Hatch vs. GOP Staff: Democrats play fast and loose with ethics, Republican gets thrown overboard.

National Review Online ^ | February 06, 2004 | Quin Hillyer

[Nick Danger]

Just what was Mr. Miranda's job - wasn't it coordinating the efforts of the senate & outside groups in getting nominees consented to?

Yes. So it's not like the guy didn't deserve to get fired, never mind the memos.

[diotima]

[ReleaseTheHounds]

Just emailed Senator Hatch begging him to resign before he does any more damage to the Judiciary Committee, his party and this nation. I'll let you know if I get a response.

[Leroy S. Mort]

The question of the day is, What is in Hatch's FBI file, that he is so afraid of the Democrats?

Hatch is just blazingly stupid. He's a joke.

[familyofman]

"So it's not like the guy didn't deserve to get fired, never mind the memos."

The point being, one of the big stinks about the dem memos is that they revealed the dems were talking to outside groups about nominations. The very same thing that was Mr. Mirandas's job - you can't have it both ways, at least if you're being honest.

Not to mention that stealing is illegal.

[Nick Danger]

one of the big stinks about the dem memos is that they revealed the dems were talking to outside groups about nominations

That statement by you is sufficiently distant from reality that it deserves mention as a possible quack by a demoduck. As has been stated numerous times, the allegations concern a specific kind of interaction with outside groups... the kind where elected officials accept money for their votes.

Not to mention that stealing is illegal.

That would be two profoundly misleading Democratic Party talking points attributable to you in the same note. No employee of the United States has an obligation to remain silent about criminal behavior that they have witnessed, and certainly not when the behavior goes to corruption in the performance of an elected official's duties.

[familyofman]

Not dem talking points - only an analysis of what I know about this, filtered with logic.

If the dem memos revealed illegal acts - why no charges? The outside contacts by both sides sound very similar to me - trying to get leverage for their side.

Accessing someone else's computer and using the contents to further a political point, is at least immoral & wrong, if not criminal. Going into my house (unlocked) and grabbing an illegal gun, then using that gun to shoot me doesn't make your actions anu less criminal.

[Nick Danger]

If the dem memos revealed illegal acts - why no charges?

Irritation at feigned ignorance of how criminal charges are brought under our system, combined with strengthing of suspicion that respondent is spewing misleading noise for dishonest reasons.

The outside contacts by both sides sound very similar to me

Laughter at transparent attempt to posit moral equivalence between soliciting bribes and "outside contacts" in general.

Going into my house (unlocked) and grabbing an illegal gun, then using that gun to shoot me doesn't make your actions anu less criminal.

Walking by your open window and viewing you in the act of repeatedly slamming your child into a wall imposes a moral obligation on me to report what I have seen, even though doing so is, on its face, a violation of your privacy.

Besides which, it is fundamentally dishonest — and an attempt to trade on ignorance — to position as "theft" the use, for any reason, of the work product of government employees engaged in the performance of their duties. There is not, and cannot be under our law, a private property right to such works.

The idea of "ownership" of written materials is handled under our system by copyright law. 17USC Section 1.105 states

Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government

The works might be classified under certain statutes having to do with national security, but these were not. And in any case, that is still not a property right. Had these works been produced by employees of the DNC, you might have a point. But they weren't. The documents are the work product of government employees operating within the scope of their employment. Further allegation that these memos were "stolen" can only mark you as a deliberate... well.... liar. So please don't do that anymore.

[hchutch]

For me the big questions will be the following:

1. Did Miranda tell Hatch and/or Frist about the memos, and did Hatch and/or Frist not do anything about what Mrianda told them?

2. What is in the memos that were NOT published?

I know I would have immediately told Hatch and/or Frist about what I saw the instant I saw what Miranda says he saw in his ethics complaint.

[Nick Danger]

Did Miranda tell Hatch

If my spies are correct, we are going to get the answer to both of your questions fairly soon. There is good reason to believe that the unpublished memos are circulating in increasingly wide circles within the Beltway. It would appear that at least two journalists have either seen them, or have been briefed on what is in them. Once a thing like this leaks past a certain point, there is no putting it back in the bottle.

It appears as though Hatch decided on his own to "handle the problem" within the Judiciary Committee, as opposed to getting any sort of law enforcement involved. That's very "Gentleman's Club" of him, but depending on how cut-and-dried the bribery evidence is, he may come to regret that a whole bunch. From what I hear, we could see people doing the perp walk in handcuffs over some of the stuff in those memos.

[KC_Conspirator]

I am not going to vote either. I had hoped they had some cushy job for this staffer, but he is being sacrificed because of their cowardice. Shameful.

[hchutch]

I am in wait-and-see mode pending the answers.

You'll have Freepmail.

[NeoCaveman]

From what I hear, we could see people doing the perp walk in handcuffs over some of the stuff in those memos.

From your keyboard to God's ears.