I agree.
While I'm no current fan of 43 or his running of the country, Scooter was the fall guy here and I've yet to see any real injury to the Plames. If anything, this was the most advantageous 'outing' I've ever seen!
There should have been no referral, no special counsel, no indictments, and no trial. The “CIA-leak case” has been a travesty. A good man has paid a very heavy price for the Left’s fevers, the media’s scandal-mongering, and President Bush’s failure to unify his own administration. Justice demands that Bush issue a pardon and lower the curtain on an embarrassing drama that shouldn’t have lasted beyond its opening act.-The editors of the National Review
4 comments:
explain how he is a 'good man'
if there real [moral||ethical] 'criminal/s' would have the balls to step forward, this wouldn't have happened.
So..because this guy's boss is a coward, he should be pardoned for doing something that is *wrong*?
Since I cited them, I guess I can't back away from NR's charactarization of him as a 'good man.' I should have been more careful in what I copied in.
Like Hillary, "I take responsibility"...whatever the hell that means.
He should be pardoned, in my opinion, because no one was injured in the first place. The Wilson-Plames are a couple of star-fuckers.
Prosecutors make decisions every day on which of the myriad of things that are done wrong every day. A fraction of them are gone after.
I watch Law and Order, so I know this is true.
If Fitzgerald had anything hanging in his Jockeys, and was really interested in cleaning things up, he would have gone after Elmer Fudd himself.
Like the legal proceedings about the time Bubba spent in Monica's mouth, it provided some fun political theater, but did not bring us any new information or make the world a more just place.
Plus, wrongful conviction aside (which I am not arguing this was), the only people who are pardoned are those who did things wrong.
FWIW, I miss these debates from the old NRI days ;-)
He should be pardoned, in my opinion, because no one was injured in the first place.
it seems to me people are arguing that this sets a precedent about the sanctity of keeping secret the identity of our [cia] agents. so depending on how abstract you want to get, this was a pretty serious crime.
The Wilson-Plames are a couple of star-fuckers.
ad hominem, dan? ;)
yes, those debates were fun!
Post a Comment