Bring It On!

Libby’s Indictment

October 31st, 2005 | by Tom Harper |

Five indictments for Scooter Libby; none (so far) for Rove, Cheney or their sockpuppet named George.  OK, so it wasn’t the Holly Jolly Fitzmas that liberals were hoping for.  But it’s a little early for conservatives to start going “neener neener neener.”  Nobody’s out of the woods yet.

Perhaps Scooter Libby was just a wayward employee, doing illegal activities on his own, and Rove, Cheney and Bush would’ve been just shocked — shocked! — if they had any knowledge of this.  And if you believe that, I can get you a great deal on some oceanfront property in Kansas.

So where do we go from here?  Will Libby do the honorable thing and fall on his sword?  Will he sing like a canary (or make a noise like a pig, whichever metaphor you like better)?  Will he plead guilty to avoid a trial, and then be pardoned by Bush?

Did he act on his own, without any knowledge of his longtime bosses, or was he just following orders?  Let’s take a closer look  at just who I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby is.

One of his nicknames is Dick Cheney’s Dick Cheney:  a quiet but powerful force behind the scenes.  In other words, the man behind the man behind the curtain.

He was one of the main architects of Bush’s policies in general, and the Iraqi invasion in particular.  He’s a longtime protégé of World Bank President (and Grand Wizard of the Neocons) Paul Wolfowitz.  A former co-worker described him as “a deep thinker and problem-solver who gives ‘discreet advice.’”

In 1992,  Libby and Wolfowitz co-wrote a policy guidance document for a post-Cold War defense posture.  This document stated that the U.S. should actively deter other nations from "aspiring to a larger regional or global role," use pre-emptive force to prevent countries from developing weapons of mass destruction, and act alone if necessary.  Sound familiar?  This version of the document was quashed after it got leaked to the New York Times, but its main ideas are clearly alive and well 13 years later.

Before the Iraqi invasion, Libby provided “evidence” of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq and a connection between top Iraqi officials and al Qaeda.  Both claims have been discredited.

Like Bush, Libby went to Yale; graduated in 1972.  Like most members of the Bush Administration, he’s a fierce armchair warrior who’s willing to fight to the last drop of someone else’s blood.

He joined the State Department during Reagan’s first term.  He worked in the Pentagon during Bush 41’s term.  He also used to be a managing partner in the law firm of Dechert, Price and Rhoads.  One of his better-known clients was Marc Rich, the fugitive financier whom Bill Clinton pardoned in 2001.

Libby is one of the founding members of the Project for the New American Century, a rightwing think tank created in 1997.  This organization expands on the ideas that Libby and Wolfowitz first formulated in their 1992 document.

In addition to acting alone and using pre-emptive strikes, the PNAC advocates:  developing and deploying a global missile defense system; developing a “strategic dominance” of space; controlling the “International Commons” of cyberspace; and vastly increasing defense spending in order to pay for all these far-reaching ideas.

In addition to Libby, members of the PNAC include almost the entire roster of American Empire-builders:  Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Eliot Abrams (one of the architects of our 1980s adventures in Nicaragua), Jeb Bush, and William Kristol.

When Judith Miller was serving her 85-day prison sentence for refusing to name her source in the Valerie Plame investigation (which turned out to be Scooter Libby), Libby sent her a letter.  There was lots of speculation that maybe this letter contained some sort of secret code.  The letter said in part:

“You went to jail in summer. It is fall now. You will have stories to cover …Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them. Come back to work — and life.”

Well, what do you think?  Secret code or just bad poetry?

Libby’s trial — assuming he doesn’t have a mysterious “accident” beforehand — promises to shine some light on the most secretive and unaccountable administration in our nation’s history.

cross-posted at Who Hijacked Our Country

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • e-mail
  • YahooMyWeb
Sphere: Related Content

  1. 29 Responses to “Libby’s Indictment”

  2. By pia on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    definitely secret code, no if and’s or buts.

    The thought of Dick Cheney’s Dick Cheney is scarier than hell–actually would make a great Halloween double mask

    I hope Libby doesn’t meet with a mysterious accident, but uh…

    It would be so wonderful if Libby does go to trial; if Fitz has more info on a few other people and reconvenes a grand jury to finalize details and to indict a few more people

    So looking forward to this trial; Friday felt like Christmas at Halloween, but then reality set in

    And i think we here at Bring it on! should pick up on the international commons of cyberspace

  3. By Jersey McJones on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Libby and Miller were in cahoots. So much for the “liberal” Times.

