… do we see the moonbats crying in their Fruit Loops or rioting in the streets?

I’m guessing they’ll shake their tiny little fists in rage, then head down to Starbucks and blog about how ticked off they are.

Jim: You know, the funny thing is, I remember this feeling. Back in 1998, waiting for the Starr report to come out, there were all kinds of rumors floating around. Starr’s got evidence of a quid-pro-quo of a job for Monica if she lies on the stand. The Senate Democrats were getting together, getting ready to approach Clinton to tell him to resign for the good of the country. Clinton went nuts while testifying and exploded in a purple-faced rage. And they never came about.

It’s probably not healthy for a political movement to have its hopes hanging on these speculations of stunning world-changing revelations about to emerge. (Is anybody expecting the coalition to find WMDs in Iraq?)

Marshall: Last summer, I was predicting that Mr. Rove would be indicted. I’m glad I was wrong. And I have to say that it’s nice to see a prosecutor with the fortitude and integrity to look at the facts and look at the law and decide that there wasn’t enough for an indictment. Too many prosecutors would have indicted simply because they could.

So the lefties didn’t get their Fitzmas. Instead, they got a lump of coal. Can’t say I’m going to shed any tears. And I agree with Jim — building a movement around a potential indictment is never a winning strategy.