This will be short - as I walked out while the BS was still flowing - but apparently Tweetie doesn't know the difference between a court of law and the congress. Nor does he know the difference between impeachment and conviction. Nor does he know the difference between unanimous and majority.
Well actually - he does, but he was such a shill today he pretended ignorance.
A quick summary below.
This evening on Hardball Mathews had the required "pro" and "con" on to discuss the Libby commutation. First he went after the woman representing the Wilson's in their suit against the whoever (not sure if Libby, the gov., or Cheney). In any event - he went straight to the "do you think perjury and obstruction of justice are serious crimes" [to which she answered "yes" - thereby guaranteeing the next few minutes of badgering]. He went from that statement to trying to get her to agree that Clinton should have been impeached, etc. She tried to deflect him back to the case at hand, and the difference between a trial with jury versus the political process of impeachment and trial by Senate, which he kept deflecting. Then - when the former Bush I guy was on - he attempted to equate impeachment vote with jury vote of guilty (did not note that the event in the Senate was called a "trial") and that there was no conviction - instead insisting that the jury was the equivalent of the House and the Senate was the equivalent of the Judge.
What BS. You can argue the rightness or wrongness of what Bush II did (and we know the answer to that) - but to just purposely muck up the relationship between impeachment and trial versus the indictment and trial and conviction by a UNANIMOUS jury verdict is so dishonest. He is not that dumb. Just playing the hack role again.
What a bummer.