The WSJ's Friday editorial deplored the indictment of Scooter Libby on the grounds that the only thing he may have done wrong is lie about a crime that was not committed. The editorial board of the Journal apparently thinks that this is a gross overstep of the independent counsel's bounds, not to mention a shocking and shameful waste of taxpayer money.
Because if I had earned 5 bucks for every time the Journal beat the "it's not about the sex; it's about the lying. He committed perjury," drum, during L'Affaire Lewinsky, I'd be writing this post from my palatial home somewhere in the Tropics. Because god forbid an administration lie about a blow job, right? No--it's much more forgivable to lie about national security. After all, I'd be shocked and stunned to find out the last time anyone on the WSJ editorial board got one...
What really irritates me is the fact that they can write this pro-Libby editorial without even mentioning the Clinton investigation. Even if they said, "now, we know we were on the other side of this issue when Billy was getting raked over the coals for much the same offense, but here is why it's different" or whatever. But to write such a "perjury is no big deal" editorial and neglect to even mention the scads of editorials claiming the opposite in their editorial history, is just really poor journalism. Not to mention breathtaking arrogance.
Although, the truth is, this is why I read the Journal. After all, what would I get mad about before 7am if I didn't have the WSJ editorial page every morning?