Checks, please

"The contempt of Congress statute was not intended to apply and could not constitutionally be applied to an executive branch official who asserts the president's claim of executive privilege," Mukasey wrote, quoting Justice policy.

"Accordingly," Mukasey concluded, "the department has determined that the noncompliance by Mr. Bolten and Ms. Miers with the Judiciary Committee subpoenas did not constitute a crime."

Our new attorney general appears to have a functioning memory in some respects, but not one that seems to recall the Constitution's plan for checks and balnces. Here we have the executive branch interpreting a law in its favor. Congress rightly decides this needs to go to a judge. Is this political?, well, yeah, blatantly. But it's also structurally the right thing to do.

Of course, the Wall Street Journal looks for another viewpoint from someone calling for a fair and balanced interpretation and enforcement of the laws:

“This sort of pandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists does nothing to make America safer.”

One commenter offers a sensible view:

Finally doing something to hold this group of criminals accountable for their actions makes you a “Loony Liberal”??? Holding government officials accountable for their actions is called justice. So does this mean that republicans and conservatives are soft on crime??

Washington needs an enema.