Monday, December 21, 1998 --- New York (APJP) -- 72%.

Keep that number in mind.

This morning, Clinton's approval rating hit its highest level ever. Higher even than Reagan achieved. 72%.

If Reagan was the "Teflon President," Clinton is the "Kevlar President," fending off a political assassination orchestrated by a handful of hard-righters in the GOP who decided to slap back at the voters who told them "NO IMPEACHMENT" in overwhelming numbers back in November and try to "take down" the President.

None of the Sabbath Gasbags got that right. They continued their assault on Clinton. They failed to address the politics of the impeachment, focusing instead on the trial.

They have never looked more foolish.

Fox News Sunday

Tony Snow did not voice over the opening sequence of visuals: Baghdad bombs, Livingston "sets an example" and quits, the house votes, Clinton speaks.

"Today we'll discuss the upcoming trial," said Tony Snow -- as if this were a murder case instead of a kangaroo court. Fox News' correspondents spoke of "putting a permanent blemish" on Clinton's record and the "murky charge" of obstruction of justice as a "serious threat." Oh, and by the way, Clinton "called off attacks on Baghdad."

"The Senate has received two articles of impeachment." Tony welcomed Don Nickles, and asked him about cutting a deal.

"I would be surprised... We will follow the Constitution [and] be fair and constitutional." A lot of "fair" and "impartial" and "follow the Constitution" from Nickles -- one of the hardest-right GOPers in the Senate. "The trial could be conducted in three days... if the White House wanted."

Will the Senate take the Starr Report, asked Hume? Nickles motormouthed away about fairness, as Brit asked about witnesses. "It's his choice... they could drag this out for months." That is the hard-right spin -- Clinton's right to disprove the kangaroo court charges is "dragging it out."

Tony asked "You don't want to hear from Linda Tripp, you don't want to hear from Betty Currie?" Nickles maintained his "We can do this in three days" stance -- "it shouldn't take that long to present the case." In other words, he doesn't want to give Clinton the chance to defend himself.

Tony brought up the old "lobbying Senators is jury tampering" spin first brought up by Robert Byrd (D-WV and no friend of Clinton) -- with which Nickles naturally agreed.

But this is not a jury trial -- this is an impeachment, a political, not legal, process. "Senator Byrd made one of the best speeches of the year," said Nickles.

Right -- because the media could play it over and over to plant the idea in the public's mind that Clinton would be "jury-tampering," and they did. no wonder you think it was one of the best speeches of the year.

When talk turned to Iraq, Nickles rambled on about "kicking out inspectors and doubling their oil sales" and then put in a good word for former inspector-truned-MSNBC-paid-blabbermouth Scott Ritter, whose conduct as an inspector has been questioned in other quarters. Nickles claimed Ritter's activities were "curtailed."

Maybe because he overstepped his authority and passed on information to people who were not entitled to it, Don.

Nickles claimed that in other impeachments, "nobody put pressure on anyone to vote." Who has he talked to from the Andrew Johnson-era Senate, we ask?

Nickles spun like a dervish. The points about a "quick trial" stuck in our mind -- sounds like the right is scared to have actual witnesses testify!

Greg Craig was the next guest. He started by complimenting Nickles for promising a "fair, evenhanded trial in the Senate" but "it has to do with the law and Constitutional standards that do not rise [to removal]... he did damage to his family."

Tony: "He did not serve his nation well?"

Craig: "The people in the House of Representatives felt this was a very unfair process... this was a party-line vote... as party-line as you get in this institution and you know that."

"It lowered the standards of impeachment."

Tony glossed over the polls, quickly saying "The polls are on your side," then asked "Has anyone at the White House been fired for passing on deleterious information on anyone?" -- a cheap shot at Sid Blumenthal. Tony then asked about "private investigators" -- continuing to play up the " White House secret police" spin when the President is perfectly entitled to have his lawyers hire investigators to look into fraud.

Juan brought up resignation; Craig said "No one has asked him to resign... the people don't want him to resign." Juan asked about lobbying members of Congress, and Craig replied "We're busy preparing for a trial." He turned to the charges, saying "he testified truthfully before the Grand Jury, and the evidence will show that."

Craig then let out a key point: "We want a bill of particulars." Specify the perjurious words, he said in so many words.

Juan asked if the White House had made any missteps. "No... we have been open to any proposal short of impeachment." On the "House is the Grand Jury" spin, Craig said "It's constitutionally irresponsible... [a House vote] is a vote to REMOVE the President."

Craig added that the House managers "have the burden of presenting the evidence" and proving it rises to the Constitutional level for impeachment. "I don't think that they will do either."

A final question from Tony was an attempt at a "he's playing dirty" bombshell that turned dud: he asked about a ruling that allowed the President to review Grand jury testimony without violating rule 6(e). Craig said he was not familiar with the statute and he didn't know of the President requesting such info.

Cute, Tony... essentially accusing the President of impeachable "cribbing" before his own testimony.

The next two guests -- Porter Goss (R-FL) and Norman Dicks (D-WA) -- talked Iraq.

