What is the sound of one shoe dropping?

The Anonymous Liberal has more on the gang that couldn't forge straight.

Modus Operandi

Remember last year when former CIA analyst Ray McGovern accused Vice President Dick Cheney of being behind the Niger forgeries?

Now Ron Suskind claims in his new book that the White House ordered the CIA to forge a back-dated, handwritten letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam Hussein that would state that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq.

From the linked Politico article: “It is not the sort of offense, such as assault or burglary, that carries specific penalties, for example, a fine or jail time,” Suskind writes. “It is much broader than that. It pertains to the White House’s knowingly misusing an arm of government, the sort of thing generally taken up in impeachment proceedings.”

I seriously doubt that this will lead to impeachment proceedings, and that doesn't really bother me. Sure, I'd like to see it happen, but I'm sympathetic to the argument that at this point in the election cycle impeachment proceedings might be counterproductive to the aim of making sure Barack Obama wins the election in November. What does bother me somewhat is the possibility that Congress won't even make a serious effort to investigate the truth of Suskind's claims, and that even if they attempt to do so the White House will successfully stonewall the investigation, as they have countless times before. But what bothers me the most is the likelihood that the vast majority of the American public won't get even slightly angry about this, that we won't see the sort of public outrage about this that would make Congress seriously consider impeachment. Instead, the public will be distracted by the thought that in some way Barack Obama is somehow the political equivalent of Paris Hilton. I hope I'm wrong about this, but I fear I'm not.

Grrrrrrrr.

Protecting the Rights of the Accused

President Bush spoke recently about a very serious matter:

When Congress returns in September the Intelligence committees and leaders in both parties will need to complete work on the comprehensive reforms requested by Director McConnell, including the important issue of providing meaningful liability protection to those who are alleged to have assisted our Nation following the attacks of September 11, 2001.

When I first heard that there are people in our country who are alleged to have assisted our country following the 9/11 attacks, I was deeply, deeply shocked. These are very serious allegations, and it is hard for me to believe that there is any truth to them.

I am so glad that I live in a country where the law presumes that the accused are innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, the court of public opinion offers no such protection. That is why I look forward to the day when the victims of these smears can face their accusers in court and prove to the entire world that the charges leveled against them are nothing but vicious lies. On that day, they can hold their heads high and proclaim, "The allegations against us are false! We did not assist our nation following the attacks of September 11, 2001!"

Sadly, though, our justice system is not perfect, and sometimes the innocent are wrongly judged to be guilty. That is why Congress must act to offer meaningful liability protection to them.

So I praise the president for his call to action, but I wish he had been even more bold. The truth of the matter is that the world is full of people who make false accusations for their own nefarious ends. Therefore I call upon Congress to extend liability protection not only to those who have been accused of helping America, but also to those who are alleged to have volunteered in soup kitchens, those who are alleged to have helped old women cross the street, and those who are alleged to have given milk to stray kittens. Until the day when libel and slander are no longer commonplace, we must be vigilant in protecting the rights of the accused.