The thought is two-fold.  

First, that Karl freaked after the depth of antipathy to Rethug policies and rule became clearly known, probably through (a) detailed exit polling that didn't come to him and the WH until some days after the election and (b) the reaction to the Rummy firing was not as nice as hoped/expected.

Second, that the Rethugs will do anything to avoid an electoral loss in 2008.  This, because they know their corruption has been so bad that even a totally evenhanded DoJ in Democratic control will likely put many of them in prison for years to come.  The only way out, for the Rethugs, is to win in 2008.

Sam Donaldson is talking with some host at the beginning of the "Green Room" segment and telling a story about Chief Justice Earl Warren.  Donaldson says this may be an apocryphal story, but there is this case before the Supreme Court and some lawyer is arguing and in the arguments, the lawyer says, "But that is the law," and Warren says, "Is it fair?"

Donaldson says that originalists and strict construtionists would believe that such a concern is wrong, but he, Donaldson, believes that the concern "Is it fair?" is at the bedrock of our form of government.

I am not sure if Donaldson or his helpers had viewed a recent post of mine at talkleft or if we all simply share the same view.  In any case, it seems to me as if there is a failure on the part of "the left" to clearly articulate the case that laws and regulations that do or permit injustice can't be constitutional.  Right now, on the right, we have a name of a philosophy
(strict constructionist) and one or more societies of lawyers dedicated to explaining, advocating and applying that philosophy in federal court decisions.

I could be wrong, but I don't think we have anything like that on the left.   Maybe I'm wrong and someone could point me to the left equivalent of the Federalist Society.  Shouldn't there be a Publius or a Warren or other similar society, dedicated to reminding the public, in the words of publius, that the end of government is justice?  

And who is it other than Sam Donaldson, myself and few scattered others that would remind the government of Warren's principles?

When I have a few extra million, I suppose, I'll help pay for it, but that is many years off.  

Would you please comment on what Sharon Eubanks had to say yesterday on Fox News about how the executive branch "diddled" with the DOJ?

...haven't we caused Nancy Pelosi and MoveOn.org enough grief already? Ms. Pelosi is a very nice woman with a good education and a beautiful house, and all she asks is to be left in peace. And yet people keep whining about how "we elected the Democrats to end the war," "we elected the Democrats to end the war," "na nah na nah na nah." Enough, already! What did she ever do to you? Do you even KNOW any of the Iraqis your money will help kill over the next two years? All right then. Shut up about it. And if Nancy Pelosi says impeachment is off the table, it's off the table. Show some respect if it's not too much to ask.

What explains the failure of the mainstream media to cover the purge scandal for so long, and so many other scandals? Do you think somebody just set up newspaper editors to cheat on their wives, and threatened to tell if the editors wouldn't play ball when they come back some day and ask for something?