This early in the morning, there are not any new White House atrocities. This gives me time to look at the 'precedents' the wingnut authoritarians have been parroting, and doesn't WaPo just have its own version of history up and ready.

It only gives two opportunities for WaPo criticisms of the way Clinton performed the installation of U.S. attorneys to point out that there is no comparison to the sleaze of this maladministration's butchery.

By comparison with the Reno massacre, we are told, the Bush administration's canning of eight U.S. attorneys was positively restrained; if you suspect political motives in the current controversy, so the argument goes, consider that when he was ousted by Reno, the U.S. attorney in the District, Jay Stephens, was just weeks away from deciding whether to indict House Ways and Means Chairman Daniel Rostenkowski (D-Ill.). Inconveniently for these conspiracy theorists, Mr. Rostenkowski was in fact indicted and convicted -- and, yes, he ultimately was pardoned by President Clinton.

The Reno precedent is a red herring, not a useful comparison. The summary way she announced the move was, indeed, unusual if not unprecedented. But a turnover in the top prosecutorial jobs with a new administration taking power -- especially one of a different party -- was not. As we wrote at the time, "These are political appointees who owed their jobs to the last administration and have expected to be replaced ever since last November's election. It would likely have happened earlier had the Clinton administration not made such an adventure out of the appointment of an attorney general."

Gotta love it, the same editorial staff that had admitted yesterday that It is not entitled to treat federal prosecutors like political pawns -- nor is it entitled, any longer, to the benefit of the doubt about the propriety of its conduct, in the face of the revelations that more lies are being uncovered still bitchslaps Clinton twice in the space of a paragraph in admitting what was done was aboveboard, legal, and incidentally kept this a nation of laws.

Why worry, be happy, though. On the same paper there is an op-ed writer willing to deal with the issue as it deserves.

Determined to keep his job, Gonzales said he will leave no stone unturned in discovering why he said what he said to Congress about the U.S. attorney firings. I've got an idea: He can order the FBI to issue a "national security letter" and then rummage through his private communications on an unlawful fishing expedition, as has apparently happened to many thousands of Americans -- on Gonzales's watch.

If that fails, Gonzales can declare himself an enemy combatant, have himself whisked away in the dead of night to some secret prison and allow himself to be "waterboarded" until he finally sputters out the truth.

It is also without a soft glancing blow that the same op-ed presents the cretins in chief; Arrogance has been the most consistent hallmark of George W. Bush's presidency. His administration's simple philosophy of government has been consistent: We can do any damn thing we want.

It is downright uncivil to speak the truth. Even our leading media organs are having their blinkers stripped off.

When crimes are committed, why, criminals are committing them.

The word you are seeking is 'impeach'.

This article also at cab drollery.