Goss said "we don't know how to measure success... what have we achieved?... Looking backwards, three things bothered me," Congress was not advised of goals or policy, and he tried to "wag the dog" on timing, even mentioning Richard Butler and suggesting an orchestrated timing of some sort.

And Tony picked up on this, confronting Dicks -- who dismissed it in light of the flow of information and pullout of UNSCOM inspectors. Dicks said, "I think we should have bombed him in November... but [some nations] said give [Saddam] one more try... HE DIDN'T DO IT."

Goss replied: "If our policy is containment, we know it's not working," going on to say that Palestinians who were waving our flag earlier this week were burning it by the end. Goss said he wants better communication, again claiming "notification failed.... It is not a popular thing to bomb another country."

Dicks agreed that containment is crucial, and if we can return the inspectors, that would be a favorable move, but we need a "long-term policy."

And panel time presented the same old gang (Juan Williams, Mara Liasson and Brit Hume) along with Fox News' "Beltway Boys" Fred "The Weasel" Barnes and Morton Kondracke.

Barnes gleefully said "We will have a Senate trial" and claimed "the President needs a new strategy. The President's not following a winning strategy and his polls are dropping."

Here's a poll result for you, Fred: 72%. Is there enough room in your mouth for another foot?

Hume laughed as he said "This goes in the history books." He loves this impeachment. It goes in the history books all right -- the story of a President fending off political assassination.

Tony then pulled up a ridiculous poll question about how a Presidential departure would affect your everyday life.

And Juan Williams got it right: "There is hypocrisy... if you think this is about sex the Republicans have engaged in hypocrisy," citing Livingston.

Barnes called Larry Flynt a "bottom-feeding slug" and went on to claim that Clinton is "a man known to hire private investigators to dig up dirt."

Prove that Clinton ever hired anyone to dig dirt the way that American Spectator hired dirty tricksters to dig dirt on Clinton. You, Barnes, are a liar.

Tony smiled as he mentioned James Carville was going to "war" against GOPers -- and Tom DeLay. Hume lit into "that vulgar little event at the White House."

Vulgar? People supporting the President when a coup d'etat over his personal life is being attempted?

Let me give you an example of vulgar, Brit: the Jerusalem Post planting a rumor that your son Sandy had been involved in an affair with Bill Paxon within days of Sandy's suicide. That, Brit, is vulgar. We denounced the rumormongers in these very pages, standing with you and Sandy's family and friends in the face of character assassination.

Does that make us "vulgar," Brit?

Juan agreed with Hume about the "vulgar event... the fact that we launched an attack is very suspicious.... Can we trust this man? Is he speaking from the heart?"

Yeah, Juan, right. Read my lips. we did not trade arms for hostages. Need we say more?

Tony played a little of the latest ex-Administration Judas, Mike McCurry, in his BBC interview. Barnes: "NOW he tells us?" Kondracke concurred. Hume: "I'm SHOCKED that McCurry did this with American flyers in the air."

But Kondracke broke with the Fox Mafia saying that "the evidence that this was not wag the dog is Cohen, the Joint Chiefs..."

Hume tried to wag: "The President knew for a week" that impeachment was inevitable. Barnes said the attack coming the day before the impeachment vote was suspicious.

So are the poll figures you cited earlier, Fred -- you fool.

Hume claimed that the President was trying to "stop a resignation tsunami."

What resignation tsunami? The one on the Freak Republic web site? The one at the racist Council of Conservative Citizens meeting with guest speaker Bob Barr?

Mara pointed out that calls for resignation are coming from people who say "this is awful."

Kondracke suggested "the bombing has stopped, the tsunami is under way."

Tony then played the great clip of Alec Baldwin screaming like a madman on Conan O'Brien "We should all go down to Washington and stone Henry Hyde to death!"

Even we laughed. but stones would leave bruises -- we'll settle for Hyde's resignation.

Tony declared it the "Howard Beale moment of the year." We loved it.

Barnes stupidly brought up Bob Barr's speech to the CCC. Hume quickly got the discussion back on "impeachment track."

Tony then put up the Time "Man of the Year" cover with Starr and Clinton -- scooping , where Walter Isaacson was to make the "official" announcement. Tony asked the panel to pick their Man of the Year.
Barnes and Kondracke chose Monica Lewinsky -- their lascivious leering suggested they'd love an intern like Monica.
Hume chose Ken Starr, probably because Hitler and Franco didn't do much this year.
Mara chose Starr and Clinton.
Juan Williams chose Clinton.

Tony ended with a commentary on the "season of miracles" -- likely gushing inside for the "gift" Starr, Henry Hyde, Bob Barr and Tom DeLay gave to him and Brit.

Careful, Tony -- it's like getting a gift from the Unibomber -- this gift could end up exploding in your face.

The McLAUGHin Group

Issue One: December 19, 1998 -- John put on his gravest voice for "Appointment with History... True history in the making... a President impeached by the House." John recounted the articles and vote counts. "So -- now it is official, part of our heritage and the Clinton legacy."

