A Pick in the End Zone
It was pointed out to me earlier today that the Wednesday Morning QB went off on David Iglesias, the former US Attorney who has mentioned that… “someone… oh who could it be” tried to use his investigation to influence the November 2006 NM-1 election.
Or as the WMQB tried to spin it
[Iglesias] is, of course, claiming that he was inappropriately pressured by certain members of the NM congressional delegation to actually DO something about public corruption.
Actually DO something? Or do something on your time line, that just happened to coincide with the Congressional election last year? Oh, thank you for lobbing that one up in the air.
*It’s in the air. He picks it off in the end zone! He’s zigging and zagging! He could… go… all… the… way!*
That pick’s goin’ to the booth for an official review.
Illegal or unethical? There is a difference between them.
The last time I checked, influence is defined as:
The action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others.
If reports are correct (and Heather Wilson has done nothing to convince anyone otherwise, but that’s my next post) she and Pete Domenici called the US Attorney to push him to indict someone not according to this time table he thinks is right, but to help her politically during a close election.
Influencing a criminal investigation. I’m not a lawyer, but isn’t that a crime? I don’t know, but according to Friday’s Albuquerque Journal story, Michael Coleman said:
Congressional ethics rules prohibit members of Congress from engaging in “ex parte,” or off-the-record communication, to sway the outcome of a federal investigation.
Congressional ethics? Heather Wilson? Insert your own joke here.
Influencing an investigation for electoral gain is a serious charge (IMHO) and it should be investigated fully. And speaking of ethics, I vaguely remember Wilson quoting something… What could it have been? Oh yeah. The Air Force Academy Code of Ethics.
“We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.”
Hmmmm, interesting. I wonder how quickly it will be before she starts saying that again? And if anyone from the Air Force is going to call her on using that.
The WMQB goes on to spin Wilson and Domenici’s “involvement” with:
So again, we say, IF any of our elected officials wanted answers from their ‘rising star’ – we say, good. Thank you for serving our interests.
Is she serious? Our interests or Your interests. There is a difference between the interests of New Mexicans and the interests in Whitney Cheshire and the NM GOP. So it’s OK for Domenici and Wilson to break Congressional Ethics rules, and possibly the law (again, isn’t influencing an investigation a crime? We’ll find out) as long as Heather wins NM-1 again? Would the WMQB have still said that if the US Attorney had been taking calls from Udall and Bingaman for an investigation of Republicans?
I believe one of Heather’s phone calls must have gone like this. “Damn it! Why won’t you hurry it up?? The race is too close for my comfort! And if momma ain’t happy, ain’t no one happy.”
The WMQB went on to close her statement of dissatisfaction with:
So regardless of any fallout from what our elected officials did or didn’t do – we say, to Mr. Iglesias…good bye, and good riddance.
That causes us to award the Wednesday Morning QB with the first ever “Warren Sapp Unsportsmanlike Conduct Award” I haven’t seen a cheap shot cleat rake like that since I was visiting Wales playing rugby.
Good bye and good riddance? Just because he wouldn’t do what you want, when you wanted it?
I prefer to leave with a little more class than that. So for all of us following the case: reporters, bloggers and readers alike, I part with…
And the booth says:
“The ruling on the field stands. The interception is good. Touchdown.”