My email to Nicholas Kristoff re his Stupid editorial in today's NYT

[smoogatz]

Mr. Kristof,

How alarming. You appear to have drunk--and enjoyed--the RNC Kool Aid regarding the Plamegate investigation. Suddenly, Republicans all across the country are telling us that perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracy and even espionage are not "real" crimes. These are the very same people who, when Bill Clinton faced impeachment, insisted that the credibility of America's legal system was at stake and that no man--not even the President--was above the law. Bill Clinton lied about his sex life--and that, apparently, was a crime that warranted impeachment. The Bush White House lied about Iraq's WMD, and took us to war under false pretenses--at a cost of 2,000 American lives and the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Bush's minions attacked and smeared anyone who had the temerity to point out that their purported rationale for going to war was weak, and in the process they "outed" a CIA operative working to suppress terrorist traffic in real WMD--the kind that might actually kill people, as opposed to Bushco's imaginary ones. That, you say, is not a crime. Prosecuting that non-crime might, in fact, make your job harder. But why would that matter to a guy like you? You and the rest of the mainstream press corpse haven't done your jobs for the last six years.

Regards,

XXXXX

Here are a few paragraphs from the piece (we subscribe to the Sunday Times, so we get Select for free):

In the 1990's, we saw the harm that special prosecutors can do: they become obsessive, pouncing on the picayune, distracting from governing and frustrating justice more than serving it. That was true particularly of Kenneth Starr's fanatical pursuit of Bill Clinton and of the even more appalling 10-year investigation into inconsequential lies by Henry Cisneros, the former housing secretary.

Special prosecutors always seem to morph into Inspector Javert, the Victor Hugo character whose vision of justice is both mindless and merciless. We don't know what evidence has been uncovered by Patrick Fitzgerald, but we should be uneasy that he is said to be mulling indictments that aren't based on his prime mandate, investigation of possible breaches of the 1982 law prohibiting officials from revealing the names of spies.

Instead, Mr. Fitzgerald is rumored to be considering mushier kinds of indictments, for perjury, obstruction of justice or revealing classified information. Sure, flat-out perjury must be punished. But if the evidence is more equivocal, then indictments would mark just the kind of overzealous breach of prosecutorial discretion that was a disgrace when Democrats were targeted.

And it would be just as disgraceful if Republicans are the targets.

[spooky3]

1. Great letter!

[seejanerun]

2. Nice turn of phrase--press corpse!!

Great Letter!

[newyawker99]

7. Hi seejanerun!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[karynnj]

3. Great letter

I really don't remember Kristoff (or anyone else) referring to Starr as Javert. A 10 yr investigation over actions already conceded is as unwavering and Obsessive as Javert. Also, if he wanted to use the Javert analogy - I can't thing of anyone it fits better than John O'Neil who has dogged Kerry (who didn't even commit a crime) for over 30 years!

[Democrat 4 Ever]

5. Picayune - must be a word on the talking points memo from Norquist

I heard Bow Tie Boy, Fucker Carlson, use the same term last night on Hardball. Thought it was an unusual term because I knew that 99 44/100% of all neocons and repugs wouldn't know what it meant.

Now to see it in use again today is fairly predicable. We need to start keeping a list of each week's talking points.

I'll start this week's

Picayune
Criminalization of politics
Perjury and obstruction of justice not real crimes

Anybody caught anymore?

For the freepers amongst us"

Main Entry: 1pic·a·yune
Pronunciation: "pi-kE-'yün
Function: noun
Etymology: Provençal picaioun, a small coin, from picaio money, from pica to jingle, of imitative origin
1 a : a Spanish half real piece formerly current in the South b : HALF DIME
2 : something trivial

[HootieMcBoob]

4. Great letter - you might also want to point out...

That Kristoff should take a look at Fitzgerald's website. If he did he would see that that 1982 IIPA law was never his prime mandate. He is tasked with prosecuting any crime relating to the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, including perjury, obstruction, conspiracy, etc. Any crime at all! And he as all the power of the Attorney General.

These assholes who call themselves journalists should do the minimal amount of work called for to inform themselves of what they're writing about rather than parroting the things that they hear their friends repeating ad nauseum on the talking head television shows.

<edit: spelling>

[reality based]

6. Great point

What offends me are these reporters and columnists who write as if they have all the grand jury transcripts in front of them as well as a complete understanding of all the applicable criminal laws. They are being dishonest by pretending to have enough information to draw a conclusion. I suspect that, instead, they are carrying water for one of their precious anonymous sources-- lawyers for potential defendants who are using them to try to influence future juries. (It appears that Fitzgerald's people are not leaking.) Kristof, Cohen and their ilk should be giving enough information in their columns and articles to allow their readers to recognize who is leaking and why. That includes the boys and girls who wrote up the story about Cheney's alleged disclosure of Plame's identity to Libby. How low the NYT has fallen!