Pat Buchanan: The House has said the President is indictedgrand jury... This is going to trial!
Eleanor Clift: The third article potentially expands a protracted trial and increases the likelihood of a deal and censure that short-circuits a trial. (She's right -- but didn't say that the GOP fears the damage that information in a Senate trial may do to the party)
Lawrence O'Donnell: It raises the ante, the Senate will want to call Lindsey and Currie. The Senate can pause to take up other business. It's peculiar that the article concerning perjury in the Paula Jones trial was dropped. (No it's not -- the GOP feared this would open up exposure of evidence showing how the President was set up)

John sounded very grave and deliberative throughout. Did crossover votes dismantle charges of partisanship?

Pat: GOPers will cut their throats if they cut a deal.
Eleanor: This is partisan-driven.

John shouted "The Thunderbolt!" He then played the clip of Livingston demanding Clinton resign -- and then resigning himself.

Eleanor: "Dressing up Mr. Livingston's resignation as an act of courage is misplaced." Other "Taliban Republicans" are likely to resign (she did not mention Larry Flynt or Hustler).
Pat: Livingston shows how a man in scandal should react "as opposed to the adolescent in the White House."
O'Donnell: He never should have stood for Speaker in the first place." Larry Kudlow: "He raised the bar of moral standards." (Ha! WHAT "moral standards?")
Eleanor: "And you think he would have done this if he had the votes in his caucus?" (She should have mentioned the straw poll within the GOP caucus that showed Livingston's support had eroded severely)

John played two clips of Clinton saying he would never resign and following the usual suspects saying the usual things, he put up quotes of Nixon in 1974 saying under which circumstances should resign!

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. A waste of time -- falsely comparing Watergate to the Lewinsky flap on the thinnest of comparisons.

John then talked the Stock Market -- which dropped a bit after Nixon resigned. Pat had even us laughing when he pointed out "They didn't have the NASDAQ!!"
Eleanor: "If the economy dips, I know who gets the blame in 2000."

Will the Senate censure, asked John. O'Donnell: 60% chance.
Eleanor: 65%
Pat: the trial will go forward, they won't go to deal-cutting now
Kudlow: The spotlight is on Lott and Senate GOPers.

Issue Two: "Wag the Bah!" John is out of his mind -- but we laughed long and hard as the title crossed the screen.

John said "The President said the attacks were triggered by the Butler report... but is it true?" citing the ever-(un)reliable Scott Ritter and the impeachment "in which the President concocts a crisis to deflect a sexual embarrassment."

Right, John -- as if we hadn't heard the name "Monica Lewinsky" until last Friday.

The entire set-up piece was just that -- especially with about the ten thousandth rerun of the Clinton "finger-wagging" clip, implying can we believe him.

O'Donnell actually agreed with Trent Lott!

John: "Why did the President lie about Iraqi nuclear capability?... We have here the 'big lie' technique." And Eleanor Clift, suppressing obvious anger at John, called him on this unsupported assertion.

Buchanan cited starvation in Iraq among children as "the end of this policy." Can you believe it? Mr. Anti-internationalist Pat even quoted UNICEF statistics -- how convenient! What a hypocrite. At least he's outrageous enough that we actually enjoy him.

Prediction: will Clinton serve out his term?
Pat: almost surely.
Eleanor: yes, acquitted he'll look better.
Kudlow: not sure but market will prosper.
O'Donnell: he will probably have to sign a censure deal brokered by Moynihan.
John: No.

You just wish, John.

Meet the Press

"William. Jefferson. Clinton. Is. Impeached... On to the. Senate... Is there. Any. Chance. For. A. Speedy. Solution."

Tim Russert's opening was read as if each word were a sentence of the utmost gravity.

Madeleine Albright was the first -- and unscheduled -- guest, who started by thanking our forces in the Gulf. "The targets and things he cares about the most have been destroyed, she said. "The box he is in is stronger... We have accomplished everything we needed to."

Tim asked what "degraded" means -- "He still has biological and chemical weapons." Albright stuck to the accomplishments: "The destruction was devastating... 18 out of 19 security sites, 20 out of 21 command and control centers, 8 palaces."

He has the capacity to quickly rebuild, said Tim -- what do we do? "We are ready to do this again," replied Albright.

Then Tim went into a litany of "naysayer" questions: "Inspectors will never be allowed back in... We have lost the capability to destroy their weapons... Scott Ritter claims that this was a set-up ploy to set up a use of force."

Albright met him volley for volley: "The truth is [inspectors] were not allowed to do their job effectively for the last 8 months... if he does not back down, sanctions will remain in place... he must let monitors back in... Butler is a very independent man, I thought Saddam would comply, to say this was a set-up is ridiculous." A shame she didn't nail Ritter, now a paid NBC talking-head "expert" with serious questions still surrounding his passing information to unauthorized parties.

What is the endgame? Tim quoted Kemp's "What is the purpose of the bombing," implying venting frustration. Albright called for a new regime more responsive to international concerns and internal problems.

