I respect senators like Leahy, Whitehouse, and Schumer, who have rejected the conventional wisdom that "the way for Democrats to win" is to be as hapless, spineless and submissive as Tom Daschle. It's thrilling to hear Leahy's little sound bites on the daily news; Leahy is never glib, and he always sounds like a grown-up.

On the other hand: given what's happened to this country for the past six years -- including the transformation of the Justice Department into an organized crime syndicate (I say this in spite of the heroic and principled prosecutions of Tommy Chong and those terminally ill pot-smoking seniors in California) -- I can't get excited about another media circus, another "embarrassing" hearing, another "damaging" resignation, etc., even if those scandals cumulatively guarantee that Congress and the White House will fall to the Democrats in 2008. Something bigger than the 2008 elections is at stake here.

In America, I was always taught, nobody is above the law. Now, I understand that that has probably never been true . . . but the fiction still has its uses. Can we ever repeat that useful fiction with a straight face if the Bush team doesn't wind up behind bars?

Sounds pretty mild to me. Why wasn't he asked to provide documentary evidence backing up his claims that the firings were because the prosecutors weren't following Bushie policy priorities--going after pot smokers and porn shops? Ask him to produce the e-mails or other evidence to back up his statements. Other than mildly contradicting the AG, as far as I can see, nothings at all was revealed as to why these people were fired, other than the obvious ones that it was an attempt to squelch investigations and punish those who don't go along--a trademark of this administration.

The WaPo is spinning yesterday's sudden Republican intervention to interrupt Sen. Grassley's line of questioning and force Sen. Leahy to call a recess on procedural grounds as a "cloakroom misunderstanding." But Sen. Grassley did not return after the sudden recess to resume his line of questioning. (The WaPo omitted this little nugget from its reporting.)

Sen. Grassley, though a Republican, is respected on the Hill for his personal integrity and distaste for corruption. Was his line of questioning beginning to cut too close to the bone for the comfort of Karl Rove? Did a quick cell phone call or Blackberry text message from the White House to Mitch McConnell (or some other, equally sycophantic apparatchik--Senator or staffer) in the Republican Senate leadership quickly cut off Grassley before he could proceed?

Can a Grassley staffer out there shed any light on this?

It is a disgrace to our intelligence to watch this hearing. The only thing the Bush Administration did wrong was not be up front as to why they were fired. They should have said "we fired them because they weren't focusing on the priorities of the administration like illegal immigration and human smuggling." When political appointees don't live up to the boss's expectations they get fired. Big deal. Clinton fireded 93. This is a charade to kick the President when he is down. Nothing has changed in Washington and it probably never will. They are all behaving like this is a Banana Republic. Maybe it soon will be if we don't wake and throw thwm all out of office. TERM LIMITS is the answer to this showboating and disingenuousness.

starts by pointing out Sampsons baldness and his suit and ends emasculating him because he want to go to the bathroom.

In between it shows that this hearing cannot show any crime was committed and is strugling to dig out material on things that never ended up happening (Fitzgerald firing).

dems have completely verified that they aren't interested in making America a better place. They are just interested in revenge for not being in power.

So he said "I don't remember" 124 times? So what?

There's no mention of how long Sampson testified, but let's assume it was eight hours. (We do know it went past 4PM.) That's 15 "I don't remember"s per hour, or one every four minutes. Think of the last time you were the subject of a 1-hour Q&A at work. Did you say "I dunno" (or words to that effect) 15 times? I know I did.

I think Sampson's a weasel, and there seems to be plenty of evidence of that in the stuff he did say. Counting up the "I don't remember"s doesn't add much.

If clear evidence of the testosterone-challenged state of the Bush Administration is needed, look no further than Kyle Kustard-KoneTM Sampson's appearance before the Senate in a suit two sized too big for him, with a voice channeling Philip Seymnore Hoffman's portrayal of Truman Capote.

My favorite part of the riveting testimony of young Kustard-Kone was his declaration that although he worked on the US Attorney Replacement Project for over two (2) years - he NEVER CREATED A FILE!

He just dropped the copious e-mails, scribbled lists, stat sheets, etc., into his bottom desk drawer - you know - the one with the Vick Vap-Rub, Cold-Eze, toenail clippers, pint of Jim Beam and tube of KY.

Then, when asked by Sen. Whitehouse where the file that was not a file might now be, he blithely responded:

I don't know - I'm not at the Department of Justice anymore.

Holy freakin' Jesus - could this little Spudboy be any denser??

Oh - and Joe - kiss my ass.

What's an insult to our intelligence is trolls trotting out the same, lame talking points in defense of the administration politicizing everything. Your party had control of everything in DC, and they f*cked it all up. Deal with the consequences.

And claiming any "evidence" or "proof" of the Dems not having the best interests of the country is pretty rich, coming as it does from someone defending the horrendous record of the last six years.

Reagan, Bush I and Bush II did the same damn thing with all US Attorneys, who actually voluntarily submit their resignations at the start of a new President's term to preserve the transparency of the process.

TRANSPARENCY.

There is no precedent for, mid-term, firing USA's in this manner.

These were very, very effective lawyers, with stellar records, protecting the American public whose careers as US Attorneys were despicably destroyed because they wouldn't play ball for Karl Rove and Bu$hCo.

Anybody who minimizes the significance of this has no idea what they are talking about.