Emptywheel sounds the warning:
How appropriate that Robert Bork would weigh in on the Libby conviction to assert that Fitzgerald's appointment might not be constitutional. Over thirty years later and he's still trying to fire the guy investigating the Republican Administration.
Mind you, Bork is not alone. Vikram Amar, Randy Barnett, Alan Dershowitz, Viet Dinh, Douglas Kmiec, Gary Lawson, Earl Maltz, Thomas Merrill, Robert Nagel, Richard Parker, and Robert Pushaw. Some interesting in names in that list, from a fwe good liberals, to architects of unitary executive, to Dershowitz, who served as such a nice liberal voice justifying torture.
The worst of the worst. Read the whole post for the legal arguments, which are beyond my ability to summarize. But here's the bottom line:
Bork is not just trying to get Fitzgerald fired. He's trying to get the next Special Counsel--the one investigating BushCo constitutional violations--fired.
Bingo. No doubt the Libby slush, er, defense fund will help them with their funding, eh?
States and localities are taking impeachment seriously. The blogosphere takes impeachment seriously. The Republicans take impeachment seriously.
Will the Beltway Dems?
NOTE I may be distorting emptywheel's point by assuming that impeachment is the only appropriate remedy for "Constitutional violations." But it's a g-o-o-o-o-d distortion.
NOTE For those who came in late, emptywheel is also playing on Bork's history: The Saturday Night Massacre. Before Nixon was impeached, he ordered his then Attorney General, Elliot Richardson, to fire the Special Prosecutor investigating him, Archibald Cox. Richardson, an honorable Republican--Yes, children, they existed in those days, although today everyone who remains a Republican knows the score or is in denial--refused and resigned. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus--unbelievably, a second honorable Republican--refused and was fired. Nixon then turned to Robert Bork, who, like the good authoritarian he was, did the dirty deed at his leader's bidding. And that, children, is why the Republicans wanted Bork on the Supreme Court!
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
Meanwhile, over by the graveyard
[/Plan 9 from Outer Space]
From ThinkProgress comes the latest update on Dem wussiness, I mean, tragi-comity:
Time’s up for Gonzales, again
You know, there's a Grand Canyon-sized gap between the level of criminality and what the Dems are prepared to do to address it. Nine, I shit you not, NINE formal requests? And the response to that is to harumph continue to ask, while Schumer coughs up a harumph threat of a non-binding no-confidence motion$?
Yeah, I'd be scared too.
Not to detract one iota from Emptywheel's bang-on insight, but I think the overt and outrageous fuck-you attitude from the Gonzales camp, NTM the Rove bird-flipping on the "lost" email is part of this whole scheme / scam to shove it all back in Dems' faces. Run out the clock just long enough to accuse the Dems of politicizing issues (they're the ONLY party who does that of course) and of being whiny wussies with no real plans, solutions, or leadership.
Gonzales in particular is a testing ground. I'm remembering that line in All the President's Men when one of the would-be whistleblowers, who witnessed it all with dread, isolation and hopelessness, finally saw an opening for justice to prevail and said, "If you could nail Mitchell that would be beautiful."
BushCo's all about perma-power based on a Watergate do-over. '72 campaigns is where Bush and Rove both got their start as dirty tricksters and rat fuckers. They're prepared to go the distance.