Column by Eddie Garcia
On July 6, 2007, the Daily News-Record printed an op-ed dealing with President Bush’s “commutation” of the sentence of I. Lewis Libby as punishment for his conviction for the crime of obstruction of justice with the Freudian title, “The Libby Pardon.”
The editorial itself is as disingenuous and skewed as its title.
It began with the sentence, “Despite the liberal and media hysteria, if there was one man who deserved a presidential commutation, it was Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby.”
When one looks past the predictable, sneering adjectives such as “liberal” and “hysteria” that are endemic to the D N-R’s sycophantic editorial stylebook, one may stop to consider that the writer of this editorial speaks from a position that is far less informed than those involved with the case, such as the judge who meted out the sentence, the jury who found Libby guilty, Patrick Fitzgerald who prosecuted the case, or even one of the class of “rabid left-wing bloggers” that the D N-R frequently derides, Marcy Wheeler of the Firedoglake blog, who blogs as “emptywheel,” and was present during most of the proceedings.
In the Denver Post on July 5, an editorial by John Koppel, a civil appellate attorney with the Department of Justice since 1981, was published. Clearly, such a person speaks from a far more infermed position than a right-wing hack writing Republican propaganda for a newspaper in a city far removed from the proceedings.
Mr. Koppel says, in part:
“The unconscionable commutation of I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby’s sentence, the misuse of warrantless investigative powers under the Patriot Act and the deplorable treatment of U.S. attorneys all point to an unmistakable pattern of abuse…In more than a quarter of a century at the DOJ, I have never before seen such consistent and marked disrespect on the part of the highest ranking government policymakers for both law and ethics … now the Libby commutation merely highlight(s) yet again the lawlessness, incompetence and dishonesty of the present executive branch leadership.”
While the editorial staff of the Daily News-Record may render their disingenuous, pandering drivel with impunity, Mr. Koppel concludes:
“I realize that this constitutionally protected statement subjects me to a substantial risk of unlawful reprisal from extremely ruthless people who have repeatedly taken such action in the past….some things must be said, whatever the risk.”
Whose point of view would you consider to be more relevant, and closer to the truth?
Where do you perceive the integrity to be, and where do you take its measure, and find it wanting?
Eddie Garcia is a regular contributor to The Augusta Free Press.
The views expressed by columnists do not necessarily reflect those of management of The Augusta Free Press.