Let's ask the big questions of the last three days.

The Iraq/Terrorism NIE, Iraq hearings pre-equipped with high ranking military personnel blasting the administration, Clinton's outburst about Bush and Bin Laden,

"That’s the difference in me and some, including all the right wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try and they didn’t…I tried,"

All scheduled and released within two days.

All properly distanced from the Bush 9/11 national security push. All seeming to whack at the knees of the entire Republican presentation and campaign strategy.

Is this a coordinated action or a coincidence? Are the Dems finally playing extra-political hardball? Writing a campaign narrative outside the candidates? (as the Republicans have done so effectively in the last few elections.)

Two of these require high ranking military and intel folks cooperating. Is the situation so dire that the career folks are helping the Dems? (Yes.)

I guess the critical question would be who is running the national show now. I know Howard Dean has the "stones" to play this kind of hardball, but I wonder if he could inspire the party discipline. So, if this is being orchestrated, who is pulling the strings?

One more: Is the NIE leak a trap for the Republicans? If they declassify it, it will be spawning front page stories for a week or more, all with a subtext comparison and reference to the original NYTimes story that then becomes the central debating point of the argument. "Did Iraq cause more terror?" This would reframe the entire national security debate one month before the election.

If, on the other hand, they don't declassify, the charge is left standing, unchallenged.

(Just random thoughts that have been in my head all day.)