The liberal media is reacting predictably to the news that the FBI is investigating a possible bugging in the office of Republican senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky after a tape surfaced of a meeting concerning opposition research on possible candidate, Ashley Judd. (Judd has since announced she will not run.) Instead of focusing on the possibility of an illegal bugging, the Democrats and their media allies are focusing on what was said on tape by McConnell and his aides. What really matters here is whether someone planted a bug in McConnell's office. If so, we have another Watergate.
Here is the reaction of the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/mitch-mcconnell-2014_n_3055435.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Opposition research is one of the more unsavory aspects of elections. Not only do operatives keep track of every vote a candidate has cast on every issue, they also dig into personal issues. In the case of Judd, the tape clearly reveals that McConnell and his aides were talking about her personal life, past statements, and reported suicide attempts.
Nasty business, but let's be honest. Both sides do it-and always have. Anyone who says differently is a liar.
What really matters is how this tape was produced. McConnell's office insists the meeting consisted solely of long-time trusted aides; thus, they discount the possibility that one of the persons was wearing a wire without the others' knowledge. As to the legality of that action, it depends on the law of the state where the recording was made. Federal law permits it for law enforcement purposes.
For example, an undercover federal officer or informant under the direction of an officer could secretly wear a wire to record a conversation between co-conspirators. I did it often as a DEA agent. The legal key here is that one party to the conversation was consenting to the recording (the undercover agent or informant). If there is no agent or informant, then obviously, nobody is consenting to the recording. Then a court order is required.
So, if it turns out that there was no "mole" or disaffected Republican in McConnell's office wearing a wire, then we are left with the situation of a bug being put in.
Hello Watergate. That would be a clear crime.
That would be precisely what was involved when operatives tied to the Nixon White House were arrested trying to plant a bug in the Watergate offices of the DNC. We all know the uproar that followed, the impeachment hearings, and the ultimate resignation of Richard Nixon. We remember the outrage.
This is not to condone Nixon. He lied and covered up the involvement of the White House and thus, deserved to lose his presidency.
My question is what will result if it turns out that Democratic operatives from Kentucky placed a bug in McConnell's office? I am not suggesting for a minute that the current White House had any involvement, but even if it is tied to a lesser level of the Democratic Party, will we see the same level of outrage? If first reactions are an indication, we will not. It seems there are different rules for the left.
I would be particularly interested to hear what the hypocritical former congresswoman from New York would have to say, the acerbic Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the Watergate committee and was so openly partisan that she had her mind made up on day one. This is the same woman who took umbrage when I asked her at UC Irvine why she pooh-poohed the perjury of President Bill Clinton in the Lewinsky affair. While at UCI, she was arguing that George W Bush and Dick Cheney should "be brought to justice" for lying to the American people-or some such rot. Very selective in her outrage is Ms. Holtzman.
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2012/03/elizabeth-holtzman-speaks-at-uc-irvine.html
If it turns out that McConnell and his aides were illegally bugged, then the conversation should not be focused on what they said-distasteful as it may have been. It should be focused on the law-breaking.
Update from USA Today (April 11). USA Today reports that two Democrtaic operatives have taken credit for the recording. David Korn's site, Mother Jones, which released the tapes, is not commenting.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/04/11/mcconnell-secret-tape-ashley-judd/2074693/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Watergate envy getting you down again?
This one doesn't reach to the White House, wasn't funded by the DNC, did not involved burglary of a closed office in a locked office building, and is of no particular significance to the future of American constitutional government.
Get a (political) life.
I stated that it didn't involve the White House. You bring in techicalities. Maybe you think this is beneficial to the electoral process. In the end, responsible Republicans like Goldwater recognized that Nixon was guilty and turned against him. Let's see how the Dems react to this. Actually, the initial indications are they want to focus on the content of the intercepted conversations rather than on the interception. Very similar to how they reacted when Jim mcDermott was using those intercepts of Newt gingrich's phone conversation.
You cried Watergate... you didn't cry "a state organization from Kentucky is out of line..." Watergate was significant precisely because of White House direct involvement.
I don't recall James McCord saying "Liddy, I don't think we're in Kansas any more."
Post a Comment