with my second it was funny as hell.

Monk, somewhere, somewhere on here today amongst the speculation, I believe in the comments, either Redd or Jane (? perhaps) said something that jogged my memory about Ralston, to the point I said her name out loud which caused my old man to say who the hell are you talking to? Then a new thread went up, I forgot to ask about her.

I got the idea because I was visiting another blog (don’t remember which one) and they did the same thing to show that William Safire had been claiming in his columns that there was a confirmed link between Al Queda and Saddam. The blog probably belongs to someone who comments here so they get all the credit for the idea.

Sheesh, I don’t know why that was so hard. Need to take a break I guess.

It’s one thing to be not too smart

It’s another to be a pathological liar

It’s yet another to screw up everything you touch//

Yep- the trifecta.

There seems to be no bottom to the hole he is in. That’s a good 10% of his base turning away from him.

http://online.wsj.com/public/a…..in_tff_top

Might it be possible that Hadley did in fact turn for Fitz some time ago and the Woodward “bombshell” is a relatively small explosion next to the conspiracy case to come?

I guess I’m thinking it’s possible that Fitz knew all along about Woodward and his source but he was playing possum with that information–as he is probably doing with a lot of shit from his investigation–since it didn’t really affect the case against Libby. It just seems a little too pat that Woodward, who had unparalleled access to the key players during the period in question, had not been previously spoken to by Fitz. Maybe I’m giving Fitz too much credit (forgive me, Me), but he couldn’t have picked a better tactic to get Firewall Scooter to crumble than to dangle a specious comment like the one that Libby was at the outset of the case and have Libby run to Woodward to “set the record straight.” In this scenario, Hadley is safe anyway, because he has already made his deal and one last potential journalistic stumbling block in Woodward is removed. It would also explain the odd arrangement whereby Hadley lets Woodward testify but not go public, so that the real targets of the probe continue to sweat and make mistakes while Hadley is still on the job.

As I’ve said before, I think Hadley is a real key to this whole investigation–either as the key witness for the prosecution or as the target that goes down for the big counts. Or maybe I just need some sleep. (But I need to rid that graphic before I do).

Your thoughts, Hobsons.