  4. By The Bastard on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    From the looks of the “poem” it sounds like he’s a pussy at heart!

  5. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Pia: Dick Cheney’s Dick Cheney — definitely a scary thought for Halloween. There was a cartoon in the paper the other day — I couldn’t find it online — that showed Cheney peeking out from behind a Venetian blind. If that’s Cheney, I don’t know how they’d show Libby. Calling out orders from the attic maybe.

    Libby’s trial should be enlightening, provided he doesn’t plead guilty or have an “accident.”

    Jersey: Yeah, it’s pretty bad when a “journalist” that does 3 months in jail turns out to be in on the whole thing. Who can you trust?

    TB: No doubt Libby’s a pussy. Typical chickenhawk.

  6. By Joseph (Ok Liberal) on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    I don’t see why everyone is so down about the indictment(s). Think about it: Libby was the one (according to many people in the WH) that masterminded the dishonest manner in which the Iraq War was started. So therefore, the fact that he is indicted, albeit for other crimes, SHOULD be good news right?

    Don’t get me wrong folks. I want to see all of the crooks in the WH (and in Washington DC generally) pay for their crimes against the state. The problem is that they are covering up their tracks very well due to new technologies that allow them to do so. Plus, Bush Co. has most of its employees so scared that they are AFRAID to speak out openly for fear of being station in Abu Dhabi with Odi (remember Garfield?)

    The point is that there is every reason to be happy. Enjoy watching the WH squirm miserably as the spotlight gets brighter and hotter. Enjoy it while it lasts and try to find ways to make the Democratic Party a better opposition unit to fight the red plague next year. CHEERS!

  7. By Jersey McJones on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Ah, but that’s why we now have the Sc-Alito nomination. This fight will be so big as to bury the corruption story for a long time.

  8. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Joseph: Libby is definitely one of the big fish. Aside from all his credentials that I posted about, I forgot to mention that he was part of the White House Iraq Group. This group had weekly meetings for the sole purpose of deciding how to sell the American public on the “urgent” situation in Iraq and why an invasion would be necessary.

    I was disappointed there weren’t more indictments, but lots of ooze and slime and stench will be dug out during Libby’s trial.

    Jersey: That’s probably their motive — to have the Supreme Court battle overshadow all the White House scandals. But I don’t think it’ll work.

  9. By MARTIN S FRIEDLANDER on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply


    The Bush Administration has become a political nightmare for all “thinking” Americans. Their record of policy failures, covered up by lies and fraud, is truly unprecedented. As Fitzgerald stated in his address to the public and in the indictment, the American people have been taken down the road to “perdition”.

    Everything that Bush and Cheney touch- from the lead up to the war in Iraq, to the failure to kill or capture Bin Laden, to the mass torturing of detainees, to Iraq reconstruction, to Katrina, to even Florida where brother “Jeb” (who screwed up royally) cannot use local government as a cover for FEMA’s inability to deliver the “goods”, has turned to “CRAP”. CRAP is what they are, and CRAP deserves to be flushed down the toilet. Call the plumber.

    Several months ago I wrote that Bush is an “Emperor without Clothes”. He is naked, waiting to be buried in his “hole” in Crawford. I am willing to pitch the first spade full of earth in his “spider hole”. May he rest in peace.

    The Democratic Party is not free from fault in this debacle. They have put forth no economic plan, no withdrawal plan, no nothing. The American People do not throw out a President on negative press. They want and deserve to vote for something instead of picking the lesser of two candidates. Kerry, as far as this writer is concerned, was the wrong man, at the wrong place, at the wrong time, with a wife who should have hid in a Ketchup jar, only to be poured out when Kerry served up a Hamburger good enough to eat.

