« The Ritter vs. Ritter debate | Main | Oh, hurray! »

Insert Kerry flip-flop joke here

(Via James Taranto:)

John Kerry in 1999:

Is there no one finding a countervailing proportionality in this case when confronted by our own congressionally created Javert who is not just pursuing a crime but who is at the center of creating the crime which we are deliberating on now?...Think about it. When Mr. Starr was appointed, when we authorized an independent counsel, when the grand jury was convened, the crime on trial before us now had not even been committed, let alone contemplated.

John Kerry last Friday:

Today's indictment of the vice president's top aide and the continuing investigation of Karl Rove are evidence of White House corruption at the very highest levels, far from the 'honor and dignity' the president pledged to restore to Washington just five years ago.

Some things never change. John Kerry's opinions aren't one of them.


How about Bush's flip-flops??? He is much worse of a flip-floper than Kerry and you know it.

Well I did see him sporting some rather fruity sandals, if that's what you're talking about.

John Kerry has indeed flip flopped on a number of occasions, but in this matter you have inadvertently highlighted a difference between the Clinton false statements and the Libby alleged false statements as Libby's alleged false statements were in response to the original alleged crime under investigation by the Special Prosecutor.

Indeed, Libby's alleged first false statement was on October 14, 2003 before U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the investigation in December 2003.

In contrast, Starr was appointed in 1994 to continue the Whitewater investigation. His powers were later expanded to investigate the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal, which ultimately was the investigation in which Clinton made false statements long after Starr had been on the case.

Now, none of this excuses Clinton's lying under oath. Yet, the first statement of Kerry is not contradicted by the second as Fitzgerald's indictments of Libby's alleged lying began with conduct that happened before Fitzgerald assumed his role as Special Prosecutor.

Personally, I'm still pissed at Clinton for having an affair with a subordinate in the people's office, then lying about it. That said, I can also recognize that Fitzgerald ran a far better investigation than Ken Starr. His office was not reprimended for leaking. He kept his focus. He did his job without grandstanding.

The first quote you cite of Kerry's criticized Starr, the second quote criticized this administration. I could add a criticism of Clinton (including his last minute pardons and some of his Chinese contributors), but the sin here is ommission, not contradiction, as I agree with both quotes of Kerry's that you list here.

May I add that the issue raised by Kerry in the first quote is still a valid one. Is there any Bush supporter who wants Fitzgerald to stay on to investigate all issues brought forth by the Democrats in Congress or any lawsuit brought forth by, say, moveon.org?

While again I am not excusing Clinton, it is hard to see the Monica Lewinsky affair as being related to the Whitewater investigation. If Fitzgerald begins to seek similar expansions of his authority and if the Republicans say no, who will be the flip floppers then?

Bring it on.

The first is a witch hunt into a man's sex life. The second is treason, pure and simple.

The neo-cons put MUCH more effort into that BJ. I guess they hate America.

"The second is treason, pure and simple"

It is a source of constant amazement that Democrats all seem so versed on the laws of this country.

Patrick Fitzgerald could not bring a charge against Libby or anybody else on the so-called 'outing' of a non-covert operative but hell, it's treason according to Bailey.

Yeah. Fine. Thank you, Clarence Darrow.

Fitzgerald says that no part of the grand jury investigation or findings has anything to do with the Iraq war.

Hell, that doesn't deter Harry Reid who claims after the decision that it did.

You guys are really something.

Wow, you are such a genius! Maybe Fitzgerald "could not" bring charges *yet* because they all keep lying. I guess to a Republican if you are *only* accused of lying and obstructing justice, you won!

If Pooter Libby dimes on the most criminal administration in the history of the United States, even treason will seem like a mild charge compared to the actual truth.

Fitzgerald did NOT exonerate anyone. He clearly stated that Rove is still a target. We all wonder what Rove's attorney brough forward to prevent this. Maybe Rove found some dirt on one of Fitzgerld's children.

You apologists make me sick.

Right. Sorry for disagreeing with you, Bailey, I'll try to avoid it in the future for your health.

Give me a break. Are you honestly so arrogant as to believe that what you consider to be the truth is so very obviously the real deal that anyone who disagrees must be doing so out of ignorance or stupidity?

I honestly disagree with you. Sorry if not having the same conclusions as you makes me inferior as a human being.

It makes me not want to buy her a coffee, that's for sure.

Post a comment