Russert then said "Nearly a quarter million Iraqis dead -- does the US bear any responsibility?" -- a loaded question to "blame Clinton." Albright replied that we authored the oil for food bill -- the sanctions have never prevented food and medicine from flowing into Iraq.

Then Russert brought up the issue of a box chart in the right-wing Moonie rag The Washington Times claiming that international crises were used to deflect from domestic flaps. Albright was forceful -- "I have been involved in every policy decision, and they have all had their own clock... People have to remember that the President has been involved with peace in Ireland" along with China, the Wye accords and other peace initiatives.

And Russert again brought up Clinton lying about his involvement with Lewinsky. He has called the President a liar literally hundreds of times on Meet the Press and other NBC programs, and has made practically zero mention of the President's many personal and public apologies and effort to right his wrongs. Albright again said Clinton had apologized. Tim doesn't seem to get that the more his team talks about his apologies, the better Clinton looks as a man and leader.

Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Chris Dodd (D-CT) along with Mitch McConnell (R-KY) joined Russert in a discussion of what happens now that President Clinton has been indicted on political grounds by the House.

It seemed a day for reconciliation. All four Senators seemed to be searching for a way to end this nightmare in a manner pleasing to all sides.

But don't be fooled. When push comes to shove, the Senate trial could be the trial of the century and the end of Republican rule in the two houses for the next 20 years.

What was clear, was that Republicans fear that the voters are angry that the House had the nerve to ignore them and to vote half their articles of impeachment yesterday.

Amid the ADM and GE commercials, Tim Russert attempted to redo his image as the wise interrogator. For the most part in this segment we didn't hear him denounce the President as a liar.

Did he finally understand that the American people dislike him as much as they dislike the Republican Party of yesterday?

Senator Hatch did not know how this would end, but he did not seem to be the man who would seek Bill Clinton's head. "The leadership have to do a hard count... there has to be some consideration as to what to do under the circumstances." Would there be a compromise censure? "They surely have to have more than 55," replied Hatch. "...I think the Senate should [give] some sort of resolution of this problem."

Senator Dodd felt it would end with Bill Clinton remaining in office. "It's in everyone's interest to find a resolution.... Let's get this done and get this open."

What struck us most was the tone of the conversation between the four Senators. So different were they from the rag tag bunch in the House - at least for now. But what we did not see was a look into the future.

McConnell "I think the chances are pretty good" it's not worth taking a headcount before the evidence is heard. Dodd pointed out a trial will tie up the Supreme Court, so we should start immediately

Russert said "some" have said the President must admit he misled the Grand Jury. Dodd's reply: "The Senate is on trial here." We have to resolve the matter quickly -- "People want this over with.

Will the President say "I lied under oath?" asked Russert.

Guess Russert still doesn't get it.

Leahy instead addressed the cheapening of impeachment: "The bar keeps getting moved. It's like a limbo dance!" The GOP says he has to do one thing, then another, then more and more and more. "What we ought to do is... find a way to wrap this up fairly quickly. Everyone agrees the votes are not there to convict him." Senator Leahy said it would end with censure -- Clinton will not be convicted and he will remain in office.

Russert asked "How many votes" to impeach? Hatch said there are not 67.

Tim replayed Hyde claiming "He has a psychological block against admitting what he did."

"Can there be absolution without admission?" asked Russert with all the piety of Mephistopheles? McConnell "I think we ought to take out cues for Senator Byrd who knows more about the Senate than anyone."

And who also can't stand Clinton, we would add.

And Dodd reiterated "We don't want to tie up the government... there are serious issues." Leahy added "That is the key... we can and should be the conscience of the nation. It is time to shed Democrat and Republican labels... I don't think the President will be convicted... it will be the greatest test the Senate has met this century... Henry Hyde said that if this turned into a partisan exercise it would fail. By his definition, it failed."

Russert mentioned Newt and Bob Livingston's resignations -- should Clinton? Hatch replied, "I'm not going to tell the President what to do... I can think of a wide variety of ways this could be resolved." On the matter of the Jones Perjury impeachment charge not being passed by the House, Hatch tried giving his pals in the lower chamber an excuse: "They said 'We're going to give you a by on the Paula Jones matter because you were protecting your family.'"

Of course, the real reason is that this would allow the President's team to question the people who maneuvered him into a situation where he would be forced to conceal a relationship under hostile questioning by craven, politically motivated enemies and prove a setup, which would collapse the house of cards charges and the GOP itself.

And then the Beltway's favorite "fun couple" -- Clinton consultant James Carville and his wife, conservative consultant and pundit Mary Matalin.

Tim asked Carville what would happen if Bill Clinton continued to be defiant -- to be righteously angry at the lynching he had just undergone in the House? How would that effect the Senate trial?

Carville answered, "They are going to pay for what they did. We are going to punish them at the polling place. We are going to storm the polling places in the year 2000."

