After a six year investigation, the Justice Department decided last week that it had no prosecutable case against Tom DeLay, the Republican House Majority Leader from way back when.  On Saturday, the New York Times, ever a reliable voice for the convicted criminal (see, e.g., its crusade for lower sentences for crack dealers and its screeching opposition to the death penalty), took after the long-gone DeLay, reminding us in acid tones of the behavior Eric Holder's DOJ just found to be not criminal.

A suspicious person might whiff the aroma of double standards, or  --  dare I say it  --  partisanship.  The Times does manage to choke out that, "Others in Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have put family members on the payroll," but that is the last we hear of anyone currently in power.  The Times instead reminds us of, inter  alia, Mr. DeLay's all-expense-paid trip to Saipan  --  13 years ago.

Well gosh.  While we're at it, I wonder what Monica is doing these days. 

But I digress.  The howler in the Times editorial is this:  "[M]any of Mr. DeLay's actions remain legal only because lawmakers have chosen not to criminalize them."

No kidding!  The actions, even of the supposedly rancid Mr. DeLay, not to mention everybody else, are not illegal unless they're made illegal.  Wow.  You learn something new in the Times every day.  The editorial staff must all be Harvard Law graduates.  Maybe they got their degrees while Elena Kagan was Dean.

P.S.  What "lawmakers," exactly  --  currently holdiing a substantial majority  --  have "chosen not to criminalize" sleazy fundraising practices?  Might it be the ones raising dough like crazy in Hollywood and for whom the Times has been going goo-goo for the last three-plus years?