Well, why the hell not? The Democrats got what they wanted, they can afford to let this go now, regardless of whether any real crime was committed or not.

For the record, I’m not all that sure that there was. But, then again, I didn’t follow it closely enough to say for certain one way or another. Others think he was, and they followed it more closely that I ever did.

Regardless of what I think, though, there were incidents that tainted the entire trial. Enough to throw this out? Possible, but as I said, I haven’t been following it closely enough to say one way or the other.

But I will say this much: if the Justice Department voids this conviction, as is being claimed, rather than have Obama commute the sentence (or pardon Stevens outright), then that tells me that something is wrong here. They — and by “they” I mean Holder and the administration — wouldn’t go this route unless there was a good chance that he’d win on appeal, and thus embarrass the administration and the Democrats. So I have to believe that there was some political witch hunting going on here.

If that was indeed the case, the Democrats got what they wanted and have no interest in pursuing this any further. Holder basically admits that, saying that since Stevens is no longer in the Senate, then there’s no reason to continue the case. If laws were indeed broken, then regardless of whether the person who broke the laws is in office or not, justice should be done. If they weren’t, then this is exactly what I’d expect to see happen, the quiet dropping of the entire matter so as not to embarrass the President, the Justice Dept. or the adminstration.

Frankly, if this entire thing is dropped I would expect Stevens to sue the Justice Department. In fact, I’d encourage it. If he doesn’t go after them and make them prove his guilt or innocence, then he will be judged as guilty for the rest of his life. And you can better believe the Democrats would make no distinction between him and any currently-serving Republicans, either. If he truly is innocent, then he must force them into admitting that fact and clear his name. Otherwise it will follow him — and the Republican Party — around for the rest of his life.

Does that mean I think he’s 100% pure? Of course not, and I’m glad he lost his re-election bid. I do know enough about the case to undestand he did do things that were, at best, unethical and goes against the grain of what Republicans and conservatives stand for. So he should pay some sort of price for that and, in a way, he did. We on the right hold our politicians to a much higher standard than the left does, and this case certainly is not exception. When one of our guys screw up we demand resignations or vote them out. The left…not so much. The question is, though, was enough of a price paid? Was justice served or not? I guess we’ll find out sooner or later.

Update: Saw a comment over at Flopping Aces (second one down the list) that I hadn’t considered:

Obama Administrations (Holder’s Justice Dept. Seeks To Void Stevens’ Conviction) – they give up on Stevens – so the Republicans will go along with Holder’s decision to no longer investigate Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA).

Capt. Ed also makes a good point (and clarifies some stuff I hadn’t known about the case):

Of course, none of this changes the fact that Stevens had oil-company lobbyists remodeling his house and hid that fact from the Senate. The fact that prosecutors engaged in serious misconduct does not make Stevens clean. It just makes him free.