“Let me say a few words about important values we must demonstrate while all of us serve in government. First, we must always maintain the highest ethical standards. We must always ask ourselves not only what is legal, but what is right. There is no goal of government worth accomplishing if it cannot be accomplished with integrity.

“Second, I want us to set an example of humility. As you work for the federal government there is no excuse for arrogance, and there’s never a reason to show disrespect for others. A new tone in Washington must begin with decency and fairness. I want everyone who represents our government to be known for these values.”

– George W. Bush, 2000

Political misdirection: What better way to deflect attention away from the Scooter than to nominate another Italian wingnut to the Supreme Court? Hail, Scalito! But the Libby indictment goes to the ethics question, and most people just aren’t buying the “cleaning up government and bringing morality back to the White House” load of malarkey.

From National Journal’s Polltrack (edited):

This morning’s Supreme Court announcement overshadowed much of the buzz about Friday’s indictment in the CIA leak case, but two new polls suggest that the matter could leave bad feelings lingering in the public sphere.

President Bush, like many politicians before him, campaigned on cleaning up government and bringing morality back to the White House, but a new ABC News/Washington Post survey suggests he hasn’t done a better job than his predecessors. A 46-percent plurality said the “overall level of ethics and honesty in the federal government” has fallen since Bush became president; 37 percent said it’s stayed the same and just 15 percent said it’s risen.

Nearly two-thirds rated Bush’s own handling of ethics in government as fair or poor, and just 34 percent rated them positively — but that’s roughly on par with former President Bill Clinton’s level in January 2000 and former President Ronald Reagan’s in November 1988, according to the analysis.

The ABC/Post survey put Bush’s overall approval at 39 percent, 3 points lower than its September number; CNN/Gallup/USA Today gauged the split at 41/56. Both of those numbers are statistically even with the 42/55 measure a few days before the indictment of Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, on five charges related to the CIA leak investigation.

As for the Libby case specifically, the ABC/Post poll found the public in a harsh mood. Nearly seven in 10 said the charge against Cheney’s adviser was a serious crime, and a majority (55 percent) also said it points to broader ethics problems in the Bush administration. Fifty-five percent said Bush himself didn’t do anything wrong in connection to the case, however, and 44 percent let Cheney off the hook as well.

As usual, the question remains about what effect these numbers will have at the polls in 2006 and beyond. A majority of respondents told Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D) pollsters that “reform and change” better described Democrats than Republicans — but the GOP came out ahead on “know what they stand for.” The parties were tied on “creating prosperity.”

JUAN WILLIAMS: You can try to minimize it, but the fact that you have Scooter Libby, so involved in justifying going to war, and in the posture of trying to smear a critic of that justification. I think is pretty revealing and pretty damaging to the Bush White House. I think they’re going to have to rebuild a sense of trust with the American People. And that’s why when Brit asked this question, why did he have to lie, he felt the need to lie if he did lie, but by all indications he’s going to say I didn’t remember it quite the way this person remembered and all the like. That’s not very strong in my book, and I think Fitzgerald did a terrific job on Friday. But the reason he felt the need was to make it clear that he was not involved in what really was a conspiracy to defame Joe Wilson.

BRIT HUME: Juan, somebody needs to hose you down.

Source: Think Progress

Toledo Blade:

Tom Noe, whose failed rare-coin deal with the state has triggered multiple investigations and rocked Ohio’s Republican leadership, was charged yesterday with illegally funneling $45,400 to President Bush’s re-election campaign.

Gregory A. White, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, announced a three-count indictment against Mr. Noe, saying he used two dozen people as “conduits” to make illegal campaign contributions at a $2,000-a-seat fund-raiser in Columbus.

In doing so, Mr. Noe skirted federal campaign finance funding limits while meeting a pledge to raise $50,000 for the Oct. 30, 2003, fund-raiser. The Bush campaign later named Mr. Noe a “Pioneer” for raising at least $100,000 overall.

The Noe case is the largest campaign money-laundering scheme prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department since new campaign finance laws were enacted by Congress in 2002, said Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department’s public integrity section.

“This case represents one of the first and most important examples of this new enforcement posture under the new law and is one of the most blatant and excessive criminal campaign finance schemes we have encountered,” Mr. Hillman said.

A federal arrest warrant has been issued for Mr. Noe, 51, and Mr. White said he expected him to surrender within a day. Authorities said they were negotiating for Mr. Noe’s surrender so that he can make an initial appearance in federal court.

Trent Lott has spoken some boners in the past but this one ranks all the way up there.

“In a month, who will remember the name Harriet Miers?” – Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss.

I’m betting that “Harriet Miers” will take a place alongside Robert Bork; that “The Miers Nomination” will be regarded on the lines of Waterloo and Little Big Horn; and that this whole fiasco will be the third leg of the 3-legged stool pulled from underneath Bush’s comfortable fanny, along with “Katrina” and “CIA Leak.”

Yeah, Trent, you’re dreaming if you think we’re all going to forget this one. That’s about as likely as anyone forgetting this little chestnut from you:

“I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years, either.”

I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.”

– President George H.W. Bush, former Director of the CIA, in remarks at the dedication ceremony for the George Bush Center for Intelligence, on April 26, 1999

Conservatives have opened a web site, WithdrawMiers.org. Important among the many reasons to shun Miers, they say, is not just the candidate herself, but the way Bush has handled her nomination.

Instead of a robust discussion about judicial philosophy and adherence to the Constitution, Ms. Miers has been defended on the basis of her gender, religious background, church membership, pro-bono legal service, ‘real world’ heartland perspective, and purported attention to detail. Further complicating the process has been the suggestion of private assurances about her vote on specific issues and cases.

They are also upset to be on the receiving end of the tried-and-true Bush strategy of ignoring the merits of your argument and instead slinging mud about your character or motivation.

Proponents of her nomination have responded to critics with unwarranted charges of “cynicism,” “elitism,” and “sexism,” made worse by the claim that those concerned about her nomination are merely “whiners.”

Among those listed on the site as calling for Miers’ withdrawal are some of the folks Bush – and the rest of us – thought would not only drink the Kool-Aid but help clean up afterward:

American Conservative Union
Charles Krauthamer
Citizen Outreach
Conservative HQ
David Frum
Fidelis
George Will
Liberty Counsel
Mark Moller, Cato Supreme Court Review
National Review
Patrick Buchanan
Peggy Noonan
Phyllis Schlafly
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Republican National Coalition For Life
Judge Robert Bork
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
William Kristol
Young Americas Foundation