Mary Matalin: "In the spirit of reconciliation, James! We are going to get back to our agenda." She said that James was on "Sherman's march to the ocean" and bringing "nuclear winter... He violated the oath, he subjected himself to penalties. What are you, going to march to the sea with Sherman?"

Carville: "We are going to remind people who runs this country, Mr. Hyde -- the people!"

Russert played for Carville Hillary Clinton's statement on reconciliation -- followed, of course, by another of his favorite clips, her January statement on the right wing conspiracy.

Carville said, "We take our battles at the polling place. I am going to do everything I can -- and people are furious, they will have to serve box lunches to people they will be waiting so long to vote."

Matalin said they are sending dual messages - reconciliation and storming the polling places. She refused to predict what the Senate will do. And Carville continues with his storm the polling place theme.

Russert then brought up Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and his $1 million offer for dirt on Republicans. Russert said Flynt now calls himself the James Carville of publishing.

And Carville smiled as he said that Tom DeLay and Henry Hyde created Larry Flynt's power -- they have no one but themselves to blame.

Russert wanted to know if Mary can tell him how to stop the politics of personal destruction.

This is amazing: Russert was the biggest perpetrator of this "new" politics -- and the only reason Carville even appears on his show is to use Russert and his air time to fire up Democrat voters.

Matalin claimed that the Democrats can actually call off Larry Flint -- then, in a truly lame statement, said that Republican voters did not turn out because Republicans did not make good on their promises. She tried to cover up the fact that they didn't turn out because Hyde disgusted them.

Matalin ended the segment with a ruefully ironic "Give peace a chance" to her husband.

Time magazine will announce their Man of the Year Vote next. Who cares?

Our guesses: Bill Clinton, Ken Starr, or Hillary Clinton.

We were right -- twice! Twin men of the year: Ken Starr and Bill Clinton. Time's Walter Isaacson mentions they could have chosen Hillary Clinton.

To prove how "human" he is, Russert brought out the Carville's children and asked them whether Santa Claus was a Republican or a Democrat. What a doofus. Mary Matalin told her daughter not to answer. Smart mom!

MSNBC!

Just for fun we decided to go a-slumming and tuned our televisions to MSNBC - the All-Monica, All-the-Time Network.

Usually they are busy slamming the President.

But this morning was an exception -- sort of.

The hostess, who likes Clinton, was baiting Moe-Howard-with-a-mustache lookalike Republican Joe DiGenova -- an investigation Meese buddy himself -- and Ben Ginsberg -- the goateed, rodentlike Republican who cannot explain the President's 72% approval rating.

Who this Ben Ginsberg is -- and what gives him any standing to appear even on MSNBC as an "expert" -- has escaped us for the past year. He looks like the Devil incarnate. Cynthia Oxney -- a babe-a-luscious pro-Clinton dudette -- is gorgeous, but judging from this morning's performance doesn't have a brain in her head, although she made a few good points.

Luckily, the hostess moved to their correspondent at The Mall of the World to get voter opinion.

The first man interviewed, who was about 80 and wore a brown turtleneck and said the President is a flawed man -- but he should stay in office. He is disenchanted with the judicial system.

A laughingstock of a show -- as usual.

Omar Wasow, a moronic slacker teenybopper with dreadlocks tied behind his airhead, was the "internet chat" host. This network, owned in part by Microsoft, seems not to care about what's actually going on on the internet.

Note to "Uncle Bill Gates:" you should take care to note that MSNBC pays about 2% attention to what is going on on the Microsoft-created web component of the cable network. Sucker...

John Dean, who obviously has little to do these days other than appear as an impeachment "expert," was on the show as well.

Dean, the Judas for Nixon, acts like the judge. Remember his wife -- "Mo" Dean (nee Maureen Biner, who according to the book &quit;Silent Coup" was involved in a Beltway call-girl operation) -- who left him and became a flash in the pan TV slut due to her notoriety over Watergate?

We wonder what she looks like now.

Dean said he thought that Nixon's resignation was a surprise and hints that Nixon shouldn't have done it.

Ha, ha, ha! It was Dean who turned him in for being a felon!!!

This Weak

San and Cokie open with the "historic vote" to impeach President Clinton. The only Republican Senator they could dig up was a former Senator.

And... Bombs over Baghdad!

"It hasn't been anything like a garden variety week, Sam." George Will joined General Shelton to tell us how we did not destroy Iraq.

He showed some home pictures of their missile repair facilities -- Shelton put them out of business for at least a year, he said. He showed yet more buildings destroyed. And then some more.

Hey General, how long does it take to rebuild some buildings when you have a million slaves to rebuild them -- at your pleasure?

Shelton claimed we have achieved the objectives: to degrade Saddam's production of weapons of mass destruction, cripple his ability to attack his neighbors.

Sam Donaldson asked whether the assessment of damage is complete. The Secretary of Defense, Bill Cohen, said no. Then Sam, pretending he has Cohen in a box, asked "How do you know then that you have accomplished what you claim?"

Cohen and Shelton just looked at him like he was a nut.

Hey Sam, the pictures are there.

