Truth and justice again, brees? There is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion. Not every crime is punished, not by a long shot. Proportionality is another word that comes to mind.
Do you have some evidence that "truth and justice" is what motivated Starr, and what's motivating Hyde and the Republican leadership? Do you think Tom DeLay is talking to the Republican Congressmen about "truth and justice"?
"I thought from day one, as I think today, that this was bad for the country," said one of Starr's defenders who now questions his tactics. "Sometimes you have to exercise prosecutorial discretion." Even though this defender of Starr said he believed the president was guilty of significant misconduct, he said, "the cost to the country far outweighs the value of proving it. (http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/092098clinton-starr.html)
I agree with that viewpoint, as I've stated before. Others disagree, as is their right. If I had some confidence that Gore would be allowed a peaceful term as Clinton's successor, and that getting rid of Clinton would somehow improve our political process, I might be swayed. I don't see any indication of that happening. Do you see some concern for "truth and justice" among the Republican leadership and their 6 hours floor debate on fulfilling their Constitutional trust? I see politics, not much else.
Cheers, Dan. |
