The shaping of things

It's pretty clear the MSM is having loads of fun with the Libby trial so far. Here's an MSNBC piece by Michael Isikoff speculating on whether Rove will testify (or plead the fifth) that continually wonders aloud about thoughts and feelings of those employed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

As is typical with many of these Libbygate stories, this one fails to mention the strange nexus between Richard Armitage, the actual admitted Novak leaker, and WaPo superstar Bob Woodward, who many on the left consider a dirty traitor.

Here's exhibit B from the NY Times. It doesn't mention them either, but describes the testimony of Cathie Martin, former press sec for Cheney. Most pundits gaged her testimony as damaging to Libby, but this quote caught my eye:

She said she was then put on the phone with Bill Harlow, the C.I.A. spokesman, who told her that Mr. Wilson went to Africa on behalf of the agency and that his wife worked there.

Not sure why Harlow felt the need to explain about Wilson's wife, unless it was an effort to legitimize the trip, ie, Martin/Libby ask, "why Wilson", and he says, "his wife works at the Agency in WMD and recommended him". If at this point they knew Wilson was essentially a Democrat operative working for the Kerry campaign such news would have set off a few alarm bells in the VP's office.

It might also help to keep events in perspective. During the runup to Kristof's column the press and Democrats were beginning to openly question the lack of WMD stockpiles. In May 2003 both Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz took heat for saying the WMDs might not be there (moved, destroyed, etc) and it started a brush fire in Europe and the UK, whose liberal populations were already teeming with war skeptics. A UN final report on UNMOVIC was due out. It's not hard to imagine major concern in the White House, which might make it real hard for a jury to buy that Libby was too overworked to have noticed. Surely they all noticed.

Across the pond the Downing Street brouhaha was unfolding. Former UNSCOM weapons inspector Dr. David Kelly was embroiled in a controversy involving Tony Blair, one that accused Her Majesty's government of "sexing up" the Iraq intelligence.

[ Sidebar--if you read the transcripts between Kelly and the journalists he spoke with on background he not dismissive of Saddam's threat since he possessed intimate knowledge of Saddam's bio-weapons program. He seemed concerned about how the evidence was being shaped, but it would seem inaccurate to suggest he believed the war was an outright lie. Under that premise his subsequent demise was all the more bizarre. ]

The question continues to be one of relevance. A Libby conviction, although strongly suggesting the administration went too far in countering what they saw as Democrat smear campaign, doesn't de facto scuttle the rationale for going into Iraq or the importance of winning there now.

As Stratfor has suggested, the raison d e'tre was multi-faceted and went well beyond WMDs. The western governments simply decided to make WMDs the casus belli since it would resonate better with the public. Besides, providing the public with the downline strategic objective would be counter-productive. When WMDs failed to slam dunk into view it made explaining the action problematic. This is usually the junction where anti-war folks peel off and erupt into their frog-march dance.

Cheney's testimony will certainly be interesting, but no more than that of Armitage and Woodward. For example, in Woodward's book "Plan of Attack" he quotes his friend Armitage on page 414 as follows:

Later in 2003, whenever there was a presidential speech or an issue with the White House, particularly on the Middle East, he would say to Powell, "Tell those people to f--k themselves."

That's an astounding viewpoint. We have much to learn.

But speaking of "Plan of Attack", my mind keeps wandering back to the last page where Hollywood Bob quizzed the President about his decision. Quoting from page 443:

"I was going to act. And if it could cost the presidency, I fully realized that. But I felt so strongly that it was the right thing to do that I was prepared to do so."

He's subsequently bolstered that by indicating he'll never change his mind, even if Barney and Laura are the last ones left in his corner. Sounds like a captain willing to go down with his ship. Or a man in the know.