Martha Stewart: Talking about InstaPundit, one of his readers quipped that "she has been found guilty of covering up crimes the government couldn't prove she committed." This is in reference to the fact that the insider trading charge was dropped by the judge, so she was punished for covering up something they couldn't prove. I don't claim to know the particulars, since honestly I don't fully care, but this fact is not particularly remarkable. Quite often, police use indirect means to prosecute, and the same applies when big boys and girls are involved.

Some consistently oppose the practice, but many now defending Martha wouldn't be too upset if it was some petty drug dealer in the dock. A message is being sent, and in this day and age, a message that you shouldn't obstruct governmental investigations or play fast and loose with regulatory rules is not necessarily a bad thing, is it? I leave the particulars to the experts ... she might not deserve punishment. But, the particular charges are not patently unjust in my view just because "government couldn't prove she committed" the underlining charge. Good meme to promote, though.