Bush backers have been blasting U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald (in photo) for prosecuting Lewis Libby for lying and obstructing an investigation. But as columnist E.J. Dionne noted, many of these critics had a different view in 1998 (and vice versa for those cheering the Libby trial). "It’s certainly amusing that so many who were eager to throw Clinton out of office for perjury and obstruction of justice when he lied about sex are now livid at Fitzgerald for bringing comparable charges in a controversy over the rationale for war. Do they think sex is more important than war?"
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
93 Comments
It’s no surprise that the Bush regime’s lies started from the time they said they’d bring honesty and integrity to the White House. The lies and hypocrisy haven’t stopped since. Weak willed Rethuglicans like Tiahrt cry foul when there’s any attempt to bring ethics to Washington. He’s just afraid more Republicans will have to pay for their crimes. I wonder what Tiahrt is hiding?
Well, now that that particular shoe is on the other party’s foot….Unfortunately, in neither case was perjury the real issue.The right wing would have done anything to get rid of the popular Clinton, so of course lying about sex was a “high crime and misdemeanor.” Now we have Scooter Libby on trial for lying about a much more serious crime than playing games with an intern. Outing a CIA agent can cost lives and intimidate potential sources, yet this trial seems more about the administration’s selective tampering with intelligence to support a war they couldn’t justify otherwise. Scooter just gets thrown on his sword to protect the Vice-president from similar charges. Playing politics this way puts our whole judiciary system at risk! It shouldn’t be used to further political agendas or protect criminal behavior.
Doug,”The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.”- Ralph Waldo Emerson -
Ah, the moral equivalency argument. The old, “my guy is no worse than your guy”. A good tool to distract from the issue at hand.
The problem in this case is that, unless I missed something, Mr. Libby has not been found to have perjured himself.
So IF that happens, perhaps Mr. Dionne might have his weak argument. Now, he has nothing.
(Phillip, your link is broken)
If convicted is still correct… If that happens, any bets that this investigation will stop there? The arguments seemed to be about Cheney as much as anybody.
I hope LIbby’s dilemma becomes: 30 years or do I give up my boss? Seems pretty clear that was the intent of Fitzgerald’s case.
When the jury comes back and Libby is found not guilty, will we get another story about that?I doubt it. The difference is Clinton was guilty and we don’t know yet about Libby.
fleettwood
What exactly was Clinton Guilty of??? Something this country had no business knowing of???
ok, Bush&Co has been lying since day one and this country has blindly followed the excuse “revenge of 9/11 and the war on terror”.
Its being proved now that Bush&Co LIED about Iraq, LIED about intelligence, LIED about intelligence from other countries, and just all around mis-led the country.
So, ok, why is it again we shouldn’t impeach Bush, Cheney and kick out everyone in his cabinet?
Send Condi back to the NFL…
Condi just aspires to lead the NFL. She was the president of Stanford University – a source of shame for that august institution, no doubt.
It seems to me that the BushCo defense to charges of lying to get us into Iraq is simply “we were just stupid, not liars”. We know the WMD etc claims were false; the question becomes did they know what they were telling us were falsehoods.
Tony – why do you hate the NFL?
“So, ok, why is it again we shouldn’t impeach Bush, Cheney and kick out everyone in his cabinet?”
I’ve said many times on this blog that if you truly believe what you say, you should be putting pressure on your people in Congress to impeach. Your anger is partly mis-directed. The anger should be to the cowards in Congress who are refusing to listening to you and yours.
By the way, Clinton was guilty of lieing to a grand jury.
And, Libby lied to a grand jury… AND FBI agents. Your point?
Last I looked, the jury was still out.
That is what I was about to say fleetwood.
I didn’t know they came out with a guilty verdict or not.
Hmmm . . . Clinton lies; nobody dies. Bush and co lie; thousands die.
Seems the is a problem here. While lying rarely does any good, when people die because of it, somebody needs to answer for it.
Proving Libby lied may be a feather in the cap of liberals, but since the whole Bush administration is built on lies, who care if some moron gets caught up in some minor mess.
