David Frum has been posting regularly, and indignantly, on the Libby show trial/witchunt:
Scooter Libby is publicly branded an oath-breaker on the basis of diverging recollections. Yet it was the man who set this case in motion, former ambassador Joe Wilson, who was caught in lie after lie by the Senate Intelligence committee.
Now we remember why Democrats are so much more eager than Republicans to criminalize politics: Because they know that the ultimate power over the lives and liberties of the contestants is held by juries drawn from the most Democratic jurisdiction in the country. Would Scooter have been convicted - would a prosecutor ever have dared to try him - if the capital of the United States were located in say Indianapolis?
It all makes you think: President Bush should have pardoned everybody involved in this case on the day Patrick Fitzgerald sent Judith Miller to jail. But it's not too late: Pardon Scooter Libby now.
There is much more at David Frum's Diary. Just scroll down.
A broader question: To what extent do Democratic-leaning prosecutors around the country root for a prosecution - and a conviction - like this? For that matter, to what extent are prosecutors around the country indifferent to a frame-up like the Duke "rape" case? And what are the implications for the integrity of the criminal justice system?