Indictments

Blogging buddy Kim wonders about my reaction to the indictment of Lewis aka "Scooter" Libby. She got me thinking: the only thing remarkable about indictments: Patrick Fitzgerald: everything the BA isn't: meticuluous, non-ideological, clean-cut.

Fitzgerald made only one mis-step, though I think for the best intentions, when he made the following statement: "This indictment is not about the war. This indictment's not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel." The man is trying to tell us that he didn't investigate the war; it's not within the scope of his investigation. He's right. He didn't explore the issue, and, consequently, should not comment on it. His comments, however, contradict his intentions, I think. The indictments against Libby, which point to both a vicious whisper campaign and a cover-up, are strong circumstantial evidence that the BA was lying about the reasons to go to war. For those of us not in the legal world, not needing to make a legal case, this evidence is major and is a vindication.

He's wrong, however, in presuming that we shouldn't find vindication for the view that the BA over-sold the war. If his investigation didn't cover pre-war intelligence, etc., i.e., he doesn't know anymore than the average person about


had hit the fan about the same time grade were due and mid-term