Scandal Overkill?

National Review's Byron York offers this assessment "from people who know and follow the CIA leak case:

"The first is that they view the indictment against Lewis Libby as very strong. One source called it 'as clear-cut an indictment' as one would ever see, and the consensus is that Libby is in serious trouble. If Libby lied as much as Fitzgerald accuses him of lying, the sources say, then Libby acted in an astonishingly reckless way."

Another conservative, John Hinderaker at Power Line, agrees that Libby screwed up, big time:

"As to Libby, the indictment is devastating. If the facts alleged are true -- and they are evidently based on the testimony of a considerable number of witnesses -- they can't be chalked up to inadvertence, misstatement or differing recollections. The indictment alleges that Libby had a number of conversations with various people in the executive branch, from Vice-President Cheney on down, about the fact that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. It alleges further that Libby had conversations with several reporters in which Plame's CIA employment was discussed.

"The indictment says that Libby misrepresented his conversations with the reporters to the FBI and the grand jury. As described by Libby, he only agreed with what reporters told him about Plame and said that he had heard about her from other reporters. It is unclear whether Libby denied the various conversations he allegedly had with members of the executive branch to the grand jury, but the indictment quotes testimony where he seems to reaffirm that at the time he spoke to reporters, he didn't know anything about Plame other than what he had heard from public sources.

"So, if the indictment is true, Libby told a story under oath which differs, not only materially but vitally, from that of close to a dozen other witnesses.

"I can't imagine how Libby could have been foolish enough to lie to the grand jury, if indeed that is what happened. As a long-time Washington insider, he must have realized how grindingly thorough this kind of investigation is. How could Libby not have foreseen that his story would be contradicted by every other executive branch employee who was interviewed by the FBI? And how could he not have realized that perjury would be far worse than the original alleged offense?"

A very different view from the right as the Wall Street Journal editorial page weighs in:

"Mr. Fitzgerald has been dogged in pursuing his investigation, and he gave every appearance of being a reasonable and tough prosecutor in laying out the charges. But he has thrust himself into what was, at bottom, a policy dispute between an elected Administration and critics of the President's approach to the war on terror, who included parts of the permanent bureaucracy of the State Department and CIA. Unless Mr. Fitzgerald can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Libby was lying, and doing so for some nefarious purpose, this indictment looks like a case of criminalizing politics."

If you want some insight into the scars that Clintonites still wear from the special prosecutor days, check out this Huffington Post lament by Paul Begala :

"The plain fact is that after a seven year non-stop investigato-rama, no senior Clinton White House official was ever even charged with wrongdoing. Much less indicted. Much less convicted. In fact, the highest-ranking Clinton official to be convicted of wrongdoing in connection with his public duties was the chief of staff to the Agriculture Secretary. Betcha five bucks you can't even name the Clinton Agriculture Secretary in question, much less his chief of staff. Unlike Nixon (whose Watergate crimes were manifest), unlike Reagan (whose White House was corrupted by the Iran-Contra crimes), unlike Bush 41 (who pardoned White House aides and Cabinet officers before they could testify against him), Bill Clinton presided over the most ethical White House staff in decades.

"And yet George W. Bush campaigned on a pledge to 'restore honor and decency to the Oval Office.' He spoke of moms and dads on the campaign trail who showed him photos of their children and asked him to give them a president their kids could be proud of.

"We all knew what he meant. With a wink and a nod he told us he wouldn't cheat on Laura. And after he took office Mr. Bush and his henchmen smeared the Clintonistas, falsely accusing them of vandalism and theft. They told the press that in this Oval Office the gentlemen would wear suits, the ladies, skirts . . . That is why this prosecution is important. No one is criminalizing policy differences. Rather, the Bush White House stands accused of hijacking the public policy process in service of a criminal conspiracy to smear, lie and obstruct justice."

Strip everything else away, though, and Libby, like Clinton, is accused of lying.