By John DeSio

“Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?” That was what juror Denis Collins, a former journalist, asked after he and his cohorts found I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, guilty of various counts of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the leak of the name of Valerie Plame, former covert CIA operative, after her husband, Joe Wilson, published an op-ed critical of the Bush administration’s claims that Iraq had pursued nuclear material in Africa.

It’s a convoluted tail, and Libby’s charges do not have to do with the Plame/Wilson affair per se. The focus of the charges revolve around the notion that Libby lied to special investigator Patrick Fitzgerald when he was asked about Plame and Wilson, how he came to learn of her status at the CIA and just who he told about it and when during Fitzgerald’s initial investigation.

No one has been tried for actually outing Plame, but many, like Collins, are wondering why it happened. After the trial, jurors said they felt sympathy for Libby, adding that he appeared to be the fall guy for Cheney and top Bush aide and Republican mastermind Karl Rove. But the chances of a further investigation appear remote. Fitzgerald has stated that the case is closed, and many prominent Republican interests are calling on the President to pardon Libby anyway.

Already the fight over a Libby pardon is fierce on both sides. “It's about time someone in the Bush Administration has been held accountable for the campaign to manipulate intelligence and discredit war critics,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “Lewis Libby has been convicted of perjury, but his trial revealed deeper truths about Vice President Cheney’s role in this sordid affair. Now President Bush must pledge not to pardon Libby for his criminal conduct.” On the “pardon him now” side, we have prominent conservative journal National Review. “A good man has paid a very heavy price for the Left’s fevers, the media’s scandal-mongering and President Bush’s failure to unify his own administration. Justice demands that Bush issue a pardon and lower the curtain on an embarrassing drama that shouldn’t have lasted beyond its opening act,” they wrote in an editorial just after the verdict was announced.

Whatever the pros and cons of a Libby pardon may be, the greatest risk such a move presents is the tremendous damage that it would cause to Republicans in 2008. Libby was not on trial for murder, and people have been pardoned for greater sins. But with the Republican image already in tatters in many respects following sweeping Democratic victories in the 2006 mid-terms, the last thing a Republican presidential candidate wants to do right now is defend a Bush pardon of one of his political allies following such a high profile, politically charged trail. Top Democrats might publicly demand that justice be served, thus forcing Libby to do his time. But quietly, Democrats must be secretly hoping that Bush goes for the pardon. Democrats would be able to move from city to city forcing Republicans to defend the move. The Bush crony machine is alive and well, they would say, and the GOP would be hard pressed to counter such charges. If Bush is dead set on pardoning Libby, he might want to wait until December 2008, for the sake of his fellow Republicans.

Others have wondered if now, following this flap, Cheney might resign. Fat chance. Cheney has survived all criticism so far, and even his serious health problems have not prevented him from staying at Bush’s side. He has no future political ambitions, and short of a guilty conviction, there seems to be nothing that would actually force him from his seat. And given Fitzgerald’s very clear message that no further investigation is underway, any repercussions affecting Cheney are becoming less and less likely.

Will a journalist ever have an anonymous government source again? Including Russert, 10 of the 19 witnesses against Libby were journalists. Thanks to the Fitzgerald investigation, every time a high-ranking government official whispers something into a writer’s ear—especially something important—he or she will have to wonder if that moment might come back to haunt him or her. Only the most banal insider news will be leaked to journalists in the coming weeks and months, perhaps longer. And even then, any leaks will likely be handled under the cover of the darkest shadows.