It's not easy to pay attention

Glancing through some articles over at Lew Rockwell (I really need to start linking to other sites), I stumbled upon this wonderful article.

So many people, myself included, take it for granted that the rule of law is just. We believe that if the law says one thing, well, damnit, that's what will be done. Most of us have at least a few laws we don't like or disagree with, but we figure that if the government follows those laws the same as we do, it'll be okay.

And then you stumble on something like this article.

Martha Stewart’s indictment by U.S. attorney James B. Comey is another example of crimes invented by prosecutors. Stewart is not charged with felony "insider trading," but with felony obstruction of justice for allegedly trying to cover up evidence that might be construed as insider trading (if a person without a fiduciary relationship with the firm, ImClone, whose stock she sold can be guilty of insider trading). How can a person be indicted for covering up a crime for which one is not accused?

I mean, really, does this make any sense within the rule of law? Roberts goes into the legal principles behind most of these changes that we have seen, I'll just note that it's not Just.

This all makes me think of some of the various groups that I consider kindred -- the gold-fringe flag folks, the tax evaders who believe that if they speak the right magic words in front of the judge, they'll either be let go without a bill, or prove that the rule of law is gone. Guess which outcome comes up more?

As long as the laws still rule, it's okay. As long as the government is still following the laws, and not laying out trumped up charged in hopes of getting a plea bargain, we're still alright, right?

The common man has a hero in Eliot Spitzer, right?