How do you define chutzpah? See Fred Hiatt. Today he writes:

It would not be acceptable for Mr. Bush to fire the attorneys to short-circuit prosecutions of political corruption among Republicans. So far there's no evidence that he did, and in fact the most questionable conduct we know of originated in Congress, with New Mexico Republicans Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson.

Wow! Did Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson fire David Iglesias? What a disgrace Hiatt is. But it gets worse:

Lawmakers would do well to demonstrate more understanding of the legitimate institutional concerns at stake here . . . and remember . . . a Republican Congress eager to rifle through the files of a Democratic administration.

I remember WaPo cheering a Starr doing the same thing:

"The White House should remember that what is driving this story," the Post pronounces, "is not the conduct of Mr. Starr's staff, alleged leaks, supposed media bias or -- in Mrs. Clinton's now famous words -- a 'vast right-wing conspiracy.' Mr. Clinton is the only one who can make this matter go away, and he remains entirely free to do so at any time."

Is Mr. Bush not entirely free to do the same now? But a horse's ass is a horse's ass of course of course. In this case, his name is Mr. Fred.