‘Every tree that we’ve barked up so far has had a cat in it’

[babylonsister]

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10221.html#more-10221

‘Every tree that we’ve barked up so far has had a cat in it’
Posted 4:00 pm

snip//

Indeed, let’s not forget that this scandal almost didn’t happen. The purge occurred last December, appropriately enough, on December 7 (a day that will live in infamy?). It generated exactly zero headlines. Some local media outlets took note of individual prosecutors offering their “resignations,” but no one noticed the larger trend. There was no outrage from Democrats on the Hill, no media interest, and no controversy. The process unfolded exactly as the Bush gang had hoped.

A week later, some blogs noticed an article out of Arkansas that said Bud Cummins had been replaced with a Karl Rove protege. Odd, some folks thought.

Two weeks later, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the “Bush administration has quietly asked San Diego U.S. Attorney Carol Lam, best known for her high-profile prosecutions of politicians and corporate executives, to resign her post.” Hmm.

Then there was another in Nevada. Some Dems started to take note, but more because of the confirmation process, not because of the broader pattern, which still hadn’t emerged.

Paul Krugman and the blogs noticed what was going on here, but as Time’s Jay Carney acknowledged this week, the rest of the media thought the story was meaningless. Dems on the Hill were “concerned,” but the story wasn’t a priority.

I mention this not to give the blogosphere another pat on the back, but to note that the White House came this close to getting away with yet another scandal. No one even thought to bark at the tree; they didn’t know to look for a cat.

What made them administration officials think they could get away with this? They grew accustomed to accountability-free politics. And even in this case, that arrogance was almost proven right.

[madame defarge]

1. I love that line...

Saw it earlier today & thought it perfectly (purrfectly? groan...) described the situation.

[pnwmom]

2. Great article, thanks. And it led me to Paul Krugman's fine piece on

the subject, which, unfortunately, requires registration. (He's the only reason I'm a NYTimes Select customer now.)

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/opinion/19krugman.html

In case you’re wondering, such a wholesale firing of prosecutors midway through an administration isn’t normal. U.S. attorneys, The Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, “typically are appointed at the beginning of a new president’s term, and serve throughout that term.” Why, then, are prosecutors that the Bush administration itself appointed suddenly being pushed out?

The likely answer is that for the first time the administration is really worried about where corruption investigations might lead.

SNIP

The broader context is this: defeat in the midterm elections hasn’t led the Bush administration to scale back its imperial view of presidential power.

On the contrary, now that President Bush can no longer count on Congress to do his bidding, he’s more determined than ever to claim essentially unlimited authority — whether it’s the authority to send more troops into Iraq or the authority to stonewall investigations into his own administration’s conduct.

The next two years, in other words, are going to be a rolling constitutional crisis.

[damntexdem]

3. No, some don't have cats --

those are skunks, and do they stink!

[eppur_se_muova]

4. "Swamp kitties" as they're known in some parts.