Sam then attacked the two men asking about the "fact" that there will not be inspectors there ever again. "What are you going to do, keep our troops there indefinitely?"

George Will asked why we dropped leaflets and attacked the Republican Guards.

Isn't that obvious, George?

Cohen answered that the flyers were dropped to warn the Iraqi army not to attack Kuwait.

Will asked if the four barracks that were destroyed were occupied. Cohen said he didn't know.

This was a lie. Our satellites can see a cockroach, and would have seen the bodies of the men if they had been there.

Sam asked whether the impeachment debate affected the operation. Cohen said no, and Shelton said the morale was very high and "we were focused on the mission at hand."

Cokie asked what should happen to the President next. Cohen said nothing much, but said that the President continues to lead upon Cokie's questions as to whether he should resign.

Following the break J.C. Watts, the official Uncle Tom of the GOP, was the guest. Sam asked about Bob Livingston's resignation.

Now, let us stop here and tell you that Bob Livingston did not resign because he had many affairs during his marriage and even recently. The GOP is now trying to pretend that Livingston had some "high moral purpose" in resigning and that he wanted to use his own resignation as a "model" for the President -- to make him resign. Livingston resigned because of far more serious charges facts that were about to come to light.

Watts suggested the President resign as well. Then he said tit for that is not fair. What a laugh -- is six years of pounding and $50 million spent against Clinton somehow okay?

Cokie, to her credit, pointed this out. She actually said the GOP has been trying to get Clinton, now they are trying to force him to resign. O.J. ... oops, J.C. quoted his grandmother, who must be rolling in her grave, saying you can't get in a bar room brawl if you don't go up to the bar. "Should we have turned our head on perjury and obstruction of justice?"

Cokie called the Democrat visit to the White House a "little pep rally." Watts thought it was "interesting" that many people at the White House used some pretty strong adjectives describing the president. Then they went down to the White House -- that was "somewhat interesting."

What the heck that means is far beyond us.

George Will -- known as a psychotic who throws furniture at his wife and lies still under his frequent migraine headaches -- asked how J.C. felt about Dennis Hastert (R-IL), the new Speaker desig"not" who is "a grandfather type" according to Will. Is he a good mechanic? What is it about him that makes him the choice for Speaker? Watts didn't know what to say, so he said he was a good mechanic. We were laughing. "Hastert is a good man, and a kind man -- but don't take his kindness as a weakness."

We alert you: do take his kindness as a weakness, but only because he is the stealth "Speaker" covering for the real new boss -- Tom DeLay, who couldn't run for Speaker because of his own chequered past. In short, the obscure Rep. Hastert is the only "safe" Speaker the Republicans could find.

After changing the world with Lucent Technologies, and baking with GE, building the right relationships with Chase Manhattan Bank, and laughing at Barbara Walters about 20/20, we returned to Sam and Cockie -- excuse us, Cokie, who is not only very cocky but the daughter of one of the greatest philanderers of all time!

And Sam and Cokie's ratings and reputation are so poor they couldn't even get a sitting Republican senator to do battle with Senator John Breaux of Louisiana, a Democrat.

Senator Breaux, a friend of Bill Clinton, had one message: "Stop the Madness." Sam said, "Isn't that a cop-out?"

Sure, Sam, and so is your show.

Senator Howard Baker -- who is the FORMER Senate Majority Leader -- said "There had to be a trial" -- otherwise the Senate would insult the House.

Hey, Howard, why not? The House has insulted itself for the past two years -- and bitch-slapped the majority of voters who vehemently opposed impeachment by orchestrating the current crisis and trashing our constitution.

It seems to us that the Senate, if they give one whit about the sanctity of the Constitution, has a duty to 'insult' the House and tell them what to do with their trumped-up Articles.

Cokie reminded Breaux that Senator Byrd wants a trial as well. Byrd is a Democrat. Cokie suggested that Clinton could resign to "get it over with." Cokie, the traitorous Democrat, is one of the most hated high-profile women in Washington -- but she doesn't realise it because her nose is stuck so high in the air.

And Breaux didn't fall for her insulting ploy. Will kept hitting on the "fact" that the President will take only personal and not official responsibility for what he did. Baker, no longer a senator, said it was "official" in the grand jury.

So what? Howard Baker is a has-been.

Baker, now shilling for the GOP, said the Senate will be able to conduct this trial "and take care of the nation's business as well."

Boy, has he sold out. The Congress has not done one thing in the past two years -- and that was without a trial going on!

Breaux said that there will never be a conviction anyway -- the GOP needs 12 Democrats to convict. A spat broke out on whether it will be three or five months long.

We can tell you that if this trial begins, it will drag out for more than a year and the White House will make certain that it does. They will fight and fight hard for the rights of Clinton and the office of presidency.

The weekly "get Clinton" roundtable followed yet another round of big-money sponsors of fine "public affair" programming.

Now pay close attention here, because it is the affable Bill Kristol who is at the root of all the evil you have witnessed in Washington these past years. It is Kristol who has become the leader of the intellectual base of the "New Right" and who provides its mantra. Kristol, a charming demon, is the man to watch here. What he says is what counts so far as what Republican Senators might do with this trial fiasco.

