The prime minister's rationale as he allowed the publication of the full legal advice on the Iraq war from the attorney general? 'Everyone's pretty much seen it all anyway', calling it more a 'damp squib than a smoking gun'.

The Guardian's web story on the release, probably appropriately, occasionally featured a pop-up ad for Persil, with a splodge marked with the catchphrase "It's not dirt...".

It also seems, according to the paper, that families of British soldiers killed in Iraq are preparing a legal case against the PM.

And, just a reminder...

Yet, as Bob Worcester of Mori said on Sky News this evening, despite the furore and doom-laden headlines for the prime minister this morning - specifically about the trust issue - Iraq remains "14th" on the list of concerns among voters; while the implausibility of any revelation having an impact on the end result of the election is borne out by bookmakers Paddy Power , who are already paying out on straight "Labour to Win" bets.

James Blitz in the FT agrees that while the timing may be difficult, and the story will rattle around for a few days, the electoral impact will probably be minimal.

The three main party leaders are due to appear together on the BBC's Question Time this evening - not quite a debate, but at least an opportunity for them to "interact with a live studio audience", if not directly with each other.

Probably as well, then, that Michael Howard didn't take the opportunity today to repeat his previous accusation - described by Melanie Phillips as "inept, opportunistic and squalid" that the prime minister had lied over Iraq, while Charles Kennedy just stuck with the "misleading" line of attack.

No chance, one would assume, of either of them echoing Richard Gott's buzzworthy assertion in The Guardian the other day that the PM may actually be, in fact, a war criminal.