"It seems to me that if the offer came from the White House, you need a special prosecutor," Mukaskey said. "People were railing on me for months, demanding a special prosecutor for this, a special prosecutor for that. But here's a case where ... well, he hasn't said what happened."You have to be kidding me. By Mukasey's logic, he should have appointed a dozen special prosecutors himself to look into his own bosses.
Mukasey suggested that there were two extreme scenarios in the Sestak story, one that might not be a big deal, and one that would require a real investigation. "The least bad case," Mukasey said, "is that the guy's 20 points down, and everybody says you don't want to do this and bloody up a candidate to no end. You want to do something, we can find something for you. But to call somebody in and tell them, 'Look, you bow out and we'll offer you a job' is very serious. No rational prosecutor should indict unless it's that blatant.’ "
If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed. -- Benjamin Franklin
Thursday, May 27, 2010
The Zen Of Legal Hackery
Former Bush AG Michael Mukasey of course found nothing wrong with all the Bush/Cheney shenanigans in Iraq, Afghanistan, warrentless wiretapping, torturing prisoners, or any of the people involved in any of the above lying to Congress and the American people...but Joe Sestak? WE NEED A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR NOW!
Partisan politics! That never happens. For instance the current AG regarding radical Islam
ReplyDelete