Just out from the New York Times:

With a decision expected this week on possible indictments in the C.I.A. leak case, allies of the White House suggested Sunday that they intended to pursue a strategy of attacking any criminal charges as a disagreement over legal technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecutor.

Actually, they’ve already been at it for some time and ThinkProgress has collected the information you need to debunk the spin. Check out our document: Right-Wing Myths About The Leak Investigation.

“Top administration officials are expected to learn from Fitzgerald as early as Monday whether they will face charges as the prosecutor winds up his nearly two-year investigation…Fitzgerald could convene the grand jury as early as Tuesday to lay out a final summary of the case and ask for approval of possible indictments,” Reuters reports. (Via TalkLeft)

On Meet the Press, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson picks up where Bill Kristol left off:

I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn’t indict on the crime so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation were not a waste of time and dollars.

Perjury is just a little technicality punishable by up to five years in prison.

UPDATE: Video on Crooks and Liars.

When President Bush announced the nomination of Harriet Miers on October 3, he called her “a leader of unquestioned integrity.” Much of what we’ve learned since then hasn’t supported Bush’s claim. To review:

- Miers was suspended from the DC bar for non-payment of dues.

- Miers was suspended from the Texas bar for non-payment of dues.

- Miers repeatedly had tax liens placed on property she owned in Texas for non-payment of fines and fees.

- Miers received 10 times the market value for a small piece of land she controlled from the state of Texas, awarded by a panel stacked with friends and allies. A mediator ordered Miers to repay $26,000 but she has failed to do so.

These incidents take on added significant because – since Miers doesn’t have any judicial experience – Bush is selling Miers’s nomination to the court, in large part, on her “character.”