Cokie asked George Stephanopoulos whether something could have happened that would have made all this moot. Of course, George blames the President for not telling the truth and the Congress for not seeing that this was not impeachable stuff. Sam, of course, blames the President. Sam and Cokie join forces to say that this stuff about a trial stopping the nation is foolish. George said this wasn't a coup!

Kristol said he "hates pseudopolitical cleverness." He said he admires the Republican Congress for "ignoring the people" and that they would be better off with a weakened Clinton rather than a stronger Gore.

But what Kristol doesn't tell you is that Tom DeLay is already gunning for Gore as well.

Steph pointed out that many Democrats want a trial because they are so sure he will be acquitted.

Kristol kept saying it may hurt the GOP, but no trial would be a derogation of the nation. He wants a trial, and he wants it in secret session.

Will, who knows nothing about it, claimed that everyone has accepted the Starr report.

But he is wrong. The Democrats did not talk about the Starr report early because they want to attack it fresh -- in the Senate.

Cokie changed the subject, saying she was "in the Chamber at the time."

Oh, we are so impressed. We hope she remembered to flush.

While she was on the pot, one of our editors was in the Senate gallery, and was delighted that Livingston resigned. Cokie "tsked" at the Democrats hissing.

But they did far more. Our editor saw it: Democrats began yelling in unison, "YOU resign! YOU resign! YOU resign!" to Bob Livingston - and he did.

George Will said we should apologize to Robert Bork.

Ha, ha, ha -- sure, and maybe we should apologize to Joseph McCarthy as well. Bork was the Nixon "consigliere" who fired Archibald Cox after Nixon's attorney general and deputy refused to do so -- and resigned. He now makes his money writing inane New Moralist tomes like his buddy Bill Bennett. It is only the hard right who have salvaged Bork from the slagheap of history as one of their 'poster boys."

Sam bit into Clinton viciously, saying that wherever he walks, he "leaves bodies strewn behind him." Sam is one of those bodies, so we can understand his hatefulness.

The President, we should point out, also leaves others standing taller and is the only thing rising against the insatiable greed of white Republican men who would have all but themselves enslaved on a Burger King assembly line if they had their way.

Cokie asked Kristol about the trial in the Senate. He thinks it will not be a spectacle and it is the appropriate way to bring closure to this. "If they make a deal, it will divide the country."

This is Kristol at his best -- looking wise, but getting what he wants -- Clinton on trial. Sam said he agrees -- as if that makes any difference. George S. says there can be both a deal and a trial. Sam laughs at George S.'s suggestion that this is not unimpeachable.

What a hateful jerk.

George Will said that if this goes on as the President wants it to -- Is it all about sex.

Well, George, you finally got something right. It is -- you sexless little mouse.

George S. said there was a bit of pep rally that was not appropriate -- but Sam went out of his mind with anger over the pep rally. Cokie said that partisanship is the element that Democrats think will allow them to win.

She is right -- but she is lying when she thinks it was anything BUT partisanship that ended us here.

George Will then said that there are some Democrats who remember Stuart Symington -- a totally corrupt Senator, by the way -- and do not like the way Bill Clinton "has lowered the level of the fray."

Here's a tip, George: read some history. And stop screaming at your wife and kids.

Reliable Sources

After the teaser, Howard Kurtz and Bernard Kalb opened Reliable Sources with clips from yesterdays big news -- impeachment and Baghdad -- but omitted the Livingston resignation, which was being reserved for a separate segment.

The first guest, self-important New York Times columnist A.M. Rosenthal (who still seems to care more about Israel than the US in his wheening columns) was asked about his call for Clinton to resign; he rambled on, impugning the President's honesty and trustworthiness -- his spin implying that the Lewinsky flap is some sort of affair of state.

When he was asked about the emergence of the "politics of personal destruction" as an issue, he replied "I have a problem with the way this personal destruction is being handled [no doubt because Rosenthal resents that it would be used against his cronies]... the President destroyed himself [as if Linda Tripp had nothing to do with it]... he took an unacceptable risk... a risk with the Presidency... the country is paying for it."

Right.

The other guest, Sandra Sobieraj, was asked about all the failed impeachment predictions, and said that the press in fact cannot be trusted to accurately predict these sorts of scenarios. She was asked where the press goes now, and answered after going through a litany of "warm and fuzzy" appearances by the First Couple on Monday that "The Clinton presidency is an exercise in stagecraft."

My, my -- Sandra made Clinton sound almost Reaganesque, though we doubt this was her intent!

After the break, Howard and Bernard welcomed Hustler publisher Larry Flynt, and the topic turned to the Livingston resignation. "I'm happy if I had anything to do with it," said Flynt, referring to the upcoming Hustler expose which purportedly prompted Livingston's resignation. "Right-wing radicals are destroying our democracy."

