Truthiness and consequences

Scott Horton runs through the latest developments in truthiness at the DoJ.

It doesn't look good:

In other administrations, the fact that two senior Justice Department officers were refusing to cooperate with a criminal probe would be shocking news. The fact that they had to be subpoenaed to answer questions about their official conduct at the Justice Department would grab headlines. For the Bush Justice Department, however, it’s just another day, hardly any different from those that preceded or will follow it. Indeed, the sense among senior Justice staff with whom I have spoken is that Schlozman and Spakovsky are, relatively speaking, small frye. The focus remains on the investigation of the U.S. attorneys’ scandal, which involves serious allegations of wrongdoing and the prospect of a criminal probe of the Department’s four most senior political appointees, starting with Attorney General Gonzales. Still the real focus of inquiries into the scandal is not on the Justice Department at all, but rather its former political puppetmaster, Karl Rove.

This is way worse than the bad old days of Watergate, the task of cleaning the Augean stables needs another Hercules, and I doubt that it is Obama. In fact, I don't think anyone will even attempt to clean it up. There is no mystery as to why Congress has sat on their hands for the last two years when faced with such utter corruption, they, or most of them anyway, are a part of the whole rotten system that is breaking down before our eyes.

Scott concludes with this:

Truth is about to attempt to recapture the Justice Department. And the institution’s reputation and future hang in the balance.

Really, it's the future of the country, because even if the DoJ has always sided with money and power, playing by the rules was a big part of the game. Once the rules are gone, it's all just personal power that counts, defended and expanded by the usual tools of such gangsters.