Here's the Readers' Digest version. Paul Krugman points out something that so far hasn't been brought to light over the scandal. If the 8 US Attorneys were ousted because they refused to play ball with the Bush White House, what of the other 85 or so? Did they PLAY ALONG? And if so, how? Here's Krugman (by way of dailykos:
The Gonzales Eight were fired because they wouldn’t go along with the Bush administration’s politicization of justice. But statistical evidence suggests that many other prosecutors decided to protect their jobs or further their careers by doing what the administration wanted them to do: harass Democrats while turning a blind eye to Republican malfeasance.Krugman's point is that the attorneys released were released because they refused to play along and deliver dirt to the Republicans on the Democrats just before the election. I guess there were more than 8 who were replaced. One of these, it turns out, is in Puerto Rico. It happened in June of 2006.
Attytood points out that that was the time we began to hear (from the Santorum campaign) about "Bobby Casey's financial team." Specifically, about a man named Robert Feldman. News reports from that time show that Feldman's fundraising activities were under federal review.
After the election? No news.
Attytood ends it this way:
I wouldn't be surprised if Attytood's suspicions turned out to be right on the money.I want to be very careful here -- I know very little about either the former U.S. Attorney in San Juan, or the one who replaced him. I also don't want to suggest that Feldman, who once had close ties to Mayor Street here in Philadelphia, is someone whose activities should not be looked into.
But I am troubled by the timing of all of this -- particularly when one looks at how the information was used by the Santorum campaign.
And so I'll try to find out some more about this. People in Washington should be asking questions, too.
3 comments:
So, the subtext of this speech is that Mary Beth Buchanan is a less than honest U.S. Attorney?
Pardon me if I don't act shocked.
In fact, pardon me for being 'hateful' but I'd not mind her getttnig held up to very in-depth, very public scrutiny.
But I guess I'm just a hater.
And how about the SHeriif Scandal here in Allegheny County? No doubt, that office needed to be examined, but it certainly raises the question of WHY? Was it because of wrongdoing, or was it due to political pressure from above?
But now I understand the Tommy Chong case too!
I wrote about this last week, wondering why no PA prosecutor had been fired then answering the question. We've had an interesting discussion about Ms. Buchanan.
Post a Comment