Waiting for the Sword

James Gordon Meek and Kenneth R. Bazinet write in the New York Daily News: "It was called the White House Iraq Group and its job was to make the case that Saddam Hussein had nuclear and biochemical weapons.

"So determined was the ring of top officials to win its argument that it morphed into a virtual hit squad that took aim at critics who questioned its claims, sources told the Daily News. . . .

"WHIG also was doing more than just public relations, said a second former intel officer.

" 'They were funneling information to [New York Times reporter] Judy Miller. Judy was a charter member,' the source said."

The Gloating of the Liberals

Daily Kos blogger georgia10 epitomizes the giddiness among liberal bloggers about the upcoming potential onslaught.

"[D]id you know that we're just hours (all right, maybe a couple days) away from FITZMAS????" georgia 10 asks. "Doesn't it feel like the hap-happiest time of the year??"

The Backlash

The liberal Think Progress blog tracks a new talking point: "Conservative defenders of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby have settled on their No. 1 talking point: the grand jury investigation into the CIA leak scandal represents the 'criminalization of politics.' "

"In other words, they say, the outing of a covert CIA agent in a time of war to punish a whistleblower is just everyday 'politics' -- nothing out of the ordinary, certainly nothing criminal. In fact, according to conservatives (as articulated by the National Review ), the 'criminalizing of politics' is actually 'the most dangerous fire of this ordeal.' "

Another View

Some of the possible downsides of the investigation -- other than for the White House, of course -- were also laid out today by The Washington Post editorial board and Slate editor Jacob Weisberg.

The Post wrote that "so far, in the accounts given by reporters about their conversations with administration officials . . . [w]hat has been depicted is an administration effort to refute the allegations of a critic (some of which did in fact prove to be untrue) and to undermine his credibility, including by suggesting that nepotism rather than qualifications led to his selection. If such conversations are deemed a crime, journalism and the public will be the losers."

Weisberg writes: "Anyone who cares about civil liberties, freedom of information, or even just fair play should have been skeptical about Fitzgerald's investigation from the start."

But the lessons to be learned from this investigation will, of course, depend on what Fitzgerald comes up with.

If, for instance, Fitzgerald has any White House officials cold on perjury or obstruction of justice, that would be hard for most people to defend.

And if Fitzgerald has collected strong evidence of a White House conspiracy to lie to the public and smear critics through misinformation campaigns relayed by willing journalists, well, some will certainly argue that it was not worth the collateral damage. But they may have a hard time convincing an outraged public that it would have been better not to know the truth.

Miers Vetting

Is it possible Bush and his chief of staff did an end run around Cheney and Rove when it came to the Miers nomination?

Joan Biskupic and Toni Locy write in USA Today: "Documents released Tuesday by the Senate Judiciary Committee reveal that the Bush administration's vetting of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers was controlled by a few insiders, a stark contrast to what Chief Justice John Roberts experienced as a contender for a court seat two months earlier. . . .

"Miers, 60, said that during the two weeks before Bush nominated her Oct. 3, she spoke with her deputy William Kelley, White House chief of staff Andy Card and the president and learned 'my name was under consideration.' She said she met with Bush four times -- on Sept. 21, 28 and 29, and Oct. 2 -- to discuss the possibility of her being nominated. Miers said Card arranged a dinner on the night of Oct. 2 for her, the president and first lady Laura Bush.

"Miers indicated she was not interviewed by several others who are usually involved in vetting Supreme Court candidates, including officials at the Justice Department, Vice President Cheney and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove."

Biskupic and Locy conclude that "the revelations about Miers' relatively easy path to nomination might revive questions of cronyism that surfaced shortly after Bush announced her selection."

Here is the full text of Miers's questionnaire.

In Other News: Immigration Watch

Darryl Fears and Michael A. Fletcher write in The Washington Post: "President Bush, seeking to deal with what critics inside and outside of Washington say is out-of-control illegal immigration, yesterday promised tough action to secure the country's borders as administration officials outlined a plan to allow illegal immigrants living here and foreign workers to work in the United States for as long as six years before returning home permanently."

Stephen Dinan and Bill Sammon write in the Washington Times: "It was a far cry from the president's usual rhetoric on illegal immigration, which focuses on the need to reunite families and provide labor for companies. . . .

"The sudden hard line comes as Mr. Bush is trying to assuage his conservative political base, much of which is upset over his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court."

Here is the text of Bush's speech.

Hadley Watch

Agence France Presse reports: "A senior aide to US President George W. Bush linked the global campaign against terrorism to a war 'for the soul of Islam' in which moderate Muslims must help stamp out extremism.

" 'In this battle of ideas we must encourage Islamic moderates to dispute the distorted vision of Islam advanced by the terrorists,' White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said."

Here is the prepared text of Hadley's speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

And here's a surprising passage that would seem to put at least some of the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the lack of democracy in Saudi Arabia:

"Muhammed Atta and the other 9/11 hijackers were predominantly middle class and well-educated. They and many Islamic terrorists like them are clearly alienated from their societies. Unable to visualize a meaningful future within their political systems, they are susceptible to radical alternatives to it. When people have been denied their fundamental rights, they have little stake in the existing order.

"The terrorists capitalize on this discontent and stoke it with a narrative of Arab and Muslim grievance and victimization at the hands of the infidel West and the Zionists."

A Bush Museum

Steve Chawkins writes for the Los Angeles Times: "For about three months in 1949, an oil-field equipment salesman named George Bush lived on a quiet street in east Bakersfield with his pregnant wife, Barbara, and their 3-year-old son, also named George. Last month, Kern County officials approved the transformation of the family's modest rental -- a two-bedroom white-frame house in a neighborhood now heavily Latino -- into a museum.

" 'We thought it was important that the house do some good,' said its owner, Republican political consultant Mark Abernathy, who plans to build a reading center for neighborhood children in the museum's back yard. 'It's almost like a duty.' "