FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Carry On, Patrick Fitzgerald

by MIKE WHITNEY

 

It was payback–cheap political payback by the administration for an article I had written contradicting an assertion President Bush made in his 2003 State of the Union address. Payback, not just to punish me, but to intimidate other critics as well.

Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson

It’s weird that the reaction to the Fitzgerald investigation has been so upbeat. After all, it only produced one measly indictment. Typically, that would have put Bush-critics on the ledge teetering towards the street.

Alas, there’ll be no looming guillotine on the White House lawn and no firing squad on Pennsylvania Ave. The iniquitous trio of Cheney, Rove and Libby won’t be seen edging through the Rose Garden in manacles and prison-pinstripes; just the well-groomed Scooter staring ahead impassively as he speeds away in his chauffer-driven limo.

So, where’s the frustration? I would have expected a collective sigh of grief across the leftist web sites like the air hissssing out of a punctured tire. But, not this time. Instead, all eyes are fixed on America’s new protagonist, Patrick Fitzgerald, and the stream of details that appear on a daily basis.

“Truth is the engine of our judicial system,” Fitzgerald opined, in his best Gary Cooper drawl.

It’s been awhile since the public has had a champion of secular values like Fitzgerald. He seems to have slipped on to center-stage just as confidence in American justice had hit rock-bottom. The Bush era has produced its share of gulags and torture chambers, but nothing vaguely resembling evenhandedness or fair-play.

But, it’s the case itself that is driving public interest, not Fitzgerald. The workings of the Bush White House read like a Mario Puzo screenplay with plenty of back-room deals and shadowy intrigues.

The details of the indictment underline this point. For example:

“On or about June 12, 2003, Libby was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson’s wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counter-proliferation Division. Libby understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.On or about July 12, 2003, Libby flew with the Vice President and others to and from Norfolk, Virginia, on Air Force Two. On his return trip, Libby discussed with other officials aboard the plane what Libby should say in response to certain pending media inquiries, including questions from Time reporter Matthew Cooper.”

In the days immediately following this flight, Libby discussed Plame’s identity with Mat Cooper and Judith Miller which suggests that the VP was directly involved in the conspiracy to leak classified information. Libby has already admitted that Cheney was one of the White House officials who revealed Plame’s identity and her role at the CIA to him.

Fitzgerald’s indictment alleges that Libby was involved in a 2 year long campaign to thwart the investigation. It also shows that Cheney, who knew that Libby was lying to the FBI and the Grand Jury, decided to remain silent, making him a co-conspirator in the in the obstruction of the investigation. We can expect that Fitzgerald is continuing to pursue this angle.

The worst case scenario for Cheney is also the most likely (given what we know of his character); that he intentionally lied under oath and that he was the driving force behind the leak. His animosity towards Joseph Wilson is not questioned by anyone close to the case. It also seems improbable that Libby would have engaged in such career-threatening endeavor as “outing” a CIA agent’s without first getting the approval of his boss, Cheney.

So, Cheney is up to his axels in the Plame scandal, and the testimony of key officials John Hannah and David Wurmser (both of who are cooperating with Fitzgerald) could seal the deal.

Bye-bye, Dickie.

Saturday’s New York Times editorial helps shed light on another of the thorny issues surrounding the case. It reads:

“Yesterday’s indictment, which followed a two-year investigation, contained only one reference to Mr. Novak, who has refused to say whether he testified or cooperated in any other way with Mr. Fitzgerald’s grand jury. A single cryptic paragraph in the 22-page indictment refers to an unnamed senior White House official (called Official A) who told Mr. Libby a few days before Mr. Novak’s column appeared that he had spoken to the columnist and discussed with him Mr. Wilson, his wife, her job and her involvement in Mr. Wilson’s trip. Karl Rove has admitted talking to Mr. Novak on the telephone about the issue, and he is still under investigation by Mr. Fitzgerald.”

Yes, but if Rove talked to Novak, why hasn’t he been indicted? And why is Novak’s role given minimal attention? There’s something troubling about this excerpt that gets to the heart of the investigation, but “what it is” is still uncertain.

The dearth of information about Novak suggests that his testimony may be critical in reeling in other members of the administration; the really big fish. So, we can either take Fitzgerald at his word that the bulk of the investigation is over or assume that he is carefully putting the final touches on a case that will implicate as many as 6 other co-conspirators including Vice President Cheney.

Whether Fitzgerald nets Cheney or not, there is reason hope that the dogged Columbo from Chicago will knock the administration off kilter in a way that will upset critical parts of their foreign policy agenda. Bush has been an effective pitch-man for the administration’s criminal conduct, but the pressure of the investigation is wearing on his fragile psyche. This could mean big trouble for his larger, global strategy. Bush won’t perform well with the sword of Damocles suspended above the Oval Office and bad news gushing from the headlines day after day.

As for Dick Cheney, the spectral-twin of long dead John Mitchell, he’ll stonewall until he’s clapped in leg-irons and carted away in the paddy-wagon. No doubt he’ll impart one final fiction with his last gasp. There’s really no chance that a serial liar like Cheney will change his stripes and seek absolution when things finally come undone.

All in all, things are looking a bit brighter for White House foes. The lights have dimmed, the bunker has been sealed, and Queeg is pacing alone in the wheelhouse. The next three years foreshadow greater scrutiny, antipathy and indictments; the excruciatingly pleasant prospect of death by 1,000 cuts. The longer it takes to sort through the mountain of lies, the better off we are.

Carry on, Patrick Fitzgerald.

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He can be reached: fergiewhitney@msn.com

 

 

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The “Great” Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail