Republicans Try to Change the Subject

And that's the end of Scooter Libby being Cheney's top aide. (But will he continue on as Cheney's alterego?) did the only thing is could think of -- change the subject! Right now, this is the top entry on that prominent right wing blog:

Economy Booming
by Adam C.

In case the Libby incident and the Supreme Court nominations are distracting you from other things in the world, let me remind you that the economy is booming.

In spite of the rush to find something -- anything -- good to say about the administration today, it still doesn't look like there's a whole lot of support out there for Libby, or for Rove. Reddstaty at surprised the heck out of me with this diary entry earlier in the week. "Karl Rove and Scooter Libby should both resign immediately. In fact, they should have both resigned as soon as the identity of Plame passed from their lips to the reporters they were speaking to."

TalkLeft wants to know where plea bargains come into all this. Faiz at ThinkProgress is just entertained that "The right-wing is already spinning themselves into knots as they struggle to defend the conduct of the White House."

The New Republic's The Plank blog is doing a nice job keeping up with the developments relating to Libby and the leak case.

Looking at the indictment, the resignation is definitely no surprise.

Obstruction of Justice (One count. See pages 1-14 of the indictment):
Libby "did knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice, namely proceedings before Grand Jury 03-3, by misleading and deceiving the grand jury as to when, and the manner and means by which, LIBBY acquired and subsequently disclosed to the media information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the CIA."

False Statements (Two counts. See pages 15-17 of the indictment):
Libby "did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation"

Perjury (Two counts. See pages 18-22 of the indictment):
Libby "knowingly made a false material declaration, in that he gave the following testimony regarding a conversation that he represented he had with Tim Russert of NBC News, on or about July 10, 2003 CIA (underlined portions alleged as false):" and "knowingly made a false material declaration, in that he gave the following testimony regarding his conversations with reporters concerning the employment of Joseph Wilson's wife by the CIA (underlined portions alleged as false)"

Let's just say this: There is a lot of underlining.

What do you think, Debaters? Which charges will stick, if any? Is Cheney the next to fall?

By Emily Messner |  October 28, 2005; 1:41 PM ET  | Category:  Beltway Perspectives
Previous: Finally, Happy Indictment Day! | Next: Criminalization or Criminal?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

The indictments against Libby will stick. The big problem for the Bush Administration here is that the special prosecutor in this particular case is extremely difficult to paint as a partisan. When even El Presidente' is praising him for doing a good job, it is difficult to suddenly turn back around and rip him for being a partisan.

You also can't really paint him as a glory hound because, unlike Kenneth Starr, he's been absolutely allergic to the spotlight over the last couple of years.

Lastly and most significantly, Rove himself pointed the finger at Libby less than a week ago.

As for Rove himself, he will either be going down soon after or cutting a deal with the prosectutor for someone further up the food chain. (Like Cheney?)

The difficulty with leaking to many different sources, is that when you get a special prosecutor sniffing around who's unafraid to rough up those media sources a little bit, all the fingers inevitably point back to the same place. This is why Rove will be going down alongside Libby soon.

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 28, 2005 03:04 PM

libby screwed up, does that make the entire Bush admininstration corrupt. i don't think so.i know the wp the nyt and cnn would like to think so.(along with j.crozier lol

Posted by: j smith | October 28, 2005 03:28 PM

You were not accurate about Red State. Not that I especially want to defend them however if you are going to accurate there was a prior post about the indictment at 13:08:08 then another one after the economic post. The way you wrote it gives the impression they did not post about the indictment at all.

Posted by: Lisa Renee Ward | October 28, 2005 04:06 PM

Fitzgerald not only caught Libby lying, he caught him lying through his teeth. It appears that this is an extremely cautious and conservative prosecutor. Given the evidence he laid out, Fitzgerald hardly went out on a limb with these charges, which is the best evidence for this being merely round one in what is going to be an extremely bad year for the administration, even if Libby does plead out to avoid a trial.

Posted by: L. Farthing | October 28, 2005 04:12 PM

With the initial results?? I smell conspiracy!!

Posted by: lw | October 28, 2005 04:18 PM

Considering the administration's history of NEVER allowing anybody off the talking points reservation, it defies credibility that Scooter was out there all by himself. I expect more to come...Jacqueline Fowler

Posted by: | October 28, 2005 04:30 PM

I expect more to come too. Prosecuting lies is the first step in determining the truth.