While no one can predict what a jury is going to do, especially one that is one juror short now, I really expected them to return quickly with a guilty verdict. The length of time they have been out, (what is this the beginning of the sixth day?), is surprising and “hints” at a “not guilty” or a hung jury. Obviously, either is a win for Libby, who, if it comes back guilty, certainly appeal and by then, the Bush presidency will be winding down, he’ll be pardoned or his sentence commuted and he’ll not do a day. So, really, this is much ado about nothing.
Well, Ben Huie, your answer is in the Phase II Report that Pat Roberts has been hiding for years. When did Bush know that his claims of threat to the US by Iraq were lies? Ah, that is THE question. Hummmm……
Deja vu’ moment: Washington, D.C., c. 1973. “What did he know and when did he know it?” If we heard that question once a day, we heard it 50 times…every day!
People have been convicted for perjury for much less story-telling or manipulation of facts than Clinton was.
As far as Libby, he got caught gossiping about something he shouldn’t have been talking about. If he did perjure himself in front of a Gran Jury then let him suffer the consequences.
“As far as Libby, he got caught gossiping about something he shouldn’t have been talking about.”
Of course it is in the hands of a jury.
But, if you read about the case Fitzgerald presented, it was clearly more than “gossiping”. The testimony would suggest it was a concerted effort to smear Wilson directed by our Vice President. If Libby is convicted, expect that Cheney will suddenly need heart surgery in India, or somewhere else.
I agree. I think losing the one juror was a problem for the prosecution. She was an art curator with a PhD from a school in London. Obviously Scooter’s team was happy with seeing her go.
Republican logic.
gossip to destroy a CIA operative and her husband = no problem
blow job = impeachable offense.
Thanks for clearing that up….
It still just floors me the lengths cons will go through to defend deflect and deny how awful their people really are.
The three monkeys with their hands over their ears, eyes and mouth really should be the poster for this administration and it’s supporters.
I almost feel Clinton is coming out smelling like a rose after this, which in all actuality, he shouldn’t have been even questioned about his affair with Monica in the first place.
hee hee hee Steven. I dont think cheney will be able to leave the country anymore after his term as pres, er vp, is over. He may be wanted across the glob for war crimes.
you know, like rummy and some of the boys cant go to Germany?
hehehehehehehehehheeh
Maybe he can have his trailing crash cart team do the surgery.
The Right Wing yahoos fail to remember that Clinton was never charged none the less convicted of perjury.
He was impeached – equilevent to indicted – but was aquited by the Senate.
Outside of that, no charges were ever brought despite the massive amounts of taxpayer and private money that was spent by Starr, Scarife (sp) and others.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Republicans.
hee hee hee Clark!
“Hypocrisy, thy name is Republicans.”
And the more they post on this thread, the more they show it!!!!!
(I borrowed some !!! from Clark’s personal stash…)
Forgive my spelling this morning. I would like to blame on my keyboard or a lack of caffiene or my cat or something……
Truf is, I jest canot spel two sav my live.
Gossiping can be quite hurtful and extremely damaging.
And ksfrmgrrl what made you think I vote Republican? Was it the mature manner in which I discussed my opinion?
Steven: That’s my opinion. The was the last juror the prosecution wanted to lose! Also, I found it interesting that the original jury panel was overwhelmingly white, while the population of WDC proper is 80% black. And I recall, (not the numbers exactly), that they seemed extremely well educated over-all for a random selection. Damned good voir dire from the defense.
UW, where did I say that you vote republican?
Again, without taking sides here, if Libby said anything about Plame, and let’s assume he did, several other facts play in here:
1. Plame was never an operative agent. She was, at best, a glorified clerk.
2. Plame was right here, in the good old USA, safe and sound.
3. Plame was no longer empoloyed by the CIA.
4. There is no reason to believe that the “bad guys” would put a hit on a clerk, especially on the subject’s home turf. The risk to value quotient doesn’t justify it. Anybody who thinks otherwise has been watching too many spy movies.
A bit of legalese that has always bothered me:
1. It’s a federal crime to lie to the F.B.I.
2. It’s perfectly all right for the F.B.I. to lie to anyone, and it happens everyday.
Hmmmmm.