    Will a real candidate with real ideas, and a “Plan for America” please step forward and identify yourself. Please.

    Martin S. Friedlander, Esq.

  10. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Martin: It’s true, the Democrats don’t have many alternative policies or candidates. I’m hoping that most Americans, of all political viewpoints, are totally fed up with Bush and will not elect anyone connected with his cesspool. I don’t care if the next president is Democrat or Republican or third party (fat chance of that) as long as they have a sense of integrity and don’t hire the same slimebags that have been festering in our government since Reagan’s administration.

  11. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    I do not buy into the fact that we have put forth no new ideas or plans. That is not accurate. What it accurate is we have no pulpit from which to preach from these days. When you do not control any branch of government, you cannot put forth your ideas. Period.

  12. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Cranky: Yep, that’s a big handicap all right. The Right controls all branches of government, and that “liberal media” is scared shitless of them, so they just report on infotainment so they won’t piss off the wrong people.

    But it’s a common complaint that Democrats aren’t offering any alternatives, that all they can do is bash Bush. As for myself, I don’t have a specific party platform or program that I’d replace Bush’s programs with, except that I’d undo (when possible) most of the changes he’s made. For me the most important thing is to get that shitstain out of the White House, regardless of who replaces him.

  13. By steve on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply


    Looks to me like Libby is all you are gonna get on this one. Sorry!!

    As far as with the rest of what you all are saying here, you know, if I were you guys and I were as diehard of a Democrat as you guys, I’d be voting your candidates and some of your dead weight in Congress out and get some fresh blood in there. Tom, all we see from you guys isn’t necessarily Bush bashing, its whining and finger pointing. Until that changes, it’s all you are going to get…

  14. By Shadow on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    I again think all of you are missing the bigger picture. These people in Washington both Rep and Dems could care less about any of us. They care about what the power elite tell them to care about. Bush is a Sgt. at best in the inner circles of power that not only run our Gov. but run the events of the world. They count on us policing ourselves with petty differences like race, financial status and of course religion among other things. The only thing that will ever change that is LOVE or something similar. Bush does what he is told to do by people who have been in control thru bloodlines for a very long time. the UK,China and a few other so called civilized socities rule from a point that the commom person couldnt even believe in. Try doing a search at google or yahoo on the Bohemian Grove or the Illuminati and see who really pulls strings in this world and why. Trying and thinking that it will change without a more powerful understanding of what it is, is futile. Sorry..

  15. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Steve: Whining and fingerpointing, eh? Well, unfortunately there’s a lot to point your finger at. Look around.

    Shadow: It’s true that both parties suck and the strings are being pulled by a few powerful groups. I think the Democrats don’t suck quite as much, and they make a few token efforts to improve things for common folks, but basically it’s tweedledee and tweedledum.

  16. By steve on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    At least you ain’t denying the whining…:)

  17. By MARTIN S FRIEDLANDER on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Have you folks been reading Time Magazine and the Sunday New York Times Magazine? The next disaster that is coming down the pike is “Pension Deprivation”. Both sides of the isle wrote Erisa and its prodigy so that Corporations can underfund their defined benefit pension plans, siphon off the cash, and then file Chapter 11 to terminate those plans. The Pension Guaranty Corporation does not have the “Full Faith and Credit” of the United States government behind this Agency, and the Agency will go broke in about 2 to 3 years. Raising the premiums of these Employers is not a saleable solution. There will not be any bailout for the “common folks” as FISLIC was bailed out to the tune over over $100 billion.

    Anyone of you with a defined benefit plan out there can kiss their pension away. Only the executives get the “golden parachutes”.

    That, plus medical coverage, is but one of the domestic issues that need fixing. Is there anyone out there that can formulate a Plan to address these issues? Nope.

    We can all bitch and moan about the Bush Administration, but what has any politition done for us lately? Nada. I believe that our Primary System is partly to blame for this mess. By the time New Hampshire is finished, we are finished, and left with the bottom of the barrel.

