No. But Josh Marshall provides a clever bit of misdirection and topic-shifting. (Actually, one of my many very crafty commenters, "Sym", gave a similar suggestion waaay earlier, so I have a head start here.)
To back up briefly - the Dejerejian Challenge is for some prominent left-half bloggers to present a revised appraisal of the Niger scandal and Ambassador Wilson's role in it.
Instead, Dr. Marshall offers a clever attempt to re-direct the conversation, as it relates to the Plame scandal:
If there's no legal case and no political problem, why don't the senior administration officials who leaked her identity just come forward?
...I can only assume by their silence that they're rather less confident about the quality of their explanation and the degree of their legal jeopardy than their many voluble defenders in the conservative press.
No political problem? Other than a Saturday WaPo story an p. A9, and a lot of blogospheric chatter (and near-delerium), I haven't seen any change in the political landscape at all. Has Wilson resigned from the Kerry campaign? Have any top Democrats opined that maybe the Plame outing was not the work of the vicious Bush Brute Squad, a criminal attempt to silence and intimidate a devoted public servant and truth-teller? Has any top Democrat or any major editorial even hinted that maybe there was no crime, and that the leaker's motivation may have been just?
Sorry - the politics haven't changed. Even Josh Marshall, who is very well informed on the matter of Wilson's credibility, is unwilling to take the first, necessary step.
But he gives a clever try.
MORE: Yes, the press silence is deafening. But it was deafening when the scandal broke, too.
AND IF THE DEMS WERE SMART: Here is a wining idea that will never happen - get the Dem Vice-chairman of an appropriate committee to offer immunity in exchange for public hearings, and soon. Put Wilson on the witness list, as well as WH staffers and others as appropriate.
My guess is that the content will favor the Reps (Wilson aside). However, the theatrics and imagery will have all of the look of a criminal investigation - all that is missing (IMHO) are criminals and a crime, but the public's imagination will supply that. Dems will feast on beautiful nightly visuals as various Reps deny wrong-doing.
And Dems can insist that Bush testify! He won't, but the public won't follow the separation of powers argument - they will focus on "he talked to the FBI, what is he hiding from us"?
Oh, I'd be worried. Except that I'm not. Too many dreams would have to die ("We're giving a free pass to the vicious Bush Brute Squad!") for it to happen.