Whew!
What a week.....been busier than a one-armed paper hanger...a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest...okay...enough...I've been busy...
But Digby ended the week right for me....and gave me plenty to "riff on".
Let's review:
The Republican talking point de jour regarding the firing of the US Attorneys is that "it's perfectly normal, legal and common....fercrissakkes...CLINTON even did it." Even some liberal commentators, or perhaps members of the "chattering class" are parrotting the points that the Attorney's "Serve at the Pleasure of the President". It follows, then, that if those things are true, then this must be just some form of "s
candal mongering" from the Democrats.
I have been forced to personnally defend this position a couple of times this week, and, as is my nature, my explanation tends to get lost in the details and overlooks the simple, straight-forward truth of the matter. Digby does much better. Here's how he explains it:
"What they don't expect is that the political apparatus of the White House will use the Department of Justice as a tool to protect criminal wrongdoing among their own and trump up charges against their political opponents. That is not just a different focus or legal prioity. That's corruption, pure and simple, and may constitute obstruction of justice. (And believe me, if there had been any evidence that Clionton had such motivations the Republican congress would have investigated it in 1994 when they took office. They investigated everything.) ..."
What lead Digby to go through this explanation for the "umpteenth time" is columnist Michael Kinsley at Time Magazines blogspot, The Swamp, who still can't see the problem with the firings....
It's the "obstruction of justice", Stupid! Could be the watchword now days.....
There's something even more ironic in Kinsley's article though, and Digby was quick to jump on it. It was that Kinsley essentially prefers that matters like this be handled through the ballot box as opposed to the "investigation and hearings " process.
The irony should be burning your soul by now.....because, the scandal was precisely about the Republicans trying to subvert the ballot box process through trumped up charges against democrats for even more trumped up charges of "election fraud"....you know, like registering voters, or maybe like allowing people of color to vote...you know, THAT kind of "election fraud".
It isn't a conspiracy theory any more. The Republican party apparatus intends (notice it's not the past tense, "intended") to create a permanent Conservative Majority by controlling the ballot boxes, the election process, and access to voting itself.
Of course, Digby writes much better than I so go read him.
He also links to: John Dean at Findlaw as well as Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo.
What a week.....been busier than a one-armed paper hanger...a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest...okay...enough...I've been busy...
But Digby ended the week right for me....and gave me plenty to "riff on".
Let's review:
The Republican talking point de jour regarding the firing of the US Attorneys is that "it's perfectly normal, legal and common....fercrissakkes...CLINTON even did it." Even some liberal commentators, or perhaps members of the "chattering class" are parrotting the points that the Attorney's "Serve at the Pleasure of the President". It follows, then, that if those things are true, then this must be just some form of "s
candal mongering" from the Democrats.I have been forced to personnally defend this position a couple of times this week, and, as is my nature, my explanation tends to get lost in the details and overlooks the simple, straight-forward truth of the matter. Digby does much better. Here's how he explains it:
"What they don't expect is that the political apparatus of the White House will use the Department of Justice as a tool to protect criminal wrongdoing among their own and trump up charges against their political opponents. That is not just a different focus or legal prioity. That's corruption, pure and simple, and may constitute obstruction of justice. (And believe me, if there had been any evidence that Clionton had such motivations the Republican congress would have investigated it in 1994 when they took office. They investigated everything.) ..."
What lead Digby to go through this explanation for the "umpteenth time" is columnist Michael Kinsley at Time Magazines blogspot, The Swamp, who still can't see the problem with the firings....
It's the "obstruction of justice", Stupid! Could be the watchword now days.....
There's something even more ironic in Kinsley's article though, and Digby was quick to jump on it. It was that Kinsley essentially prefers that matters like this be handled through the ballot box as opposed to the "investigation and hearings " process.
The irony should be burning your soul by now.....because, the scandal was precisely about the Republicans trying to subvert the ballot box process through trumped up charges against democrats for even more trumped up charges of "election fraud"....you know, like registering voters, or maybe like allowing people of color to vote...you know, THAT kind of "election fraud".
It isn't a conspiracy theory any more. The Republican party apparatus intends (notice it's not the past tense, "intended") to create a permanent Conservative Majority by controlling the ballot boxes, the election process, and access to voting itself.
Of course, Digby writes much better than I so go read him.
He also links to: John Dean at Findlaw as well as Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo.
