Can the MyDD lawyers - or anyone who wants to comment with the INAL caveat - provide a cogent explanation of how stonewalling the press is interferring with an investigation?
I get the sense that the Bush administration is too weaselly to even say "on advice of counsel we will express no comment" or "on advice of counsel we will exercise our Fifth Amendment rights". Am I wrong?
Silly me; to me not talking at all seems like obstructing an investigation, not cooperating.
Hell, I would even characterize it as Orwellian.
Since main page is talking about Jefford's VT senate seat already, should people start planning for '06 governor races?
· Blanche Lincoln's website supports public option (desmoinesdem)
· Big Coal's PR Spending Spree (desmoinesdem)
· IA-03: Former college wrestling coach to challenge Boswell (desmoinesdem)
· Tea Baggers Target Gore... (Cliff Schecter)
· Stimulus Watch (Jerome Armstrong)
· CREW seeks ethics inquiry of Bachmann (desmoinesdem)
· Did IRC help? (MN Campaign Report)
· 5 Worst cities for urban youth (desmoinesdem)
· "The Bishops' Huge Financial Stake in Stupak-Pitts" (desmoinesdem)
· Conservative group wants FEC to override state laws on robocalls (desmoinesdem)
· URGENT: Call these House Ds Saturday to oppose Stupak amendment (desmoinesdem)
· WI-08: Wingnut plans to run as "conservative independent" (desmoinesdem)
