The Irony of Adam Cohen’s Irony
Adam Cohen writes:
Opponents of Gov. Jim Doyle of Wisconsin spent $4 million on ads last year trying to link the Democratic incumbent to a state employee who was sent to jail on corruption charges. The effort failed, and Mr. Doyle was re-elected and now the state employee has been found to have been wrongly convicted. The entire affair is raising serious questions about why a United States attorney put an innocent woman in jail.
The conviction of Georgia Thompson has become part of the furor over the firing of eight United States attorneys in what seems like a political purge. While the main focus of that scandal is on why the attorneys were fired, the Thompson case raises questions about why other prosecutors kept their jobs.
Cohen implies that prosecutors kept their jobs because they brought thinly based political prosecutions like that of Georgia Thompson.
Cohen never explains that Steven Biskupic, the head of the office that prosecuted Thompson, is thought to have been targeted for firing only after Biskupic’s prosecution of Thompson had been completed.
The timing makes no sense. But Cohen shows no interest in exploring that angle. Instead, without any evidence whatever, Cohen speculates about Biskupic’s motives:
Mr. Biskupic made the creative argument that she gained by obtaining political advantage for her superiors and that in pleasing them she enhanced job security for herself. Those motivations, of course, may well describe why Mr. Biskupic prosecuted Ms. Thompson.
Cohen describes that as “ironic indeed.” What I find ironic is that, while Cohen is willing to excoriate Biskupic for leveling serious accusations at Thompson with slim evidence, Cohen is only too happy to level accusations at Biskupic with no evidence at all.
Patterico
Your right let me follow your logic
First the Furor over the firing
Next will be why some weren’t fired
Last will be why they were appointed in the first place
EricPWJohnson (92aae0) — 4/16/2007 @ 7:10 amIf anyone deserves to be speculated about, it’s Biskupic; while he may have strongly believed his case against Thompson, it’s obvious that the case was based on speculation, not direct evidence. If he can’t stand the heat, he should really get out of the kitchen.
And there’s plenty of evidence that this was a politically motivated prosecution (notwithstanding the vigorous denials of, heh, other prosecutors even if they happen to be democrats). It’s just all circumstantial evidence. The question is whether one is willing to connect the dots in the circumstantial evidence.
And unlike Thompson, Biskupic isn’t facing 20 years in prison based on Cohen’s speculation. Speculation seems more forgivable in this context, I’d say.
Phil (427875) — 4/16/2007 @ 9:58 amTotally off topic, but here are Virginia bloggers reacting to the massacre:
http://www.blognetnews.com/virginia
David Mastio (6586cb) — 4/16/2007 @ 10:08 amCute how you infer only the motives that divert suspicion from what is truly a smelly affair. Do you know why Biskupic was on the list? Do you know why he was taken off?
Sensing the answer is ‘no,’ and seeing as how you want to spin whole cloth, here’s an alternate outfit that fits the circumstances just as well, and knowing how these things have turned out with the Bush Admin, thirty times more likely to be the case than whatever you’re spinning.
Biskupic is tasked to find voter fraud. He finds none. He knows without being told that this is a career-threatening failure. He goes after Doyle on thin gruel. The DOJ Regent Law geniuses see the lack of voter fraud cases, their highest priority, are not pleased, put him on the list. Someone higher up says, hey, he tried to get Doyle, so maybe he has some ‘loyal Bushie’ in him after all. Maybe we should give him one of those Monica Goodling ‘metals.’ Biskupic keeps job.
Care to bet which version turns out to be true?
multum_in_parvo (ff7b02) — 4/16/2007 @ 2:14 pmJIMMY DOYAL hook him up to a backside kicking machine and turn it on full blast
krazy kagu (6a69d6) — 4/17/2007 @ 12:38 pm