Hillary, Johnny Mac and Mo

"Curt Weldon, the embattled suburban Philadelphia Republican congressman, is already well into the predictable cycle of responses employed by politicians who labor under the cloud of scandal: I haven't been informed of any investigation; if there is an investigation, I didn't do anything wrong; the timing of this investigation is suspicious, given the impending election, but I will look forward to cooperating fully with those who are unfairly coming after me; this is just a conspiracy concocted by my political enemies; even if it's just a conspiracy, I am moving on.

"It's worth revisiting Weldon's claim that he is the victim of a conspiracy. At last check, he is attributing the FBI's raid on his lobbyist-daughter's house to, among other people: public interest activist Melanie Sloan (who used to work for a Democrat, and who filed a complaint against Weldon with the FBI two years ago), former President Bill Clinton, a former senior Justice Department official and 9-11 Commission member named Jamie Gorelick, former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

"But here's the part that I don't get:

"1. Do all those people, acting separately or in concert, have the clout to tell the FBI what to do?

"2. Isn't the FBI a part of the Justice Department, which, last I checked, is run by a Bush Republican loyalist named Alberto Gonzalez?"

I slapped my forehead when I heard the following news, and the Nation's Tom Engelhart apparently agrees:

"A possible death-sentence for Saddam and his top lieutenants on November 5? Now, shouldn't that raise a few eyebrows somewhere? If you happen to have a calendar close at hand, pull it over and take a quick look. That verdict would then come, curiously enough, just two days before the midterm elections. It's the sort of thing that--you would think--that any reporter with knowledge of the US election cycle (no less of how Karl Rove has worked these last years) would at least note in an article. But no, you can search high and low without finding a reference to this in the mainstream media . . .

"Scheduling the announcement of what will almost certainly be a future execution to give yourself one last shot at a bump in the polls? Welcome to Bushworld."

Are big, fat Sunday papers the next to fall? In London, the Guardian's Kim Fletcher muses:

"It doesn't help that the latest iteration of internet publishing is such a long way from Sunday papers. The internet is all updated news and instant information and audio and video spewing from a computer screen. Sunday papers are meant to be taking your time and sprawling on sofas and eating brunch in those attractive coffee shops they show on adverts for building societies. Daily papers now believe in putting up not only news but also comment and analysis of that news as it happens. Sunday papers continue to believe in news stories off the obvious agenda or in reflective comment and analysis that is held until the end of the week."

This prompts Jeff Jarvis to ponder their fate as well:

"The problem there is that Sunday papers have separate staffs -- thus added costs -- and in the case of the Guardian, a separate brand: The Observer . . .