Rove is still on the hook, and it doesn't matter whether he (or libby) knew that the information they were leaking was classified, and it doesn't matter what their motives were. They are both in violation of their NDA's which are backed up by executive order (google: Rove NDA)

Posted by: lumberjack | October 28, 2005 04:56 PM

RedState didn't try to change the subject. The discussion started this morning and continues as we speak, with two front page threads bookending the discussion by Adam C. and several other member diaries. RedState has several independent editors who post stories to the single-column front page, often without any consultation among themselves, as they write their stories. That's how a blog works. Adam C.'s particular area of expertise is economics, and it's perfectly appropriate that he wanted to talk about that news today in addition to everything else that's going on.

Posted by: RedStater | October 28, 2005 05:53 PM


Posted by: MIke P | October 28, 2005 06:29 PM

Libby takes the blame for Cheney. Now we know our govenment lied to us. We are no example for Freedom with a President and Vice President lying to the american people. With two years investigation no one leaked the CIA names. I guess thats not important in this investigation. Bush/Cheney did what Nixon couldn't they lied,cheated and stold and got away with it. American christens believe in truth, honesty and will follow Bush as he leades us all into hell. No one cares that american children are dying for an illegal invasion and our children are dying for oil.

Posted by: Jackie Rawlings | October 28, 2005 06:37 PM

The great thing about the internet is that it expands the full range of articles available to readers. The Washington Post Online had front page stories on both the economic growth numbers and the indictments. RedState had articles on both as well.

As an editor at RedState, I mainly focus on economic issues, fiscal conservatism, and Senate races. As the editors do not co-ordinate their story postings, the "top" article is just the most recent one posted. That's the difference between a Scoop format blog (RedState) and a newspaper format site (Washington Post).

Next time you are thinking of writing a piece on the site, I recommend you email the editors first.

Posted by: Adam C | October 28, 2005 06:42 PM

Another upsetting thing about our world today is this: "Oh I voted for Bush and my husband is on a boat in the navy and I have been wondering how I will pay for my son's education", well call up GW and ask him or "Gosh I have a huge suv now and cannot afford the gas" or "our economy is a mess and I don't want to pay taxes but I want good schools, health programs and cheap gas."
Well you know what america, look no further, its called the democratic party and its back after a long time off. True, our leaders are fools and liars, but look at Nixon, they always were liars. Now we have Dick Cheneys office and reading Cheney's Libby farwell statement, well there was not one word of a thank you or anything, just well he has to go too bad. Ok america, what next? Who's next/ When our we goin get the heck out of Iraq? Do you have to be a gold mother to stand up to these scum? Our government is run by scum, yeppers. WHEN THE PEOPLE LEAD, THE LEADERS WILL FOLLOW. AMEN.

Posted by: Vote Blue next time | October 28, 2005 06:54 PM

Emily, as someone who's been deeply critical of at points -- oh, and a co-founder, now departed, of that blog -- I can say that you're dead wrong on this one. Whatever its faults as a site, willful subject-changing and topical obfuscation aren't among them. Toss in the fact that Adam C writes almost exclusively on economic issues, and you're running on empty here. Quite honestly, you owe RS an apology.

As an aside, why is the WaPo's house blogger not among the listed WaPo personnel with public e-mail addresses? Come now.

Posted by: Joshua Trevino | October 28, 2005 07:33 PM

Ha, imagine citing redstatty as a voice of reason at Redstate. He's no doubt itching to correct you. Redstatty is a resident moby, a closeted kossack poorly attempting a masquerade as a conservative. Nice try Emily. Seems you couldn't manage to stumble across a single bit of accuracy in this blog post.

In any case, since what the top topic on a site is supposedly has so much to say, perhaps you can explain why all the lefty sites clearly think white people should be eradicated.

Well? They didn't make "Dr." Kamau Kambon THEIR top posts. By your logic it means they're trying to cover it up or change the subject. Or maybe they agree? I bet Steve Gilliard agrees. Do you?

Imagine trying to use the top post, which, by the way, was sharing the spotlight with THREE front page stories about the indictments, as some kind of judgement on what the most important item is. Showing your blog naivete and your general ignorance in a single fell swoop. How impressive of you!

Posted by: Absentee blog | October 28, 2005 08:51 PM

When bloggers screw up (like you did with RedState) they usually update their post and apologize, otherwise they look, (how to put this nicely) just plain stupid. Maybe you can go with the "False but Accurate" defense.....

