October 28th, it all ends.

And that’s just the beginning.

By next Friday Chicago District Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald will conclude his investigation of the Wilson/Plame leak, with indictments likely to follow. Some rumors have the count of indicted individuals at up to 18, while others think no charges will emerge. The truth is likely somewhere in between.

To recap: the CIA sent former Ambassador Joe Wilson to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq attempted to purchase yellowcake, a processed uranium material that can be used to make nuclear weapons. Wilson found the charges were false, and later the source memos were exposed as fakes.

Still, the Bush administration used the attempted purchase as a key piece of evidence that Saddam Hussein was pursuing WMD technology, and made the smoking gun of a mushroom cloud a major plank in the push for the Iraq War. The culmination was in Bush’s State of the Union address and the famous “16 words” that alluded to the attempted purchase. The administration later retracted the charges and apologized.

After appearing as a talking head arguing against the war, Wilson wrote an op-ed article for the New York Times detailing his trip to Niger and his findings. He concluded by saying that the administration was either incompetent or lying to its public.

A short time later Robert Novak wrote a piece for Newsweek insinuating that Wilson’s trip was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, CIA WMD covert operative Valerie Plame. Novak said he learned about Plame from two senior White House officials, and then everything spun out of control.

The leaking of a covert operative’s identity is a felony. It ruins the work of the spy, and it outs any connected proprietary businesses. (A proprietary business is for all intents and purposes a regular place of work, except it is CIA-owned and used to gather intelligence about whichever financial sector it is in. They take many years to establish, and it is at least a decade – and often longer – before they produce intelligence fruit.)

Worst of all, the leaking of a spook’s identity puts her life at risk, as well as all the fellow CIA operatives with which she has known contact.

In short, the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name destroyed her career, as well as the cover of a 30 year old business that was the CIA’s best asset in Saudi Arabia.

Wilson took this act as a deliberate attempt to discredit his Niger investigation, and to act as a warning to future whistleblowers. Infuriated, he pressed forward with his charges; when the CIA also asked for an investigation, the matter was handed to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Given his connections to the principals, Ashcroft recused himself and the case fell to Fitzgerald. His investigation has included the interviews of numerous White House officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney and President Bush (both hired outside attorneys for advice instead of using White House counsel, so as to retain attorney-client privilege).

Although at first White House advisor Karl Rove and the Vice President’s Chief of Staff Scooter Libby were told they were not subjects of Fitzgerald’s probe, in recent weeks that has changed and both are facing possible prosecution. Originally it was thought that Fitzgerald would make a charge directly related to the leak, but the list of indictable actions has expanded.

In addition to the leaking of a covert op, possible charges now include perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy, to name a few. Rove in particular should be worried about perjury; he has appeared before the grand jury four times, and according to sources familiar with the secret proceedings, he has reversed himself at least once, and withheld information during his initial testimonies. