The Wall Street Journal got it right, as they usually do on such issues.
But The Washington Post thinks the main point is that Stevens somehow got away with a crime. They apparently missed the news that the main government witness plainly lied about the amount of money involved in the Stevens house rehab--$80,000, not $240,000. Eighty thousand is not a lot for remodeling a house.
In comparison, how much has been spent on a wrongful prosecution of a sitting U.S. senator? What price does The Post think should be placed on the government's legal manipulation of a federal election?
UPDATE: Anger (well justified) in Alaska: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/us/politics/03react.html?_r=1&hpw