    Sometimes I believe we deserve what we get, and boy did we get CRAP this time. What Bush needs is a BJ, but Laura is no Jenna Jameson.

    Martin S Friedlander, Esq.

  18. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Hell who is Jenna Jameson? If that were the first lady, I might have voted for Shrub myself. At least the press conferences could have been fun…

    I think that the Dems have raised thos very issues, at least certain Dems have. Surprisingl, John Kerry is doing more on those issues now that he lost than in the election. The guy must write me 3 times a week and call 2. OK not him personaly, but his paid help. Healthcare and education are all he talks about. Oh yeah, and that war thing…

    I agree that the PGC is going to land us in trouble. It isn’t insolvent yet, but it will be. Companies can’t just be let off the hook and the government just can;t keep borrowing from China to pay for it’s bad economic policy.

    I agree mostly about the primary system. There is a big push to change that to regional primaries so that people who vote last actually have a say. It makes sense. That’s something both groups should get behind.

    That is if you really like democracy and don’t just hate America

  19. By steve on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply


    California could vote last and it wouldn’t matter (for Republicans). Over 12% of the country’s voters live here and still, it doesn’t matter what we decide.

  20. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    I understand, thats why the primaries need to be switched.

  21. By Tom Harper on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Martin: You’ve got it. Pensions and healthcare benefits are going the way of the hula hoop. Golden parachutes will be safe of course. In other words if you’re rich enough not to need your benefits, you get to keep ‘em.

    As far as what Bush needs, that’s exactly it. Monica Lewinsky: Please report to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Cranky: Jenna Jameson was written up in Rolling Stone a few months ago. I don’t remember exactly who she was. I only buy Rolling Stone for the articles (really — trust me).

    Kerry has been sounding a lot better now that he’s not running for President (please say he isn’t).

    And I think it’s sinful (and I’m not even religious) the way corporations and government agencies are let off the hook so they can declare bankruptcy every time their bad decisions come home to roost.

    Steve: Yup, Californians get screwed. 12% of the electorate becomes irrelevant after a handful of smaller states have voted.

  22. By The Bastard on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    YOu know, that’s a little bit of bullshit people have been playing in to. The whole “democrats” have no ideas, they have and always have had the same core issues they have bene concerned about. YOu don’t have to come up with new ideas if the old ones work just fine. Just because the radical right are challenging people to come up with new ideas doesn’t mean everybody has no ideas.

    I mean seriously folks, what fucking “new” ideas has the radical right offered? I see nothing new, I see different packaging of old ideas but I see nothing new.

    Steve, what’s new? Instead of asking around here and telling people around here that the democrats have nothing new please explain what this radical right bible humpers have brought to the table that is different from the Reagan era?

  23. By steve on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    It’s called conservatism Bastard. It isn’t always new ideas. You give us gay marriage and freedom of choice yet want to take our guns away. Keep in mind gay marriage and freedom of choice are not Constitutional amendments, the right to own guns is. You guys are supposed to be progressives and tolerant. Where is your tolerance to religion? Where is your defense of religion? Where does it say in the Constitution that religion can’t be part of political thought?

    It doesn’t always go to the Presidential level, look at the state of California. Look at what Schwarzenegger is trying to do: Reduce spending!! How?? Re-districting, setting district lines in a state where they can’t be moved by the person in power of the district.

    Reduction of power from unions: Making unions take a vote before they few in charge spend their money on special interests. Personal experience on this one, my wife, a card carrying member of a union who disagrees with the union, along with the majority of people she works with. Who gave her the vote? Aren’t unions about people? Hell no, they totalitarian bullshit regimes sapping the power of this nation.

    Imagine this, Arnold wants a State Constitutional amendment to control state spending and insure adequate money for schools. Imagine that, government responsibility? Holy Shit!! No brainer eh? Of course not because you got a bunch of stupid liberals with their hands in the pot, spending and spending with no cap. It’s bullshit what our state does with the money, yet all those state employed union people are out there with their little signs trying to scare old people and their commercials that don’t make sense. And then you get shit like this. Security guards?? What the hell is that?

