<$BlogRSDURL$> Mark in Mexico

Friday, October 28, 2005

Jeralyn Merritt thinks she smells a rat 

I was just browsing the headlines in Google news for all the latest stories about the Fitzgerald grand jury affair and stumbled upon this amazing report from Jeralyn Merritt which was originally posted in Huffington's Post. It is titled "Jeralyn Merritt: How Karl Rove Could Walk". She gives us a bunch of paragraphs about possible scenarios whereby Karl Rove would skate away from this mess either with no charges filed or with charges but a recommendation from special prosecutor Fitzgerald for no jail time. We get a lot of yada yada yada and etc. etc. etc. and sis boom bah and then we get this;
And that's how Karl Rove could walk.

Will it happen? Right now, only Fitzgerald knows for sure. As a devout critic of the Bush Administration, I bring it up because I don't like rats. If Karl Rove isn't indicted, or gets a sweetheart deal, I can't conceive of any reason why other than he sang his heart out.
Hmm. Let me see if I understand her position here. I witness an alleged crime being committed by, let's say, my friend and colleague Pete Peehos. I may not even be aware at the time that it was, in fact, an alleged federal crime. In any case, I am first interviewed by the FBI about my dealings with my friend and colleague, Mr. Peehos, later by a special prosecutor hired to investigate the alleged crime, then that same prosecutor hauls me before a federal grand jury and questions me as to my involvement in that alleged crime. I tell him about what I saw and heard my friend, Pete Peehos, do and say relative to the alleged crime.

If I don't, my attorney tells me, I may be charged with committing that alleged crime. I have a family which depends upon my career for, oh, things like food, shelter, medical care etc. I am young enough that I will have to seek other work from time to time before I finally retire and a felony conviction will make jobs hard to come by. In any event, I am innocent of committing any felony, or even misdemeanor, for that matter. So, I testify as truthfully as I can, including 4 trips before the grand jury.

Why 4 different sessions before the grand jury? In the course of my day job, I engage in some 100 conversations with at least 25 different people, every day, 7 days a week. These conversations include one-on-one, face-to-face conversations, one-on-one telephone conversations, conference calls with more than 2 people participating, meeting discussions with more than 2 people present and emails as well as various meetings where I am merely an observer, not a direct participant. That would be some 36,500 different incidents of personal interface with colleagues, my boss (the President of The United States), reporters, friends, family members, employees, gas station attendants etc., every year.

I don't think any reasonable person would expect my instant recall of any particular one of these conversations as to its date, time and exact subject matter as well as an accurate recall of exactly who said what. The prosecutor has a lot of manpower at his disposal and, as he interviews more witnesses, he comes up with more questions which also require my additional appearance before his grand jury. In any event, I manage to dredge up all the pertinent emails and clarify my earlier testimony as my memory is jogged by the prosecutor. My friend, Pete Peehos, seems to be in a little hot water.

I am, therefore, according to Ms. Merritt, a rat. The fact that I did not, in fact, commit any crime is of no importance to her. I am a rat. The fact that the law states that I must answer the prosecutor's questions truthfully, regardless of what may happen to my friend and colleague, Pete Peehos, is of no importance to her. I am a rat. The fact that my wife and son depend upon me for sustenance is of no importance to her. I am a rat. The fact that, if I do not testify truthfully, I may be prosecuted for a crime that I did not commit as well as for the crime of perjury, which I would be committing if I give untrue testimony, is of no importance to her. I am a rat.

What specific type of rat am I, allegedly? A Rat. A big rat. A rat out. A rat fink. Rat face. Ratso Rizzo. Rat's nest. Rat's tail. King Rat. The year of the rat. Rat race. Desert Rat. River rat. Swamp rat. Kangaroo rat. Pack rat. The Rat Pack. Rat terrier. Willard rat. Rat trap. Rat Tales. Red Rat. Rat Patrol. Le Rat. Ratsnake. Rat-bite fever. Rat poison. Rat infested French jails. Rat's Blog. Trapped like a rat. Rats deserting a sinking ship. Rat-tail file. Rat-tailed maggots. Rat hole. Rat-a-tat-tat.

And why, rat? Why not, aardvark? Why not, gnu? Why not, platypus? Why not, Temminck's ground pangolin? Why not, eastern rock elephant shrew?

And why, heart? Why not, pancreas? Why not, spleen? Why not, duodenum?
And that's how Karl Rove could walk.

Will it happen? Right now, only Fitzgerald knows for sure. As a devout critic of the Bush Administration, I bring it up because I don't like eastern rock elephant shrews. If Karl Rove isn't indicted, or gets a sweetheart deal, I can't conceive of any reason why other than he sang his duodenum out.
I think I smell a rat here, too, but it ain't Karl Rove.

Linked to Basil's Blog at his new location. Temporarily (I think) identified as "goingToday.com". Basil has been pressed to make a change. UPDATE: STOP! Hold the phone! That's not the new name of his blog, it's a link for an advertiser. Silly me. In the far righty right tippy top corner of the page you will see "Basil's Blog", so he has not changed the name. I need a drink.


TAGS:




| Main Page

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?