If you read the whole article, you'll have noted the complete and total lack of any complaints about "White House" interference. The only concerns with David Iglesias were in relation to CONGRESSIONAL and CONSTITUENT contacts. The Domenici call "lasted about two minutes." Domenici apologized for any inappropriate "appearance" with the call. There was no need to apologize for any substantial impropriety, because there was none. Heck, if there had been any impropriety, Iglesias should have and would have immediately reported the call to the DoJ. Iglesias never did that.

Cummins said he 'didn't feel threatened.'

I saw NOTHING from Carol Lam stating that she felt that any of her work was threatened.

This is BS. If you want to argue with me, you had better get tuned up better than this. That WaPo reporter ought to do a better job of reporting and less editorializing in the future, too.

The fact of the matter is that Republicans intervened directly to thwart investigations or instigate political pressure in ways that contradict everything the Administration has claimed.

Just name one investigation or prosecution that was "thwarted." Identify how anyone "intervened directly." Do it in clear language, and cite your authority for the charges.

Let me know when you have something serious to write about. In the meantime, I've got my President. And you don't.

I have no problem with any lack of "terrorism" convictions. I don't want our guys trying to serve subpoenas and working up criminal cases against bin Laden, Zawahiri and the rest. I don't want them to go to jail. I want the 82nd Airborne and the 10th Mountain Division to kill them.

When I see cars driving around with bumper stickers saying, "Impeach Bush" and "Not my President," it could be any one of you all, right?

I didn't mean to imply that all of you don't have a President. You do, whether you like him or not. But I've "got" a President that I like. You don't. And moreover, you don't have a President to whom you all can say, "Gotcha."

Doesn't he have his hands full setting up the Department of Peace?

Live from Washington. Or is it "Warshington"? Can somebody please let Harry Reid that there is no "r" in "Washington"?

I don't think it is true that Harry doesn't want to argue with Cheney. He just doesn't want to debate Cheney on something serious, that Cheney knows a whole lot more about. After all, in "the spirit of bipartisanship" that 'ol Harry likes to talk about, just the other day, he called Cheney "the President's attack dog." Isn't that special? Now I would never expect the President or the Vice President to debase the public debate with that kind of language, although it is exactly what I would expect of a Harry Reid. No; what I would expect of the Vice President in a situation is exactly what I would do. Walk up to the little worm in private, look him squarely in the eye, and tell him to go fuck himself.

Weeks like this just make me glad to be alive. My dream is of a 24-hr. all-Rosie & Alec cable news channel.

"YOU FAT PIG!"

"EAT ME!"

I'm not sure just one channel would be enough.

Even as a fiercely loyal Republican, I had thought that the Jessica Lynch story was bogus from Day 1. But I never saw anything ideological in the fabulist coverage of the phony story; rather, I thought it all to be reflective of the media feeding the lowest common denominator of the news biz. A sort of Anna Nicole in camo. The story had practically nothing to do with any strategic or policy goal in Iraq, and everything to do with tugging at heartstings.

In any event, if everyone wants to expose that story for what it was, I say go for it. Don't forget, however, to ask the hard questions of Jessica Lynch, such as, "What was your role in promoting that story?" and, "What did you get out of the deal?"

I returned to the reality of Glenn Greenwald's partisan spinning when he wrote that the only thing that has saved us all from falling victim to these stories is our heroic resuce by a Congress now led by Democrats. HUH? Weren't there about a half-dozen investigations of the sad and frankly shocking Pat Tillman story before November '06? I can't even remember now when it was that I learned that he was a friendly-fire casualty. But whenever it was, I knew the real story long, long before any Democrat even dreamed of controlling Congress.

Glenn Greenwald -- You are right, these were two cases of garbage p.r. by the military and exceedingly faulty news reporting. (News reporting in which one can scarcely accuse Fox News of being a radical-right outlier.) But how the hell did you ever reach the conclusion that we wouldn't have known what we did without some showoff hearing before a Congressional Committee?