« Relevance and clarity | Home | Setting the stage for congressional elections »
January 20, 2006
Good riddance, David Barrett
This is unbelievable…the independent prosecutor, David Barrett, spent 10 years and $21 million investigating former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros. The best he could get on Cisneros was a guilty plea to a misdemeanor charge of making a false statement. Cisneros paid a $10,000 fine.
The unbelievable part is that Barrett wrapped up his investigation with a 474-page report blasting the Clinton administration for impeding his investigation.
Impeding his investigation? He would rather have spent more than $21 million and 10 years? He needed even more unbridled subpoena power?
Barrett is disgraceful. Just like the other rogue prosecutor, Kenneth Starr, who started investigating Whitewater and ended up issuing a report that descended into Hustler Magazine-type descriptions of body fluids and sex acts.
You may have heard it said that prosecutors have the power to indict a ham sandwich. In Barrett’s case, he outran his headlights, and then spent half a career trying to justify his misadventure. He certainly tried to ruin Cisneros in the process.
Once again, the news media co-conspired with Barrett to the end. Many of them put Barrett’s part shot on the front page, gleeful at the prospect of trashing the Clinton Administration once again.
This whole Barrett scenario is so painfully obvious: a billious rant made to cover up the stunning ineptitude of rank rogue prosocutorial politics.
Whatever partisan differnces we have in America, this junk should not be tolerated by decent citizens.
Posted Jan 20 2006 @ 06:40 AM