Sean Hannity is like the canary in the coal mine when it comes to official talking points from the Republican party. Like no other pundit, he can be relied on to toe the party line and repeat verbatim from the talking points sent out by Mehlman & Co. Even the cons at Redstate see the smear machine primed to go after Patrick Fitzgerald if any indictments come out.
I am a bit troubled by Sean Hannity this afternoon. After two weeks of liberals in the media accusing Republicans of bashing Patrick Fitzgerald, when no one had said anything about him, Hannity finally bit today and started “raising questions” about Fitzgerald. This is not to say we cannot question what Fitzgerald did or whether he was faithful to the mandate, but questioning his motives and his connections seems to me to go too far.
Of course, this being a posting on a con website, there are more than enough caveats and cushions so that there’s room to attack Fitzgerald anyway.
Fitzgerald is no Ken Starr. He isn’t being bankrolled by Scaife to look into a land deal and write up an impeachment based on a sex affair.
If no indictments are forthcoming, I’m ready to say he was unable to find anything worth prosecuting, and aside from some sort of summary report he will have done his job. I don’t think criminal courts are the way to settle political scores – I prefer to do that sort of work at the ballot box. But if a crime has been committed in our White House, let slip the dogs of war.
It would also be refreshing if Fox News would stop treating people like Hannity as journalists reporting the “news”, instead of the “talking head” with a clear agenda, which is what he really is.
When I hear O’Reilly or Hannity say that their programs give you the “most accurate news and information,” I want to upchuck.
And yes, during Monicagate…all we heard about was “Rule of Law.” Ad nauseum.
JK
It would be refreshing if the Law and Order republicans would stop parsing the nuance of statutes and practice what they preach. The Rule of Law is more than a technicality. The spirit of the law is the true Ghost in the Machine . That seems a bit overlooked in all these discussions.
Does anyone know who would be President in the line of succession?
Bush and Cheney goes–Dennis Hastert is President (oh my head)
Then it’s President Pro Tempore–Sen. Ted Stevens (arggh!)
Then it’s Secretary of State; Condi Rice.
Talk about two-edged swords.
Tucker Carlson just said on Hardball that the White House blew it by praising Fitzgerald and for to Bush to note the seriousness of his investigation. Why? Because it closes off the opportunity to attack Fitzgerald if and when indictments come down. Better to start talking now, as has Tuco, about the possibility that maybe Fitzgerald is out of control. Nice.
These GOoPers are on such a roll lately, I say let them attack Fitzgerald, especially after they praised him for months for the dignified way he does his job. And Fitzgerald laid low for 2004 so the investigation would not distract us from our important job “re”-electing Bush.
The knee-jerk retaliation of chickenhawks is what started this particular chain of events, so why not let another round of it commence? I’m making popcorn to enjoy it more thoroughly.
NRO’s McCarthy says;
http://corner.nationalreview.com/05_10_23_corner-archive.asp#080587
Leo, you just ruined my day.
President Ted Stevens?!? If anyone calls, I’ll be hiding under the bed.
Quaker;
Sorry;
Ted Stevens would be kinda like President Bob Novak.
Not for the squeamish.
OT but it has a narrow band of relevence in this discussion.
Captain Ed on how effective dissent requires some independent thinking.
Good point, but he will be hollerin’ for a long time before they get it.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005670.php