In reference to Some Guy's Tuesday Blog about Plame

In reference to Some Guy's blog on the 24th about the Plame affair... L'homme and I were just watching a segment about this site on Meet the Press this past Sunday. I heart Tim Russert! The people on the show were talking about just this topic!

Anywho, apparently Prez. Bush said that if the investigation finds something, that person or those persons responsible would be brought to justice. And the White House press secretary said that Karl Rove told him personally that he (Rove) wasn't involved. But this was before Fitzgerald was appointed special prosecutor, and Russert was supposing that the President was confident that nothing would be found. Since Fitzgerald's on the case, and is widely regarded to be an impartial prosecutor, it will be interesting to see what happens if he brings indictments.

Also on Sunday's Meet the Press, Sen. Kay Hutchinson of Texas said basically that indictments don't prove guilt, that people are innocent until proven guilty, and that perjury and obstruction of justice charges alone would show that the special prosecutor had it out for (specifically) Karl Rove, proving a sort of "gotcha" mentality (her words about the "gotcha mentality").

L'Homme and I almost laughed out loud at the television - that's exaclty what Ken Star and the Republicans did to Clinton! That's not to say that what Clinton did (re: lying under oath) was okay, but rather that if it is wrong in 1999, it's wrong in 2005. Here is an op-ed in the Houston Chronicle which gives an opinion about the Senator's comment which is close to my own opinion.

While I would agree that both sides of the aisle can be equally good at tossing the mud, I find it decidedly delicious that Republicans are being smeared with the same sort of muck they painted on Clinton. And, while yes lying is never the correct way to go, Clinton lied about getting a BJ, not about committing TREASON.

See last Friday's Demotivator: Schaedenfreude. What goes around comes around. :)