A week or so ago, Matt Yglesias observed that the Libby commutation is extremely unpopular, and suggest that "[t]here's got to be a campaign issue in this somewhere." I'm skeptical of the notion that Libby will be remembered when it matters (or that most people are aware of him even now)...but less so when I see articles like this one, in Monday's Chronicle:
President Bush's rationale for sparing Lewis "Scooter'' Libby from prison -- that his 2 1/2-year sentence was more severe than the former vice presidential aide deserved for lying to a grand jury -- is at odds with his support of new legislation that, by the administration's description, would make such sentences mandatory....The beauty of this is that it's not complicated. You don't have to have a sophisticated understanding of criminal law; you don't even really have to be paying attention to get it. It's too blatant to ignore.
The administration is now proposing to toughen sentencing rules. The Justice Department announced legislation last month that it said would require federal judges to sentence criminals to at least the minimum term provided by federal guidelines -- the term that Bush found too harsh for Libby in commuting his sentence July 2.
Which I think makes it a perfect focal point for a whole constellation of issues where Bush shows contempt for the law: the U.S. Attorney purge, the secret prisons, the domestic surveillance, the signing statements--et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
And on every single one of these issues, every single Republican who might conceivably get the nomination has wholeheartedly supported Bush (and Thompson, going above and beyond the call of ideology, actually served on the board of Libby's defense fund). That's the campaign issue. We have to make sure they're all tied to this; we can't let them skate like Libby did.
And I would formulate it this way: There's one law for you and me, another law for the rich and powerful, and no law at all for Republicans.
That is what it's all about, isn't it?
|