Post Fitzmas Funk

You know the feeling. The day after. The presents are open, and...while you pretty much got what you asked for, you'd hoped for more. Fitzmas never quite lives up to the pre-Fitzmas hype, now does it?

If you're wondering what the hell I'm talking about, I'm of course referring to Patrick Fitzgerald's Friday afternoon press conference, and the Libby indictments.
bad: Rove escaped indictment.
good: Multiple indictments came down.
bad: All indictments came after the crime for which no one was indicted.
good: The indictments go all the way to the Vice President's office.

Fitzgerald came across at the press conference as straighter than straight. I got the feeling that he was there to do the peoples' bidness, and if crimes were comitted, he was going to prosecute, regardless of the party or who was being investigated. That should give us solace that perhaps he'll find something for which Rove needs to be indicted, and will then do so.

Clearly Libby lied about having heard the Plame news from Tim Russert. Clearly that information originated in the Republican realm, and clearly Novak, Miller and Cooper were told in an attempt to shut up Joseph Wilson. While intent is harder to prove, has anyone suggested Libby told these folks to cause Wilson anything but pain? The former ambassador was publicly suggesting the President was a liar, and he needed to be shut down.

There are a few untold stories here, but here's the one that seems the most massive of them all: this is so stupid! Allowing columnist Novak to publish the name of an undercover CIA operative, and the fact that two high administrative officials had verified Plame's identity...doesn't that just say to law officials: "You want me? Come and get me!!" It reminds me of Gary Hart's catch me if you can scenario about a decades and a half ago.

If outing Plame was not a crime, it was oh-so-very-close to one. And that a pair of high-ranking administration officials are giving out a CIA operative's name because her husband disagrees with the President is an instant national scandal!

And herein lies the interesting point to me: there is such hubris...such a blatant example of pride getting in the way of common sense. Answer me this: after the Novak column, why in hell would there not be an investigation? Why in hell would that investigation not uncover that everyone points fingers in a couple of directions only, and that their stories all match up?

The old saying applies: Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And when your party is controlling the house and the senate and the presidency and the supreme court, you dine on hubris with garlic, and vanity under glass.

Why else would anyone make such an idiot decision as to out the CIA operative wife of the man who's been on Meet the Press to tell everyone your President lied in the State of the Nation address? The untold story in this matter is how stupid a decision it was in the first place.

What kind of stain does this put on the Bush administration? They swept into office early in 2001 claiming they would bring back honor and dignity to the White House. It appears that after nearly bankrupting the nation, taking us into and unnecessary war and turning most of the world against us, they didn't find time to work on that honor and dignity thing. Here's an interesting new poll, an excerpt from which follows:

The poll, conducted Friday night and yesterday, found that 55 percent of the public believes the Libby case indicates wider problems "with ethical wrongdoing" in the White House, while 41 percent believes it was an "isolated incident." And by a 3 to 1 ratio, 46 percent to 15 percent, Americans say the level of honesty and ethics in the government has declined rather than risen under Bush.

The man and the party who had an opportunity to do good things and to put a shine back on politics and dirtied it more than a stained blue dress ever could.