Are you practicing the journalism of personal destruction? "I set out to expose the hypocrisy in Washington," he said. If these men are to sit in judgment of Clinton "they should have no skeletons in their closet."

Then why are you poking around in other people's closets? Flynt smiled -- "Desperate times call for desperate measures."

When asked about Livingston's statement, Flynt said there was far more than Livingston admitted to, and "with Livingston coming forward and upstaging us" they have to reconsider their strategy.

His real message -- Livingston is the best free advertising we could have ever imagined, and we may put out a special edition just to take advantage of the building hype. They'll certainly have to rethink their PR campaign in light of all the publicity they are getting -- the fact that people know "a little" will surely prompt them to make the March issue of Hustler (out in January) their best-selling issue yet.

Howard and Bernard turned back to Rosenthal: "This is in no way related to what the President was impeached for yesterday... he was not impeached for a sex offense..." he denounced Flynt as a nonjournalist and said that "being on TV being called a journalist is just what he wants." And Sobieraj said, "Mr. Rosenthal used to be the gatekeeper, now we have Larry Flynt and Matt Drudge." But she never made the connection -- Flynt did what he did because hypocrites like Rosenthal are the gatekeepers, and Rosenthal came across as the prejudiced selector of news based on his own bias that he is.

And Flynt did something that Drudge assiduously avoids --he checked his facts, unlike, say, The New York Times, who have still failed to retract the story or apologize for getting the facts on Whitewater wrong a full six years ago. Did Don van Natta check his facts? And where did he get his information?

Maybe it was right-wing dirty trickster David Bossie.

We say the day that the day The New York Times fires van Natta and troglodyte editorial Ayatollahs like Rosenthal and Howell Raines -- if the Sulzbergers ever wise up, that is -- should be declared a national day of celebration for the First Amendment.

CNN Late Edition

Wolf Blitzer led in the teaser with Baghdad "night vision" shots, then shifted to impeachment and the Livingston resignation. "Washington is in shock, and the Senate prepares for the trial of the century!"

We stuck around for the first segment.

White House Chief of Staff John Podesta was the first guest, and when Wolf asked how the President was doing, Podesta talked a little about dealing with the end of air attacks on Iraq.

"Give us a flavor of how he reacted when he learned he was impeached," asked Wolf, no doubt wanting to plant visions of a disgraced, devastated President in viewers' minds. "I think he was expecting that vote, I don't think he hit it that hard... he watched some of the rest of the votes for him and then went back to business."

"He must have been depressed by them," said Wolf in a continuing effort to depict a hobbled leader.

Podesta's reply: "When history is written, it will not be a pretty day for the House of Representatives."

Wolf then turned to Livingston's resignation, saying "Just listen to what he has to say about the President" -- another shot at "getting Clinton" -- then played Livingston's speech up to the "you, Sir, should resign your post."

And Podesta jumped on it -- and Wolf. "This was a strictly partisan process... we're disappointed by that [Livingston decision] and think he should reconsider."

Wolf brought up the issue that the President may be weakened and diminished, "you hear those criticisms."

Mostly from people like Wolf Blitzer.

Podesta put the lie to the spin, pointing out "the President dealing effectively [with Iraq and his recent trip to the Middle East]."

The words of Podesta -- he is moving forward with his agenda. His real message -- if the GOPers in the Senate don't resolve the situation fairly, they will be seen as partisan like their House counterparts.

After a break there was a lot of back and forth about a censure resolution -- Wolf framed a question with phrases like "lying under oath" and "plea bargain," as if this were a court case and not a political process. He tried the same "trip-up" question he seems to use with all White House staffers: "Are you saying the President lied under oath?" Podesta pooh-poohed the question.

"What happens if there's no deal -- will there be fact witnesses?" asked Wolf. Podesta would give no details, but said that the managers from the House have the burden of proof for their case, not the White House. "I would remind you that one article... passed by such a small margin it would not pass in the 106th Congress... Our legal team will take a look at that."

A strong segment which, along with Greg Craig's laid out two major points: the House managers must "stand and deliver," and the White House may well be ready to blow the lid off Starr, Hyde and the impeachment coup with a very vigorous campaign -- they know that republicans do not want witnesses that would exculpate the President.

Missed or Almost Missed

Of course, impeachment swamped all else this week -- but we were glad to see Juan Williams mention Bob Barr's appearance before the white-power CCC. Watch for the company that ultra-Conservative Southern GOPers keep become a developing story.

And the pundits tried to sidestep Larry Flynt -- as if they did not want to step in it. The fact is, many Congressmen are already up to their neck in it -- if not in over their heads. The Hustler revelations hold the possibility of accelerating the unraveling of the GOP or stepping up tabloid scorcher-earth politics, possibly both.

And nobody tracked the return of tension between Israel and the Palestinians -- an unstable situation that should have merited at least some mention.

We didn't miss Tony Snow on FNS very quickly glossing over poll numbers that looked good for the Prez so he could get back to Clinton-bashing.

You don't suppose they had an inkling of the magic number 72 -- do you?

-- The Editors