When Libby was first convicted Glenn Greenwald wrote a column titled “Lewis "Scooter" Libby is a felon.” It ended with this paragraph:

This administration has concocted all sorts of radical theories to justify its transgressions and outright violations of the law. It began that behavior at a time when it appeared that it was invulnerable and too politically powerful to be held accountable. After today's conviction of one of its own, it most assuredly sees things differently.

After Bush’s commutation of Libby that further obstructs justice, there is substantial doubt in my mind that they view things differently. Indeed, a case could be made that commuting Libby’s sentence has actually reinforced the view within the administration that they cannot be held accountable.

Does anyone really expect this administration to comply with the law or with the subpoenas issued by Congress? I don’t. I see them stalling, stonewalling and ignoring all attempts at accountability until they leave office. That is who they are – and the idea that laws do not apply to them has become an intrinsic part of the DNA of the neo-conservative cult.

In that post Glenn also wrote:

Yet the rule of law in this country -- as slow, imperfect and endangered as it sometimes may be -- typically prevails over a particular elected official or political movement.

With that I agree, although it increasingly looks like an election rout of those espousing neo-con ideas is the only way to restore the rule of law in this country. Maybe then (when the public has overwhelmingly rejected their contempt for the rule of law) will they “see things differently.”

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/03/06/libby/

John Rogers makes an important point on our inability to deal with the neo-conservative movement – it is their utter lack of shame that baffles us:

We are faced with utterly shameless men. Cheney and the rest are looking our representatives right in the eye and saying "You don't have the balls to take down a government. You don't have the sheer testicular fortitude to call us lying sonuvabitches when we lie, to stop us from kicking the rule of law and the Constitution in the ass. You just don't. What's beyond that abyss -- what that would do to our government and our identity as a nation -- terrifies you too much. So get the fuck out of our way."

We don’t know how to deal with people who openly express their contempt toward the majority of Americans. They’re not supposed to do that, but yet, there’s Bill Kristol on our teevee telling 60% of America that they’re “ridiculous” for not approving a separate legal system for neo-conservatives where laws simply don’t apply to them.

We don’t know how to deal with a smarmy Tony Snow who blatantly lies and spews absurd and self-contradictory statements on a daily basis. We’re not supposed to point that out because, somehow, that wouldn’t be civil.

Neo-conservatives demand civility from their critics while simultaneously threatening Judge Walton. We don’t know how to deal with that. It’s just so … well, shameless.

Until we learn to confront this shamelessness head on, the neo-cons will continue to tell us to “get the fuck out of our way.”

It’s time to face the abyss.

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2007/07/l33t-justice.html

Over the last six years, all of those safeguards have failed completely.

Libby knew very well of this outcome and that was predictable when his defense team suddenly decided not to call Dick Cheney as a witness in return for the “get out of jail free card” they received today. This is not surprising.

What is surprising is that candidates like Thompson so emphatically support a decision that is so unpopular with the American people – only 21% support it.

Why do all the Republican candidates act as if they no longer have to appeal to the majority of the American people? (This attitude goes way beyond Republican Primary political pandering.)

Our election process is supposed to be one of our other safeguards to prevent abuses, but the Republican Party acts as if it is just one more rule and tradition that does not apply to them, or to their grasp on power.

All of them act as if this hopelessly corrupt system will continue unabated and cannot be corrected by the “will of the people” in an election. They have come to regard the majority of Americans as completely irrelevant. This attitude is frightening.

…because it was just agreed that we would all implicitly believe -- with no investigation -- that they only listened in on the Terrorists and did so for our own Good.

But given the mindset of Bush who said during the election that a win for the Democrats means that “America loses” isn’t it (from his point of view) his responsibility and indeed a matter of national security to do everything possible (including spying on them) to keep the Democrats from letting the “terrorists win?”

Remember what he said, “However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses"

Why wouldn’t he act on this belief? From this point of view – he should be spying on them, and he’s doing it “for our own good.”

This view was a basic part of the campaign and continues to be so. Cheney’s buddy John Howard of Australia issued this warning:


"If I was running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats."

If they believe their own rhetoric, then we have to ask, why wouldn’t they spy on Obama and the Democratic Party? If they don’t, the terrorists could “win.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000530.html

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21209258-2,00.html