MiniRants: Moral equivalency, frivolous Congress and finding corruption where it doesn't exist



  • The White House in its infinite wisdom and zeal for Palestinian statehood in 2008 at any cost, has decided to criticize Israel for building houses, saying “it’s not helpful to the process.” Let’s be clear about what happened here. The Palestinians murdered 8 Israeli children in their beds. The Israelis responded by threatening to build houses. The US chose to criticize the building program. Sure, the standard condemnation of the terrorist attack went out as well, but that’s the point – these are not morally equivalent actions deserving equivalent levels of condemnation. The US should be crystal clear about what is preventing peace – it is not construction of houses; it is terrorism by Hamas, the elected government of the Palestinian people.

    US Says Israel Housing Move Unhelpful

  • Congress has set a new low in the field of frivolous lawsuits with its completely uncalled for lawsuit to force Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers to testify in its probe of the US attorney firings. There’s no evidence – none, zero, zip – that the firings were the result of bribery. Absent that, there’s no reason – none, zero, zip – to investigate what is purely an internal executive branch matter, a legitimate exercise of the President’s plenary power to dismiss political appointees for political reasons, and legally none of Congress’s business in the first place. This isn’t really even a matter of executive privilege, though on that issue alone the executive will likely win the lawsuit hands down; it’s a matter of an investigation of a nontroversy that shouldn’t have been investigated in the first place. There’s a reason this lawsuit is “historic” – previous Congresses had more sense!

    House panel files historic lawsuit to enforce subpoenas

  • Congress is also up in arms over the hiring of John Ashcroft to act as corporate monitor for a deferred prosecution agreement in the case of Zimmer Holdings Inc. The phrase that keeps being thrown around is “no bid contract,” but to be clear the contract is paid by the corporation. The monitor has to be approved by the Justice Department, but it’s hard to argue that a former Attorney General of the United States is not qualified. What’s even harder to argue is that John Ashcroft provided kickbacks or was involved in any other corruption. That dog just won’t hunt. Remember before commenting my liberal friends, Ashcroft was the guy who wouldn’t sign off on the NSA spying program when Alberto Gonzalez and Andy Card tried to pressure him into as he lay in an intensive care hospital bed. Ashcroft is a patriot, a scholar and a statesman. In this attempt to find corruption, I’m quite confident that there is no “there” there.

    Ashcroft to Testify at House Hearing

  • This entry was posted in Default.

    Leave a Reply

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    %d bloggers like this: