I spy

A story in today's New York Times describes a wide-ranging surveillance program begun before the Republican National Convention:

In the records reviewed by The Times, some of the police intelligence concerned people and groups bent on causing trouble, but the bulk of the reports covered the plans and views of people with no obvious intention of breaking the law.

The latter include church groups, theater companies, antiwar organizations, and anyone suspected of planning to protest at the RNC. Far from being a local operation, undercover police officers spied on people throughout the U.S., Canada, and Europe. They infiltrated groups, posed as fellow protestors at rallies, and videotaped participants at public events.
Where do we draw the line between promoting public safety and undermining lawful political activity?

Pardon me

As soon as the guilty verdict was delived against Lewis "Scooter" Libby on charges of obstruction of justice, perjury, and lying to the FBI, the right wing began calling for a presidential pardon.

Let's take a moment to think back to December 1998, when the Republican-controlled House approved two of the four Articles of Impeachment against President Clinton, accusing him of purjury and obstruction of justice during his testimony to the grand jury regarding the Paula Jones case and his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. So, when a Democrat is believed to be guilty of purjury and obstruction of justice, he's up for impreachment, while a similarly-accused Republican is up for presidential pardon.

Of course, the Senate ultimately acquitted Clinton on both counts by voting on the matter. Which is a little different than having one person decide to give you a free pass to get out of jail.

Maybe the greater irony is that, by taking the rap for his boss, Scooter has saved President Bush from making good on his pledge to "fire the person" responsible for leaking Valerie Plame's identity to the press.