PrintJune 30, 2007
The NYT suspects a political prosecution
The New York Times runs an editorial on the prosecution and trial of the Democrat Alabama Governor and intimates it was a political hit job by DOJ
The gall! "Selective prosecution"? (What was the prosecution of Lewis Libby, by the way?)
The Times writes of his defeat in the past election by a few thousand votes "marred by suspicious vote tabulations" (the paper never voices such suspicions when Republicans lose); play for pay scandals usually involve campaign contributions, not money being sent directly to candidates for their personal accounts; the jury dismissed 25 of the original 32 counts against him (that still leaves 7 -- he can be convicted of one and still be guilty, so what does the dismissal prove? If they prove his innocence, then the 7 non-dismissals should be proof that the system works and the charges were upheld after due scrutiny.
The Times writes of his defeat in the past election by a few thousand votes "marred by suspicious vote tabulations" (the paper never voices such suspicions when Republicans lose); play for pay scandals usually involve campaign contributions, not money being sent directly to candidates for their personal accounts; the jury dismissed 25 of the original 32 counts against him (that still leaves 7 -- he can be convicted of one and still be guilty, so what does the dismissal prove? If they prove his innocence, then the 7 non-dismissals should be proof that the system works and the charges were upheld after due scrutiny.
The Times practices selective defense of Democratic officials. The paper lambasted on the front page of the paper Republican Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher, who was charged with patronage violations. He was cleared of these charges as part of a settlement, but the resolution of the matter that cleared Fletcher was given virtually no attention by the Times. Yet the paper has repeatedly run articles, and now an editorial, trying to clear Siegelman's name.
The Times picks and chooses whom to defend and who to persecute. Is that the role of the nation's supposed premier newspaper?
The Times picks and chooses whom to defend and who to persecute. Is that the role of the nation's supposed premier newspaper?
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
- This U.S. Under Trump is Strengthening Critical Minerals Sovereignty
- Upheaval and Pushback
- Why Do Democrats Hate Women and Girls?
- There is No Politics Without an Enemy
- On the Importance of President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’
- Let a Robot Do It
Blog Posts
- French right-wing leader Le Pen banned from running for office
- The case for Alberta as the 51st US state
- Putting tariffs into perspective
- Iran’s nuclear countdown: Can Trump hold the line?
- Putin in the crosshairs
- I'm looking through you -- where did you go?
- So Milley was running the whole Ukraine war with Russia without telling the public -report
- New York’s ‘clean energy’ demands are unattainable, per industry’s own experts
- Astronauts carefully tell the truth
- California voters introduce new health care ‘access’ ballot initiative named after Luigi Mangione
- ‘American Oversight’? What a joke!
- Pete Hegseth in the line of fire—again
- Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is accused of plagiarizing parts of his Oxford thesis
- France goes the Full Maduro, bans leading opposition frontrunner, Marine Le Pen, from running for the presidency
- Bob Lighthizer’s case for tariffs