Suddenly pundits don't want to hold previous (read: GOP) administrations accountable?
April 24, 2009 1:10 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
It's been bemusing to watch the media 'debate' over the torture memos and whether the Obama White House should just drop the matter. Lots (most?) media elites argue that that's the best strategy, hinting that only partisan loons would want to hold an exiting administration accountable for wrongdoing. That's dismissed as nasty "retribution."
Allison Kilkenny at HuffPost helps put into context the media's current blinders:
Apparently, upholding the law is now a fringe issue. Those on the "hard left " want accountability, and the serious beltway "journalists" want to "keep walking" away from "retribution" so as to maintain life's sweet "mystery."
But boy, it was hard to find any members of the punditocracy in early 2001 who argued that point when Congress launched hearings and investigations into the Clinton pardons and gift 'scandal' after that Dem team had left the White House. Back then the message was clear: only partisan loons wouldn't want to hold the exiting administration accountable for wrongdoing.
So.........millions to investigate oral action between adults good - a seeming threat to the rule of law. But investigations of clear lawbreaking are for the loons.
Maybe they don't want anyone to break the Reagan administration record of convictions - 32