« Can Pres. Bush Bring Health Insurance to 47 Million Americans By One Quick Fix to the Tax Code? | Home | Why Are We So Lousy at Foreign Policy? »
Paul Gigot Discovers Evils of Criminalization
From this morning's lead Wall Street Journal editorial:
"Opening arguments begin next week in the trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and, regardless of the verdict, it is our firm belief that this is a case that should never have been brought....the case is among the most egregious examples we can recall of criminalizing political differences."
Criminalizing political differences.
I have two words for Paul Gigot:
1. Whitewater.
2. Lewinsky.
Then words fail.
Advertisement
The criminalization of criminality is to be thoroughly deplored.
January 21, 2007 4:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am surprised to hear that Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed by a Democrat.
January 21, 2007 7:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why don't idiots like Paul Gigot get laughed off the public forum platform? Why does anyone still care what he says? He has fouled his britches too many times with stinking crapola to have even a shred of credibility left.
January 21, 2007 7:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hypocrisy thy name is Gigot.
Ron Byers
January 21, 2007 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Recalling Whitewater and Lewinsky is all well and good, but it's not just hypocrisy. I hate to point out the obvious, but we are not criminalizing political differences. We are criminalizing lying under oath to cover up a serious crime that could endanger lives and national security, the outing of a CIA in pursuit of political vengeance. It'd be nice if we could directly prove intent and thus pursue the latter in court, along with others from the administraiton, but if the perjury strategy worked against the Mafia, it'll have to do for now, too.
John
http://www.haberarts.com/
January 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, "gigot" is French for "leg of lamb." I always chuckle every time I hear the old mutton extremity introduced.
Jan Knaus
January 21, 2007 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
When Paul Gigot's name shows up in my spell check the suggested change is "bigot."
I guess we are all stuck with the names we inherit from our ancestors.
Ron Byers
January 21, 2007 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is probably the PBS-watching liberal in me, but I used to respect Gigot when he represented the conservative right on the News Hour. He at least made an attempt to rein in his more extreme views long enough to address opposing viewpoints and play to the center now and then. Now that he's just another empty Fox News talking head, I find I can no longer stand to listen to him. That he would even have the nerve to publish such a statement without even a thought of the White Water-turned-Lewinsky scandal and the lengths to which the Republicans were willing to go to drag Clinton's name and legacy through the mud, just goes to show he really is the ideologue he denies being. He and George Will must be on the same selective memory erasing meds.
January 21, 2007 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
You left out Vince Foster's suicide, a non scandal turned into a massive witchunt with help from the WSJ editorial page.
And lets not forget pseudo scandals like Filegate, Travelgate, non scandals turned into decade long witchunts. Again with a major push by the WSJ editorial page.
It is no use trying to shame Gigot or anyone else working for the WSJ editorial page. These people are beyond shame.
January 21, 2007 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I almost forgot; Mike Espy witchunt.
Again it was the WSJ editorial page that hyped this non scandal into a major witchunt. Espy was indicted of 35-38? counts for accepting tickets from a lobbyist friend for some sports event. He was found not guilty on all counts.
January 21, 2007 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gogot's editorial is the definition of hypocrisy. How can he, in good conscience, complain about the Libby case being about the criminalization of political differences, while having no problem ranting about alleged Clinton crimes in Whitewater and with Monica Lewinsky? Or, is it only a problem when Democrats do it? Oops, I answered my own question. Is there a conservative writer out there that can be called principled and reasoned?
January 21, 2007 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your last line reminded me of my high school typing class exercises. I think Gigot and Will have simply regressed back to a tried and true GOP101 exercise, "Now is the time for all GOP [good] men to come to the aid of the party [county]."
Back then I did not see the inherent prejudice, sexism of the content, but simply took what my teacher (authority) handed me. I practiced and practiced until I got it right.
Gigot and Will are getting it just right... Oh, I mean, GOP Right.
_____________________________________
"I, ..., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
January 21, 2007 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm. And eight fresh, new GOP US Attorneys coming on line. What might be their marching orders? Will the new US Attorney in San Diego concentrate on illegal immigrantion, as was purported to be an issue with Carol Lam, or will they go after Democrats?
_____________________________________________
“I, ..., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
January 21, 2007 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Question:
Is there a conservative writer out there that can be called principled and reasoned?
Well, let's see -- Ann Coulter just labelled the entire Democratic Party as a "sleeper cell," and no outrage from other "conservative" writers, so --- NO.
Jan Knaus
January 21, 2007 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
My pet peeve is about how these Sunday roundtables can accept a participant from the Washington Times. I can understand the Weekly Standard. Barely. But how someone from the newspaper of record can sit down at a table of colleagues that includes someone from the Washington Times is beyond me.
January 21, 2007 10:59 PM | Reply | Permalink