Thanks for the interesting speculation on Miers on the Supreme Court and analysis of the Plame case, and President G W Bush's likely collusion in it.  

I have a quibble with the statement about Joe Wilson's New York Times Op-Ed piece.  Far from "...expos(ing) as utter nonsense the Bush claim that Saddam Hussein was shopping for uranium in Africa", Wilson's Op-Ed stated Saddam sought uranium from Niger, but that he was likely to have been unsuccessful.  More importantly, Wilson cited President Bush's avoidance of the likelihood of Hussein's failure to buy yellowcake, while also pointing out the forgery of the documents on which his words in the State of the Union relied, a fact Joe Wilson couldn't have known when he made the trip to Niger, since it wasn't known then.  Whatever Wilson's Op-Ed stated, this was the essence of his report to the CIA.  Bush used the document's assertions in his State of the Union speech  making his case for the Iraq attack by ignoring the results of Hussein's quest for yellowcake (uranium).

Such quibbles over facts are the stuff of Roveian retaliation, which is not helped by Rove's critics getting the facts wrong.  Can we really afford to continue to be careless with our facts when the stakes are so high and the players so ruthless while also holding all the power cards in the US government?  

Sincerely,
a fan, 
Toni Marshall Arnold, MD