A breathtakingly satisfying evisceration: Minutes after David Johnston's New York Times story about the perjury, obstruction of justice and false statment charges that Patrick Fitzgerald is likely to bring against Karl Rove and Scooter Libby hit the Web, Tucker Carlson went ballistic. How dare Fitzgerald leak this stuff?
Carlson demanded that his guest Larry O'Donnell share his outrage about Fitzgerald's alleged indiscretion. But the story repeatedly and explicitly sources the information to lawyers involved in the case, not to Fitzgerald. When O'Donnell calmly pointed this fact out, and suggested that Rove's lawyer Bob Luskin was the source, it only enraged Carlson further. What possible good could it do Luskin to leak such a story? he blathered. Well, said Larry, elegantly disemboweling his interlocutor, it gets a Tucker Carlson to say that indicting Rove for lying to FBI agents and a grand jury is no big deal. Tucker didn't buy that, no siree; that's way too complicated, Larry, but thanks for being on the show.
You gotta wonder: Does Tucker really think that when Johnston wrote words like "lawyers involved in the case said Thursday," or "the lawyers said," or "some lawyers in the case said," that it's fair game to claim that Johnston really meant the prosecutor? What is that, the MSNBC truth exemption? And did Tucker sleep through the last thirty years of lessons about the coverup being worse than the crime? I wonder if he came up with the idea that anything less than an espionage charge is an affront to the public on his own -- or is it just version 2.0 of the pathetic criminilization-of-politics meme that Ken Mehlman & Co are putting out?