“Damned good voir dire from the defense.”
I don’t know much about the other jurors, but that the majority were white.
What did you make of the defense lawyer sobbimg like a little kid during his closing? That seemed weird to me.
Yeah, it wasn’t what I would have expected — but, hey, maybe it worked !?! I just never thought of that case as a “weeper” — but, then again, that’s why he makes “the big bucks”. It seems to me that the plot that ran through the trial (what I saw of it) was, in game show rhetoric, “Who Wants To Be A Victim”, and the “audience” jumping up and down screaming, “Pick me! Pick me!”
RM,In the last post, you are recycling the Republican talking points. I am sorry you feel the need to do that.
The danger to people resulting from Plame being outed were to foreign assests she worked with while undercover. I have not heard anyone say that she herself was in danger state-side – that would a pretty silly assertion.
At the time she was outed, the CIA said she was undercover. That makes that so. Otherwise, the CIA had no complaint about Novack’s article. And Ashcroft sure as heck would not have appointed Fitzgerald to investigate.
“3. Plame was no longer empoloyed by the CIA.”
See the above response.
“never an operative agent”
That might be impossible for us to know for sure, but my understanding is that she did work undercover in other countries – and developed assests.
Rm, you wanna cite those “facts”?
“1. Plame was never an operative agent. She was, at best, a glorified clerk”
A. – Sorry RM, but if the CIA says that Valerie Plame was covert, she was covert. End of story.
B. – Scobby Doo Libby is charged with lying to a Grand Jury – not with outing an agent. It is immaterial as to Plame’s status. The issue, as the judge has repeatedly instructed the jury, is whether Libby knowingly lied to the Grand Jury.
Scooby is using the “I am an idiot” defense. Odds are that the jury will be hung, with one or two holdouts against conviction because they actually DO believe that Libby is that stupid.
cnn.com reporting that the jury in the Libby trial passed a note to the judge late yesterday; no indication of what was in it, but there is to be a hearing this morning. The article further reports the defense team met for over an hour last night once the existence of the note was made known to it. What this means? I haven’t the foggiest.
Frmgrl: Already did – whether you agree with them or not.
Steve & WSC: Officially, the Hispanic lady who empties the trash at night is covert in the CIA. It’s been that way for many years. It’s known as counter-intelligence. Make the “bad guys” waste their time looking at everybody even remotely associated.
And, you are right, he is being charged with lying to the Grand Jury, and, (I really don’t know why you guys assume I’m on Scooter’s side or anybody else’s for that matter), has it occurred to anybody, WSC, that maybe he is that absent minded. I know a lot of very intelligent people that, if they don’t write themselves notes during a telephone conversation, forget any details of it 5 minutes after they hang up the phone. As I said the other day, I feel like I’ve had a real good day if I’ve only gotten up and gone to another room to fetch something and forgotten what it was on the trip in there less than three times! :)
“Officially, the Hispanic lady who empties the trash at night is covert in the CIA.”
Never heard that one before. Got a link?
And, going back to the FBI lying, but it is not okay vice versa: Isn’t this also the case with all law enforcement? I thought it was, and one reason, if ever in that position, I’d “lawyer up” right away.
On the memory defense, I thought Fitzgerald did a masterful job of illustrating how angry Cheney, et al. were. When the subject makes you angry, you take it personally, and then take steps to exact revenge – such as situation is in a different mnemoic category than where one’s house slippers are.
I thought, they would bring back a guilty defense quickly. I’m going to go to cnn.com and look up what Vaughn is talkng about.
guilty “verdict” – sorry.
From:http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/28/cia.leak/index.html*****WASHINGTON (CNN) — The judge in the criminal trial of Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff on Wednesday returned a note sent to him by deliberating jurors, and asked them to clarify it.
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton took the action — over objections from attorneys representing I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby — before a hearing that was to consider the note’s contents.