Posted by: Conservative_D | October 28, 2005 09:09 PM

This mess (all of it) has ALWAYS been about O-I-L, and the subsequent greed it creates (uh, bible-thumpers, ain't greed a sin? Oh, only gay people who are greedy -- gotcha). Cheney sat down in a private huddle with big business reps to develop an energy "strategy" -- on the table were maps of Irag and other middle east countries showing where the oilfields are -- get the picture? All Cheney wanted to do was turn Iraq into a big service station, owned by him and his cronies. Not the most noble thing to die for, but why should he care? He always had other priorities.

Posted by: Clem Cadiddlehopper | October 28, 2005 10:34 PM

Nice try RedStaters but your pitiful blog is really not the subject of the day here. Maybe try changing the subject to national security - oops, can't do that - Iraq - oh, another bad idea - well, maybe you are just doing the best you can with a bad hand.

Posted by: KRH | October 28, 2005 11:14 PM

So with the indictment of Libby (AKA Cheney's Cheney), the once impenetrable White House has had a major brick removed. With Rove (AKA The Brain and The Architect) not off the hook, and all the other leaking that is going on, this house needs more than just major repairs. I would think that Ty Pennington of Extreme Makeover would agree that this house needs to be razed in order to make a new and safer home.

Even with Miers removing her name from the Supreme Court nominees, and the quick trigger rush to war, "3B" (AKA Bubble Boy Bush) is blinded by his own shortcomings.

Even now, the "spin peeps" are saying that it took almost 5 years for this administration to have a "few", lol, speed bumps. Hello "peoples", what was and is being brought out in the open, didn't happen yesterday, it happened years ago.

Who should be next in the indictments, Bush himself, as well as Cheney, Ronald Dumbsfield, and all those who do not have the "cajones" to tell the king, that he isn't wearing any clothes. To those who fall in this group, I will say what I tell people about my children. I love my children dearly, but I will not love them "blindly". If I cannot guide them and let them know, not only when they have done well, but I also need to be able to tell them when they have done something wrong. If I fail at that, then I fail as a parent.

Posted by: David, Indiana | October 29, 2005 12:59 AM

"In any case, since what the top topic on a site is supposedly has so much to say, perhaps you can explain why all the lefty sites clearly think white people should be eradicated."

What on earth is this person talking about? The sad thing is, he/she probably actually believes this nonsense.

Posted by: johnuw93 | October 29, 2005 07:00 AM

Here's my prediction. Plea bargin, no trial, six months in a Club Fed, a cushy commentators job on Fox and a pardon at the end of the Bush administration. Sounds right?

Posted by: buonocore8 | October 29, 2005 11:12 AM

Who can predict what will happen to Scooter?

His fate is dicey today, but I agree with Buonocore8's guess that if Libby gets convicted, he will be at the top of G.W.'s last minute pardon list in 2009. That assumes W makes it that far and the country survives his fear-mongering "stewardship."

Of course, Scooter may be joined by others in W's administration looking for an 11th Hour pardon.

That said, I believe that if Mr. Fitizgerald ends his investigation without finding the people or person responsible for outing a CIA agent, then he will have failed in his duty.

Here's hoping that Mr. Fitzgerald takes his time and gets it right.

Posted by: Roger Dier | October 29, 2005 11:25 AM

I would like to know if Libby is on the payroll of Likud or AIPAC.

Posted by: candide | October 29, 2005 11:42 AM

For those who think that the Washington Post is a liberal mouthpiece trying to milk this for political advantage, read the current editorial. The Post stops just short of suggesting that the lack of an indictment on the "outing charge" vindicates the administration and its pro-war alllies (including the WaPo).

Posted by: guez | October 29, 2005 12:40 PM

How did our government mislead us?
Remember that Saddam lost Gulf War I?
Remember he had to let the UN monitor his weapons programs as part of the surrender terms?
Remember that he didn't co-operate and the UN passed many resolutions that Saddam ignored?
Remember the UN said that he had wmd's (that he used on Kurds and Shia) that UN inspectors could not account for?
Remember that Saddam had bought yellowcake uranium from Niger before Clinton bombed his nuclear facility?
Remember that the Clinton administration thought that Iraq's weapons programs was the greatest threat to America's security?
How did our government mislead us?

Posted by: Salt | October 29, 2005 01:42 PM

I predict Libby will stay mum and take the fall.

After all, "Libby" is just "Liddy" with the 3rd and 4th letters turned backwards.

Posted by: Cal Gal | October 29, 2005 02:43 PM

I'm just wondering why Libby is on crutches. Is it possibly because a man allegedly needing crutches can't be 'frogmarched across the White House Lawn in handcuffs'?

Posted by: Gomer | October 29, 2005 07:53 PM

Dick has control of the strings, George has to " out for that tree"!

Posted by: | October 30, 2005 12:39 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.