Why Monica Goodling Pleaded the Fifth
posted by Teflon at 6:02 PM
1 comments
3.29.2007
Teflon
- The Religious Fanatics the Religious Left Doesn't ...
- To Bee Or Not To Bee
- Key Evolution Hypothesis Rejected
- What Gives With Russia?
- Why Do American Troops Refuse to Engage Iranians i...
- Ultrasound Technology Alters the Abortion Debate
- Is It Time To Stick A Fork in Dubya?
- Another Underpinning for Global Warming Rebutted b...
- My "Lost" Theory (SPOILERS)
- Because We Need A Little More Law & Order
1 Comments:
You are of course entitled to believe whatever you like, Repack, but there is no evidence of any crime. As Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton demonstrated, U.S. Attorneys serve at the will of the President and can be fired for any reason.
As the Libby case demonstrated, however, Democrats will pursue perjury charges even when there is no underlying crime.
Now, I think you're absolutely right that Goodling ought to testify anyway. I can certainly understand her not wanting to risk financial ruin and incarceration simply because "I don't know" or "I don't recall" responses when provided by Republicans are felonies now.
Unlike Fitzgerald's Bush Justice Department-sanctioned witch hunt, however, lying to Congress has hardly been considered a crime. I think she should go, be honest and transparent, and be done with it.
Unfortunately, this Justice Department has already amply demonstrated itself to have no concern for a fair trial (how else did Libby wind up with Tim Russert's neighbor, a Washington Post reporter, in the jury box?) and D.C. juries will fry any GOPer the Dems drag into court.
But since you allude to her or her boss going to jail, may I ask what crimes you think they've committed?
As a corollary, do you think Jimmy Carter should have been hauled into court for sacking a U.S. Attorney who was overseeing a corruption investigation into the congressman who requested Carter sack him, or Clinton and Reno hauled in for sacking the whole slate including, not incidentally, the U.S. attorney investigating what would become the Whitewater case?
More importantly, perhaps, do you think President Hillary Clinton should not be allowed to fire Republican U.S. Attorneys who refuse to prosecute, say, Sarbanes-Oxley violators, as USA Lam consistently elected not to prosecute illegal alien smugglers?
Better the President be able to do what Presidents have ALWAYS been able to do, I think.
Thanks for reading.
Post a Comment
<< Home