“I have some questions in my mind as to exactly what the jury is asking me,” Walton said. “So contrary to the defense position, I will send a note back to them stating, ‘I am not exactly certain what you are asking me. Can you please clarify?’ ”
Chief defense attorney Ted Wells said the note, whose content was not divulged, was clear to him, and he believed prosecutors were interpreting the note nearly the same way as the defense.*****
Makes you wonder why the defense was upset, but Fitzgerald apparently was not?
Steven: There are things that people know, from personal experience, which are neither classified nor publicly announced. In this instance, the reason should be obvious. I guess you’ll just have to trust me on this one. I could tell you how I know, but then I’d have to kill you.
The latest on the note:*****The jurors appeared confused about whether the charge involved Libby making specific false statements to the FBI about his conversation with Cooper, or whether the general “content” of how he described the conversation was false.
“Is the charge that the statement was made or is it about the content of the statement itself?” the jurors wrote.*****
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022800321.html
rm,Not sure I understand what you’re talking about, but that’s okay. This case is very interesting to me, but I’d rather live.
Steven, thanks for the update. From the linked article and content of the note, it sounds to me that there was a confusing instruction given, but the jurors have now agreed what was meant. Interesting, no?
Do I get this right, the question is about “meta-lying” – did Libby lie about lying?; Which I believe was the case.
Rm, I’m sorry, but I must have missed where you cited the source for your “facts” like VP not being covert, etc. Sorry if I am just overlooking your citation, but I cant find it. I only see where you posted these items, not where you got them.
Yes, Vaughn. According the WaPo article, the jurors answered the question for themselves after they sent the note.
Some comments on the length of the deliberations:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022700177_2.html
Frmgrl: As Steven pointed out, the facts are as laid out in Libby’s defense (see transcript of trial). I have no reason to doubt them, and while they are tangentially important to the defense, they are not right on point considering the charge of lying to the Grand Jury.
Steven: I’m glad the jury figured out what they “think” it meant, because I read the article you cited 3 times, and I still don’t understand what it meant. No wonder the Judge was confused. :)
rm, it may be due to impairment resulting from the lowgrade fever I still am dealing with, but after only 10 reads of the jurors’ note, it came to me in a vision: they didn’t understand the instruction(s)!
LOL. Why didn’t I think of that ?
I have no facts on this, but when the Feds go to court in things like this, don’t they usually win?
I don’t follow the law, but I can’t recall any cases this prominent that were lost.
??
Libby defense was that he was so focused on important things that were going on in the country at that time that he couldn’t recall when he heard what. The time line he thought was right was disputed by no less that Tim Russert.
No one has ever said she was covert, including the Fitzgerald. Her former supervisor said the following.
“A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an “undercover agent,” saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency’s headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.”She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat,” Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times.
This was a fishing trip from the beginning and dems were hoping to catch Rove or Cheney. They settled for Libby because they had to have something to show for all this money spent on this witchhunt.
Several people don’t remember things. Some forget the really important things. Even Hillary Clinton:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21297802-401,00.html
DEMOCRAT senator Hillary Clinton failed to disclose a family charity she operates with former president Bill Clinton that has enabled the couple to write off more than $US5 million ($6.3 million) in taxable income since 2001.
The US Ethics in Government Act requires members of Congress to disclose positions they hold with any outside entity, including non-profit foundations.
But in successive annual Senate disclosure forms, Senator Clinton has failed to report the foundation, established in 2001, or her position as treasurer and secretary, the Washington Post reported yesterday.
The foundation has enabled the Clintons to write off $US5 million in taxable income while it dispensed $US1.25 million in charitable contributions over that period.
The Post said Senator Clinton’s office amended her Senate ethics reports yesterday to add the information after receiving inquiries from newspaper.
Libbys were called lying hers were called ‘oversights’. Who benefitted most by the omissions?
Gster: I don’t have any numbers, but, I think it’s safe to say they win more than they lose … because of their ability to “pick and choose” their prosecutions and their virtually unlimited resources.
