So I’m reading the story of Jeanine Pirro, the beleagured candidate for Attorney General in the state of New York. And I’m thinking. . . What??

It turns out that she believed her husband might be having (yet another) affair, so she talked to a friend, a former police commissioner of New York already disgraced in unrelated matters, about secretly bugging her husband’s boat in order to “listen in” on any activity. She never followed through, she says. But unfortunately for her, the friend was being eavesdropped upon because of an unrelated investigation the FBI was conducting.

Now the FBI may be after Jeanine Pirro for attempting illegal surveillance, and she’d made the front page of the New York Times two days running.

What? I have no idea what the legalities are. If she really didn’t do it, I imagine she’s in the clear.

But here’s what Republican party leader Edward Cox said, according to the New York Times, about the thought that Pirro would try to get the goods on her husband: “the political issue is not whether she broke any laws, but the fact that she would think about doing this to her husband raises questions about her judgment and about whether you want that individual as attorney general.”

Are you kidding? (This is exactly who I would want as attorney general.) “How could she do this to her husband?” How could she not want to know what was going on? What does Cox mean, how could she do this to him? What about what he’s doing to her? What if she’d hired a private investigator as so many fearful spouses do? I wonder what Cox would say to that.

Grief. She didn’t arrange a hit on the guy, she’s staying with him inspite of the many times and ways he’s embarrassed her. If it’s serial adultery she’s been living with, as has been suggested, she certainly has the right in my book to leave, maybe even the responsibility to. But that’s a decision only she can make. I like the fact she’s not claiming her husband isn’t who he is, or blaming some “vast right wing conspiracy” for his problems. She essentially acknowledges her husband’s problems, their problems, but says she wants him there for their kids. Okay.

But thinking about putting a recording device on a her husband’s boat which she has a right to (if not legal title to) in order to find out if her husband is cheating is also all right in my book. I have a feeling it’s okay in a lot of “books.”

In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if this “scandal” helps Pirro to get more of the women’s vote.

Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here