Shockingly enough, there continues to be a substantial quality control problem with the blogging that occurs under The New Republic‘s banner written by the magazine’s editor in chief. Today, for example, we learn this remarkable series of facts about the trial of Scooter Libby:
It was from the beginning a politically motivated case, as Dershowitz argues in this morning’s Post, the appointment of the special prosecutor, the prosecutor’s own obsessions, the case itself with the doubtful and understandably doubtful but diverse memories of many witnesses, including the defendant, the especially harsh sentence pronounced by the judge, the refusal of the appellate court to continue Libby on bail -all of these were politically motivated. And, thus, in and of themselves, unjust.
The prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, became a US Attorney when appointed to that post by George W. Bush on the advice of the Republican Senator from Illinois. The decision to name a special prosecutor was made by James Comey, who was appointed by George W. Bush to be a US Attorney and then appointed by George W. Bush to be Deputy Attorney General. Fitzgerald made the decision to prosecute. The jury undoubtedly had members of both political parties. The judge who offered the “especially harsh sentence” (actually: a sentence in line with federal sentencing guidelines) was appointed to his seat on the federal bench by . . . George W. Bush. The appellate court that unanimously rejected Libby’s claims contains — at last! — a Democratic appointee. And also two Republicans.
This is the kind of patently absurd statement you expect to see published when the author of the statement, say, owns the publication in which it appears. Given that that’s not the case, the existence of this paragraph is somewhat puzzling.
UPDATE: I see Andrew beat me to this.