There is a raging debate going. Well, not exactly raging, a lot of the media won’t even mention it. But, those that do, are debating Bill and Hillary Clinton’s hypocrisy regarding Scooter Libby.
Put me on the side of thinking they are. Here’s why. From, of course, Wiki:
During hearings after Rich’s pardon, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who had represented Rich from 1985 until the spring of 2000, denied that Rich had violated the tax laws, but criticized him for trading with Iran at a time when that country was holding U.S. hostages. [2] In his letter to the New York Times, Bill Clinton explained why he pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center concluded that no crime was committed, and that the companies’ tax reporting position was reasonable. [New York Times, February 18, 2001][3]. In the same letter Clinton listed Libby as one of three “distinguished Republican lawyers” who supported Rich’s pardon.
Now, Bill Clinton/George Bush took a lot of heat for pardoning Rich/Libby. His logic was that no crime had been committed. Is that simple enough?
And, Nancy was in office in 2001 as well. I don’t recall her insisting Clinton had violated or ignored law then. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Comments
Comments:
Leave a Reply
