Actually this would be easier to be concerned about if the House weren't fighting the search of Jefferson's (D-La) office for the marked money he was hiding. You know, they are immune from scrutiny by the Executive Branch? Do they think they are the princes of the Potomac? Kings of the country? Regents of the republic? Apparently

DC Federal Judge Thomas Hogan decisively ruled against the Legislative branch's claims. Guess what, that also means the Executive branch is not immune to scrutiny from the Legislative one.

Shoe, meet other foot. Why you would reference this as some salve to your President's legal troubles is beyond me. If anything, it makes life much much worse for them.

I said this already: The courts have already ruled against Jefferson and the Legislative branch's amicus curae filing.

Also, since you bring him up, note that Pelosi stripped him of his ways and means seat before he was even indicted (which, he still has not been).

That's how an honest party deals with an implicated member within its midst. Take the cookie jar away from them. Republicans were trying to change their own Contract With America rules to allow Delay to keep his Majority Leader post after being indicted on multiple felony counts.

Jefferson was never chair nor even ranking member of Ways and Means. Don't pretend there is equivalence between him and Purgegate or Delay's indictment or the violations of the Hatch Act, or the missing emails.

Jefferson is comparable perhaps to Duke cunningham. Whom Republicans defended strongly until he confessed.

Congrats Glenn and to Digg User "yugandhar" who submitted this post, because it has hit the big time as far as Digg goes. Currently at 744 Diggs.

Clearly just doing a cut and paste of the Administration's obstructions of justice is compelling enough to a great many concerned citizens. No extensive commentary necessary.

If we assume an additional 100 people "dugg" this article, and 100 high RWAs "buried it" we're almost at 1000 free eyeballs. To say nothing of readers who may not have dugg or buried it.

I'd like to commend yugandhar for ably retitling the post and synopsizing it such that it catches attention. If you're going to submit a Greenwald post, take the time to edit the submission from the defaults Digg provides!

For anyone watching the Digg side, most times Glenn's posts get frozen at about 15-20 Diggs. Like DailyKos recommends there is some threshold where it becomes "popular" and dramatically more people will read it. So let that be a reminder to fans of Glenn's writing to make the effort to register a free Digg account, and head over there to "digg" the submissions.

This is not just a popularity contest: This type of readership expansion is what gives an opinionist like Glenn "power" and why high mucky mucks like that tool from ABC news actually answer his emails now, instead of disregarding him as merely a "blogger." Each digg submission that reaches the popular list, will bring another few regular readers in addition to the one-timers.

Glenn's post on the ABC/Anthrax story also hit the popular list for digg, as well as the FBI Lawbreaking post.

http://digg.com/politics/The_unresolved_story_of_ABC_News_s_false_Saddam_anthrax_reports

http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_significance_of_the_FBI_s_law_breaking

It's a small thing we can do to promote Glenn's work which we know is for the good of the United States, and ultimately the world. Not to hyperbolize, but it all matters, and if we're so sick of the obtuse and dishonest punditry of the gang of 500, we'll need to create our own voices.

Glenn,

Would you consider sharing some of the readership figures for this blog? Do things like Digg spikes show up noticably in the figures?

Can you give us some idea how much more readership you get at salon versus what you had at Unclaimed Territory?