Someone comes up with a specific accusation, such as "Lam was fired because of the Cunningham investigation." I point out she was on the firing list long before that ever happened, and document it. I did something similar with the Rove e-mail, and this most recent one.

The only response I get back now is various forms of "well, this is what he COULD have meant."

That I point out the hypocrisy of Democrats who are remarkably selective in what they want to microanalyse and second-guess between two different administrations isn't the main issue, but it does seem to be the one that pulls the chains the hardest around here.

Everybody knows that this barrage of investigations is a fishing expedition, and more about payback than any actual concern about corruption.

My arguments have been a lot more straightforward than the responses I've been getting to them.

--The first one about Lam's being targeted for firing long before the Cunningham issue arose should have laid it down right there.

But no. Maybe somebody knew about it ahead of time, secretly. Fine. When Lam says that for herself, and shows that the Bush administration also knew about any preliminary investigations, I'll eat dirt.

Until then, I've got facts, and you've got innuendo.

--Then we have Rove "planning" the firings. The proof? The famous Rove e-mail, where Rove asks somebody "how we planned to proceed regarding U.S. attorneys, whether we are going to allow all to stay, request resignations from all and accept only some of them, or selectively replace them, etc."

This is a "plan?" This is somebody wondering what the hell the plan is. I also quoted a later e-mail showing that "Karl's office" hadn't even been informed as of

MSNBC quoted this as:

"how we planned to proceed" on the issue and whether the prosecutors would be selectively dismissed or fired en masse, according to newly disclosed White House e-mails.

Notice anything missing there?

--And now the Foggo stuff, as Schumer and the others continue to leapfrog to something else as things sink behind them. This one is hung on what they think someone meant from one e-mail, despite what other e-mails said.

I haven't even brought up the holes in the Los Angeles Lewis investigation.

If I didn't stay on the beam all the time, soory. Frankly, considering how the accusations have shifted in real time, and the responses I got, it's a miracle I could respond coherently at all.

You're being played for saps by the Democrats and the media, and you like it because things are going the way you want them to. Don't get mad at me about it.