I once heard a rather sick joke that said that the definition of anti-semitism is hating Jews more than is absolutely necessary. I think Thompson's remark and attempted apology fits this definition.

Thanks to Charlie and Glenn for the sort of reporting that this country desperately needs. It will take many years to undo the damage caused by the Bush Administration's utter contempt for the rule of law. In partisanizing (which is more accurate than saying politicizing) the entire Federal government they have driven out thousands of devoted, career public servants who had dilligently done their jobs through the terms of Presidents of both parties. The disgust over what has been done to their agencies that has forced their departure has left a gaping hole of integrity and experience that will take many years to fill. It will be the job of the next president to begin that restoration process. The natural tendency for whoever is the next president will be to not want to relinquish the power that Bush, Cheney, et al has illegitimately garnered for the Office of President. We should evaluate all presidential candidates in the light that the most important quality the country needs is a president who will resist that temptation and, for the good of America, reverse the trend. I don't know who that person is and George Washington isn't running but I believe that quality of character is going to prove more important than any individual policy position.

We should all be grateful to Alberto Gonzalez. Had he been smarter, smoother or more devious he would never have put himself in this position; by the magnitude of his incompetence he has given the country a stark window into the extreme partisanization of the entire Federal Government that the Bush Administration has been undertaking for the last six years. The real story is not whether he should continue as AG but rather to determine how corrupted the prosecutorial functions have become. Unfortunately, only in hindsight can we statistically analyze how many investigations were done of Democrats versus how many investigations of Republicans were stopped or not started nationally and how many thinly based charges of "voter fraud" were started in predominantly Democratic districts. These are the perverse impacts that will occur in the specific districts where the US Attys were replaced and the chilling impact on the rest who weren't. The "shoot one and the rest will fall into line" approach. But getting that information out as part of the 2008 election cycle is important (assuming that the Justice Department doesn't lose those statistics). Last thing- it was very disappointing that no Senators asked what I think is a very obvious question; "Mr. Gonzales, you had said that no US Attorney was fired for improper reasons, could you please tell the committee what WOULD constitute improper reasons for firing them?" I suspect that the AG doesn't think there are any; which is why he doesn't view his actions (or rather his following of Karl Rove's orders) to be inappropriate.

Finally, some good, old fashioned lying about sex. No one dies, billions of dollars aren't stolen and/or wasted and the fundamental underpinnings of the Constitution aren't destroyed. I hope Bush pins a Medal of Freedom on him to hold him up as an example to the rest of his Administration.

Kudos to Robert Wexler for taking the prosecutorial line with Gonzales. His (and the administration's) complete disdain for the truth will prevent Congress from really collecting the hard evidence on the firing of US Attorneys as part of an ongoing effort to partisanize the Federal Gov't's prosecutorial function, but there is much to be gained by exposing Gonzales as a bald-faced liar; which he did. Since, Gonzales, et al continue to insist that these US Attorneys were not removed for any "improper reasons", I'm still waiting for someone to ask some administration spokesperson to enumerate what they believe WOULD constitute an "improper" reason for firing them. I suspect that they don't think there are any and that would expose the meaninglessness of their response and if they listed some then Congress would have a standard to apply to their actions.

The question posed by Sidney Blumenthal is, to say the least, extremely disturbing. Since the beginning of our Republic, the world has marveled over the peaceful transfer of power from president to president that has been the hallmark of this nation since George Washington set the then unheard of standard of leaving when your office expired. With all of Bush/Cheney's continual grab of executive power in the name of national security to fight a new kind of unending war, I wonder, at the risk of being extremely paranoid, if they plan on leaving when their terms expire?