Liz Cheney tries to revive the 1990’s mindset where every single imagined impropriety, no matter how frivolous or unsupported, merited an independent prosecutor:

Look, I think there are some things that clearly rise to the level of needing independent investigation. And what you have had happen here, obviously is the White House put out a statement the Friday before Memorial Day announcing Bill Clinton was involved, which I’m sure was really not that reassuring to most Americans. There is not an impeccable record of integrity there on the part of the former president. Secondly, then you have Rahm Emanuel basically have his own lawyer, the White House counsel issue a statement saying ‘Hey, this is all fine, we’re good to go,’ with no analysis whatsoever. Clearly, you need somebody to come in and take a look at exactly what happened.

Hey, Clinton himself was involved–that’s reason enough for an investigator right there!

What Cheney is talking about is the fact that the Obama administration offered Joe Sestak a White House position in exchange for him not running against Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter. Scandal!! Lawbreaking!! Why, no one has done that, except for perhaps every other single president in U.S. history!!

It’s not surprising that wingnuts want to smear Obama with something, it’s the sheer ridiculousness of their choice of vehicles. The offer Obama made is the same kind of political horse-trading that goes on every day in Washington, and is not even considered unethical by the more conspiratorially-minded. Even the Bush administration ethics lawyer said there’s no “there” there.

But Cheney seems to think that by singling out Clinton as a “cut out,” she can get an actual investigation started:

There is a lot here that just smells funny. If the White House thought what they were doing above board why did they go to Bill Clinton? Why did they need a cut-out for whatever they were doing? I want to know what he offered. I want to know what the president knew. The president said he didn’t know. I find it really hard to believe that the chief of staff would go to the former president to get him to try and get somebody out of the race without telling the president. And finally, this is very reminiscent of the campaign finance scandals back in the mid-’90s when they were selling the Lincoln bedroom. So I think the American people have a right to know here. We have Bill Clinton, Rahm Emanuel back engaged in this exactly what happened? Were any laws broken? Was an offer made?

Yes. Let’s not even think of investigating the massive, illegal warrantless wiretapping, or the near-infinite graft during the Iraq War in which billions simply vanished; let’s not have an investigator looking into Halliburton or the no-bid contracts, or the collusive policy-writing by oil company executives. And it’s traitorous to ask for an investigation of torture, or of the abandonment of national security leading up to 9/11.

No, let’s start a huge investigation because of an unsuccessful attempt at mundane, garden-variety political deals which cost nothing, harmed no one, and which happen all the time and nobody gives a rat’s ass about.

Ironically, if anything, Cheney’s blathering actually validates Obama’s ethics: if this is the worst someone like her can think of to charge Obama with, he must be pretty damned squeaky clean.