    The sad problem Bastard, is you guys just don’t get it. You spend millions on little websites that do nothing but make fun of a president. Wow… that has been done since when, the beginning of this country?

    There is nothing new here… there isn’t anything new… same shit, different blog..

    PS: They give you Vicodin for concussions!

  24. By Billion Year Old Carbon on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    And now a special message to my conservative friends…

    The Miers nomination was a sham right from the beginning. The higher ups in the Democratic Party demonstrated an awareness of this by letting the ultra cons flail around and do the work for them so that whey wouldn’t get their hands dirty yet. Not for nothing but the last time…hell every time the administration takes some real enlightening heat over the Iraq intelligence situation they go out and start screwing around with every controversial nomination they can.

    Every one knew that if Fitz would was going to start making indictments it would happen this October. By appointing a nominee who had absolutely no judicial experience and who would not be well tolerated by either political ideologies the administration accomplished a few things

    1) Knowing that Miers was a poor pick they bought time make an actual nomination coincide with what ever indictments would be served up if any. “Tell me why I don’t like Mondays?” 2) Making a sham nomination like Miers was a great attempt to de-stigmatize the push for a more conservative nomination when conservatives freaked like 3 year olds but 3) and more importantly once that very conservative nomination is brought forth, it drives a huge wedge between the every day people of either party who other wise might unite to do things like demand to re-open the intelligence investigation and make it an independent investigation so that the country can finally get to the bottom of what has happened how, why, and who.

    Lesson number one: is that conservative politics stress orthodoxy, are exclusive in nature, and strive to provide government only for those that adhere to its orthodoxy while excluding any one deemed un-desirable or unorthodox. To be effective to that end it is necessary to divide up the nation into who is orthodox and who is unorthodox.

    The collateral effect of this process of dividing creates an ambiguity of governmental priority in the average person we should be worried about energy policy, the seemingly illegal war that we fled the UN to go and start, the down sizing of America, the proliferation of the no bid contract which is a threat to pricing competition - the key stone of all capitalism, the educations system, the inner circle in the administration that is out moded and living in the 20th century still trying to make Reaganomics work, all headed up by a CEO who made any of his own money by driving his own corporations into the ground.

    But instead we are now going to have to take on this nomination that was stalled by the sham nomination of Miers, where going to argue about evolution and Roe V Wade AND ALL THE REALLY BIG CRAP THAT TURNS OUT TO BE RATHER NOMINAL WHEN COMPARED TO THE REALITY OF A NATION THAT IS BEING UNDERMINED FROM WITHIN BY ITS HIGHEST OFFICES!
    …And you know why because they want us to do it. They need to keep us fighting. Divide and Conquer, You’ve been had SUCKaS …so maybe some of you conservatives are right and Libby is all that we are ever going to get, is the nation going to be any better for it if thats the case? Can you say that you are proud to have these men for rulers? I want a god damn leader who can find the best in every American and help lead them to their dreams. Not a rats nest of know liers on matters of national security dividing up the meat to its exclusive inner partie special interests.

  25. By The Bastard on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply


    I don’t think anyone is trying to take away your right to bare arms. But since I’m gonna assume you are not part of a state militia I personally would ask that they are more controled. Crap, most states have helmet laws for kids under 11 riding bikes but we can’t get laws passed that kids under 11 should not be firing a weapon.

    Tolerance of religion is there, you just refuse to see it. I for one would die to protect anyones right to worship and I am not religious. But I would also defend the right for someone not to worship. What does that mean? Religion stays out of the government.

    I’m all for the power of redistricting. Hell the Dems mastered it first, was it right? No. But to that end Repubs learned and used it to your advantage. Look at how Tom DeLay wrestled away Texas. Redistricting by a non-partisan board is a good thing.

    As for the rest of the problems in your state, all I can say is, I was was stationed in San Diego for a couple of years and well, your state is pretty fucked up. But that is not solely because of Dems. Look at Enron, who allowed that to happen? Look at the price fixing and the man made rolling blackouts. Who allowed that to happen?

