So, I'm following the opening day of the Libby trial, and the comments made about same by the ever-shrinking Pro-Bush cult faction, and someone actually had the gall to say this:
I just can't grasp how someone can be tried for obstructing justice in regards to an issue that was a false premise to begin with.
I think I can help. I seem to remember it happening once in my lifetime. Let's see... checking the ol' memory banks... it's hazy but becoming clearer. Oh, right. President Clinton.
Wasn't it the argument of the right that his chief crime hadn't been the affair, but the cover-up?
Sucks when the shoe's on the other foot, doesn't it?
0 comments:
Post a Comment