Mr. Bush

* DAVID E. SANGER and DAVID JOHNSTON at the nyt via FDL:

"Moreover, the disclosure seemed intended to suggest that Mr. Bush might have played only a peripheral role in the release of the classified material and was uninformed about the specifics — like the effort to dispatch Mr. Libby to discuss the estimate with reporters.

The explanation offered Sunday left open several questions, including when Mr. Bush acted and whether he did so on the advice or at the request of Mr. Cheney. Still unclear is the nature of the communication between Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. Also unknown is whether Mr. Bush fully realized what information Mr. Cheney planned to disclose through Mr. Libby or was aware of the precise use that Mr. Cheney intended to make of the material.

It has been known that Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby were focused on the uranium issue in June 2003, well before Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former ambassador, wrote an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on July 6, 2003, saying that nothing he had seen on a mission to Niger for the C.I.A. confirmed that Mr. Hussein was seeking uranium."

there might be something wrong with my brain - but does anyone else notice something weird here? aside from the content? Mr. Bush, Mr. Libby, Mr. Cheney? and the piece de resistance: Mr. Hussein! is there a new editor in town? or are we in the juan cole zone where he postulates that the more serious the crime, the more official the nomenclature protocol? (cole often refers to Richard B Cheney - or whatever the hell is middle initial is)

Mr. Hussein? that is priceless.

What's next? Mr. Ahmadinejad? all of a sudden we'll have to pretend that world leaders deserve some respect - and we may even have to start talking to them, and listening to them, and negotiating with them. For shame!