The blog over at Harper's Magazine has a rebuttal to that tortured Wall Street Journal editorial the other day, which argued that the CDR hubbub had vindicated the Bush administration's decision to fire U.S. Attorneys who didn't kowtow to its political agenda, like New Mexico's own David Iglesias.

The reasoning is apparently something like this: there is corruption in New Mexico state government. President Bush was right to fire David Iglesias, a Republican, for failing to go after it. But this demonstrates a failure to appreciate even the most basic facts surrounding the scandal.

The mag's Scott Horton asked Iglesias what he thought of the editorial. The former U.S. Attorney said:

The Wall Street Journal's nonsensical editorial tries to argue about matters no longer in controversy. The official DOJ investigation into the U.S. Attorney firings established conclusively that the firings were “fundamentally flawed.” Every reason given for my ouster was reviewed and rejected by the Justice Department's Inspector General, Glenn Fine, who characterized the proferred reasons as “disingenous after the fact rationalizations.” If this editorial represents the logical reasoning ability of the board, I have profound doubt as to their ability to understand the utter sanctity of a prosecutor's independence and integrity.

"Reading the Journal's editorial, you get the distinct feeling that its author doesn't read the news reports in his own paper, or any newspaper, for that matter," Horton writes. Ouch.