Does Fitz want Dick?

I don't know why some progressives felt disappointed by Fitzmas. There are many good after-action reports on the Libby indictment, and much of the commentary argues persuasively that Fitzgerald's real target was and is Dick Cheney.

I commend to your attention this analysis by Marty Aussenberg ("gadfly"), a lawyer and former SEC enforcement official:

Under the applicable federal rule, indictments are only required to be a "plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged." The rule goes further to say indictments "need not contain a formal introduction or conclusion."

The Libby indictment goes considerably beyond what the rule requires, or even envisions. It is what's called, in courthouse vernacular, a "speaking indictment." The purpose of a "speaking" filing, in any court proceeding, is to show the other side some of the stronger cards you're holding in your hand, and this indictment is no exception.

Josh Marshall makes more or less the same point. A lot of the stuff in that indictment just has no real reason to be, except to function as a signal of things to come.

The indictment, gadfly argues, includes all of the elements of an espionage act violation. So why wasn't Libby charged with that?

No, the real reason to lay out as much factual detail as he did was for Fitz to show the world (and in particular, the world within the White House) that he has the goods, and that he won't hesitate to drop the dime on some additional malefactors, particularly, Cheney. Let's face it: Libby is only the consigliere to Cheney's don. Even though the threat of spending 30 years in the pokey will be a powerful incentive for Libby to cut some kind of deal that might include turning on his boss, the possibility of the additional charges of revealing classified information, particularly against Cheney, is even more powerful since, presumably, Cheney does't appear to be at risk of a truth-telling-related indictment.

firedoglake has more along these lines, with a special emphasis on the discomforts awaiting Scooter in the Big House.

But here is the big question: Does Fitz want the cooperation from Libby? Or is he using Libby to widen that crack in the foundation -- and go after someone else who was on the brink of spilling what Fitz needs? Someone who is even more afraid of prison than Libby, and a whole lot more craven and less loyal in terms of thinking of "what's in it for me"?

Several have suggested that Tenet narced to Fitxgerald shortly before resigning as DCI.

All that said, I'm still not sure whether Dick can, in fact, be gotten. So far as I know, Cheney spoke to no reporters. Cheney and Scooter were free to chat all they wanted behind closed doors about who's who in the CIA, since both men were (obviously) cleared.

On the other hand, Libby could squeal. He could reveal that his boss orchestrated a "get Wilson" strategy. He could even start blabbing about the conspiracy surrounding the Niger fakes -- which, I believe, is the crime that Fitzgerald really wants to dig into.

So the argument comes down to Libby's willingness to withstand pressure. We can be certain of this much: This man does not want to do time, and his "bad memory" defense is laughable. Literally. Reporters guffawed when Fitzgerald gave a dead-pan rendition of Libby's inane story.

Bush can pardon Libby. But will the President take that step?

As I see it, he's facing three possible futures: 1. Deal with the firestorm which would follow a pardon, 2. Deal with the bigger firestorm of a trial, or 3. Deal with the unendurable firestorm resulting from an indictment of the VP. The first option must seem more palatable.

On the other hand -- is Cheney, in fact, the real target? On Friday, Fitzgerald was spotted taking a meeting with James Sharp, Dubya's personal lawyer. Bet you wish you were a fly on that wall...