Preening? Methinks not.

Libby's "lying to the FBI" conviction will stick post-trial and on appeal -- it almost always does -- unless there's an appellate court willing to make a major change in direction. Here's why. You want to push for broad expansion of federal criminal powers in this Time Of War™? Want to make an example of folks like Martha Stewart? Sow, I'd like to introduce you to my friend reap.


(Despite ColumbusGuy's challenge, I can't seem to figure out how to respond out on the front page, and this is important enough not to stick in the back.)

Columbus Guy says YIKES: If all of this sounds complicated, it is. Whether you speak, what you say and how and when you say it can have a profound effect on your future when you find yourself involved in a white-collar criminal investigation. The time to realize this, hire an experienced white-collar criminal defense attorney and develop a strategic plan is before the feds come knocking at your door.

I heard on the radio today that the lottery is something huge, maybe hugest ever, so they asked a couple of yokels what they'd spend it on, then they asked an attorney about it, and the attorney said it was important to seek out an attorney and a financial advisor BEFORE claiming the prize, because how you claimed it affected the payout.

I'm sure there are plenty of attorneys willing to do that on a one-third contingency.

Really, though, I think they're missing a niche market. I think everyone who plays the lottery should hire an attorney.

Anyway, I was equally appalled by Marth's conviction. Of course, I'm appalled by Martha's existence, too.

QueensGuy responds: Hey, there's good reasons nobody ever asks you to send economists, guns, and money.