Having said that, it took them three or four times to finally convict John Gotti. The RICO statutes (racketeering and organized crime) have given them a much better success rate since those statutes are so broad, they can prosecute their attack on several different fronts simultaneously. But, if you look back 30 – 50 years, I can’t remember how many shots they took at Jimmy Hoffa before they got him, and Meyer Lansky was constantly being indicted for something or other, and they never got a conviction. And, as with the state courts, most of their cases end up with an agreement of some sort, that chalks as a win (in their books, anyway). Damned few federal criminal cases actually go to trial, compared to number filed.
Thanks for the info.
ksgrm,
Much of what you post above is false information.
I do wish I understood why facts and the truth bother you so much that you have to resort to what you do.
I am referring you to the Patrick Fitzgerald’s site, where any number of documents refute nearly all of what you say above.
Start with Libby’s indictment. Compare that information with what you post.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf
This is the main page of Fitzgerald’s site:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/
And, in my opinion they are not settling on a case against Libby. I believe they are hoping via conviction to flip Libby and have him be their star witness against Cheney.
And Germ, leave the Clintons out of this – they are so last century, ya know?
When/If Libby is found not guilty, will you people leave him alone?
Sure woody, hell, he’ll be in prison.
In past business dealings with the Federal Court it is my view that it is decidedly true that they have unlimited time and unlimited resources.
The strategy of getting the rats to rat out bigger rats is one of their favorites. You know the interesting thing I observed about the Feds, though, is that they have a lot more respect for those relatively few rats who will chose to not play the rat-out game. To me, it makes sense in terms of human nature, but it was very interesting to observe.
I have wondered, if Libby gets prison time, will he take it and remain silent, or will he flip. I am almost inclined to believe the former. At the beginning of this trial, there was all the arm waving and shouts of “Rove, Rove”, but no mention of Cheney.
This may yet be a very interesting drama.
So, Grandma from Hell, if a Clinton does it, there is a crime that is worthy of the worst punishment?
If a Republican does it, there is no crime and everyone should apologize for bringing it up?
And Fleet, when he is convicted, you are going to ?????
ws-If he is convicted, I won’t defend him. Unlike some people I know.
Fleet,
Are you defending him now? I wasn’t able to tell that you were.
No, I am not defending him. I’m waiting for the jury to come back.
If he’s guilty, tough shit for him. If not guilty, then a big tee hee to you people.
a big tee hee to you people.
Posted by: fleettwood | February 28, 2007 at 04:01 PM
I sincerely appreciate your “maturity”. As Hank Price would say, “you make us look good.”
Please, you wouldn’t do the “tee hee dance” if he’s convicted?
No. I will be anticipating Part II and when/if Cheney is convicted, then I might do the dance. But, truthfully, I don’t think I will feel any joy at all. Just relief that justice has finally been served on a small portion of this very corrupt administration.
It’s called adulthood. Try it sometime Fleet.
“…justice has finally been served on a small portion of this very corrupt administration.”
That makes you special. When is the impeachment trial?
Fleet Nut, do you ever ADD anything to the discourse? Really? Do you ever take a position on the subject and support your position with facts, links and intelligent debate or do you just make stupid comments over and over and over again?
Cut the crap Fleetdavesherrinut and offer something that indicates that you have an IQ greater than 63.
Steve, Interesting to note that Hillary is so last century. Last I looked she was running for Prez.
Yes, I do think that a woman who fails to note a charity to which she seemingly donates 5 mil to avoid the taxes, lost law firm files for over 5 years and then found them in her bedroom, allowed a husband to mess around on her for many years while she goes on national tv to defend him calling it a right-wing conspiracy, I could go on and on.
This to me is much more important and right now than whether Libby remembered if he talked about a non-covert agent.
This is a woman who could be in the early stages of senility with such memory losses and the dems want her to be prez. Go figure.
Grandma from Hell, please go back to sleep. You are hardly in a position to question ANYONE’S mental acuity.
WS glad to see your acid tounge is alive and well. Now just engage the brain and you might be able to recover.
ws- All I’ve said on this subject is that if he is guilty, tough shit for him, if he is innocent, tee hee from my side.
I think your previous post sez more about you than me.
Are you OK?
