"Obstruction of Justice"

In this morning's Washington Post, Daniel Froomkin's blog gave me hope that there are some writers who have a public voice who will still call it like it is. His blog was entitled "Obstruction of Justice." (CLICK ON LINK!) I would encourage you to read that before reading my response to it, which I published as a comment in the Post online this afternoon (page 2, bottom, of the comments section). But backing up just a second, I started off by reading the Washington Post's editorial (CLICK ON LINK!) protest that the President, while right to show leniency to Libby, went too far in commuting the entire jail sentence. I was very confused at that point. How could the Post be so far off base as to take this tone? Was it a conservative writer writing it? How could they not get the point that I then discovered Froomkin making so eloquently? This was clearly a political payoff for doing Bush-Cheney dirty work. And it does smack of obstruction of justice, indeed. Give them a read and see what you think. My comment was as follows:

"I thank you, Dan Froomkin, for telling the truth about this. Your take on it and the editorial that appeared in this morning's Post can't both be true. This morning's editorial saying that Bush went too far in eliminating any jail time, pretty much paints a picture where there was no wrongdoing on anyone's part but Libby and the former deputy secretary of state. Your reading of this however coincides with what I've been reading all along: Cheney and Bush are both implicated in this. And you're so right to suggest that it is an outrage that flies in the face of the Founders if a President and Vice President of the United States can make a deal, explicitly or implicitly, that allows their operatives to protect them by stonewalling the court system and Congress, knowing that a pardon awaits on the other side. Congress needs to read through this, and Republicans in particular need to read through this. They need to ask themselves if this is really the kind of country they want to allow the Bush administration to create. The Democrats would impeach Bush and Cheney if they knew that Republicans of conscience were on their side. The question is whether there ARE nonpartisan representatives of conscience in either party representing us. The sad conclusion that most of us make today is that no, there are not."