    Gee, we’ll never know because Cheney won’t release his secret findings, that wouldn’t you know it, Ken Lay helped him put together.

    And finally I wish I had millions to spend on this website. Sad truth is that if I had millions I would probably not be on this website.

    Vicodin, be a pal, don’t hide it, divide it!

  26. By Elizabeth on Oct 31, 2005 | Reply

    Steve: “Arnold wants a State Constitutional amendment to control state spending and insure adequate money for schools [...] because you got a bunch of stupid liberals with their hands in the pot, spending and spending with no cap.”


    How is it that the liberals are managing to pull off this travesty? Let’s see, they’re not dictating what goes on in the executive branch — what about the Senate? Nope. House? Uh, nooo… And yet it’s the liberals who are pissing away money that would otherwisew be earmarked for precious schools?

    Harpers Index: “Rank of 2004 among the most fiscally reckless years in US history, according to the comptroller general: 1″ (October 2005)

    All of the magical, invisible, non-office-holding liberals in my state must be very, very powerful, indeed.

  27. By The Cranky Liberal on Nov 1, 2005 | Reply

    Gee Steve, Arnold is such a good example of “conservatism” that I’m glad you raise his name here. First, the guy is nominally conservative. Second, his proposals for the special election are set to go down in flames. His redistricting plan is an attmept to get around the Democrat lef redistricting in the state. A great idea - but NOT a nonpartisan one. It is an attmept to grab power for the GOP. It is also not a “Republican” idea because the same idea has been implemented (or is on the ballot) in a variety of other states by whatever party is in the minority.

    Your right about Gay Marriage not being in the Consitution. Either is, as far as I know, Hetero marriage. Now there is that whole clause about respecting compacts made in one state by all the others. You don’t seem real willing to accomodate that part of our Constitution or people from Massachusets would have to be treated as married in the other 49. Now, care to talk about strict interpretation?????

    And Steve, say what you want about same shit different blog. You people are scared shitless. The approval raitings for your boys are inthe toilet because you finally have a group of people willing to scream - LIES. You had your chance at rule and have done nothing but rape this country. It is no longer time to listen to people who think that these asshats are doing the nation good. Those people are accomplices to the destruction of this country.

  28. By gindy on Nov 1, 2005 | Reply

    “How is it that the liberals are managing to pull off this travesty?”

    Because they are in control of the state government and yet we are at the bottom (litterally) of the list in terms of quality schools.

    “Let’s see, they’re not dictating what goes on in the executive branch — what about the Senate?”

    California is not the federal government. It has it’s own state controlled government.

    “Nope. House? Uh, nooo… And yet it’s the liberals who are pissing away money that would otherwisew be earmarked for precious schools?”

    No it wouldn’t. Most of the money for schools are provided by the state for the state. Very little comes from the federal government for education by comparison.

    ” First, the guy is nominally conservative. ”


    “His redistricting plan is an attmept to get around the Democrat lef redistricting in the state. ”

    I disagree here. CA has a problem with gerrymandering. Just about every seat is non-competitive which seems to be leading to massive corruption. It also allows state politicians to ignore the will of the people. I don’t know if his plan will solve the problem but something needs to be done.

  29. By Jersey McJones on Nov 1, 2005 | Reply

    Gindy, California, by it’s very structure, is a libertarian nightmare. Your schools suck because you don’t fund them. You have no power generation, no water, no sensible zoning and regulations, no labor representation, no public transporation, not enough roads, and on and on and on.

    “Liberals” have nothing to do with any of that besides the ol’ NIMBY problem - which is a nonpartisan ailment with a variety of causes.

    I know. I lived out there too. California is a libertarian nightmare.

  30. By bomberman1 on Jan 5, 2007 | Reply

    home equity loan online
    discount web hosting
    home mortgage loan california
    home mortgage interest rat
    car chicago loan
    bad debt credit card
    personal debt consolidation loan
    credit debt consolidation

Post a Comment