Grandma, you are a bit like a fart in church – no one wants to claim responsibility for you, but we all are aware of you and most of us think that you really, really stink.
Fleet Dave, when I walk into my house, I scrap the shit off my shoes before I go in.
Fleet Dave, you are no more than shit on my shoes.
WS since you really don’t know me or who I am making a statement like that is just showing more of that demorat arrogrance. Like when Harry Reed says “the American people think/want/need/etc..” when in reality he is only speaking for himself.
ws- Your last few comments have nothing to do with the Libby trial. Perhaps you could go to the Open Thread.
And what is the deal with the fart and shit? You want to tell us something?
Quite honestly, Grandma from Hell, I thank God every day that I do not personally know people like you. I sleep well without nightmares, but I am sure that if I ever met you that the nightmares would begin.
I should say, however, that I do pray daily that you and Fleetdave never mate and produce a child.
The world has already had to deal with one Hitler.
“That makes you special. When is the impeachment trial?”
Wait and see. I’ll keep ya posted.
Thanks for thinking I’m special. What makes you special, of course, is that you are so good at repeating Rush’s lines & lies. Rush says, Fleet repeats, ad nauseum.
“Steve, Interesting to note that Hillary is so last century. Last I looked she was running for Prez.”
Germie,Your moral equivalency arguments are so last century, too. “Libby did nothing, a Clinton did worse.” Go back to school – you’re not at all convincing.
Fleetdave, you twist everything that everyone has to say, so now you have a taste of your own medicine.
So, why the crying, boy? You can’t take it? Too tough for you?
You twist and distort anything and everything I post – but now you are sensative? Now you want to play FAIR? Now you want rules?
Poor boy – run home to the Grandma from Hell.
Maybe she can “comfort” you.
Here we go again. I really don’t get the “Rush tells you what to think”. It’s not a conspriacy(sp). We (like you) have a set of beliefs. I happen to believe what I have already stated regarding the Libby trial. Don’t need Rush to tell me that.
Fleetdave – why can you dish it out but you can’t take it?
What is that all about?
You have lost me, ws. I don’t know where you are going. If you would like to talk about the Libby trial, fine. My position is clear and unassailable.
Fleet I am glad we don’t have that near fatal illness called iknowitallittis. It seems to be rampant on this blog tonight so I think I will move to another blog that really has some intelligent discourse.
That is sooooo sweet, Fleetdave. On every other thread you dish out personal insults and challenges to liberals, but now, you want to stay on topic.
What a wonderful guy!!!!
So, does this mean that you have become a mature blogger that only wants to discuss issues and will not resort to personal attacks or suggestions of violence?
Now!!!!!! Now, you want to limit the discussion to the Libby trial?
Really?
No personal insults – no race baiting? No non sequiters? No Dems are traitors comments? No sedition charges? No gender insults? No blacks are lessor citizens issues?
‘Mon, Fleetdave – you talk the talk but you have yet to walk the walk.
Jeez, Fleet and the Grandma from Hell are an item!!!!!
We can only hope that they are practicing safe sex.
And the band played on.
‘Mon, Fleetdave – you talk the talk but you have yet to walk the walk.
“Jeez, Fleet and the Grandma from Hell are an item!!!!!
“We can only hope that they are practicing safe sex.”
Can you imagine what the progeny of such an unholy union would be like?
A dementing, brain-dead, smart ass, wise-carcking, partisan hack who only knows how to quote Rush Limbaugh, but never formally sites sources…
If there was a better argument for euthanasia, I’ve not heard it yet.
intelligent discourse<—Germ wouldn’t know it, if it slapped her in the face
From a client who just called; apparently, the Libby jurors requested a pad of “large” post-it notes last night. He was curious on my take on this, and here it is for anyone who cares: no matter the verdict, the jurors are taking their duties very seriously. My guess is that we’re still a few days from a potential verdict/hung jury scenario.
Now, back to work.
The GOP has long lived by a double-standard that is the earmark of the well-heeled. Do as I say not as I do.The extreme right always reminds of what direction to follow the moral compass until they themselves are caught taking the shortcut then they attempt to assign blame to anyone but themselves.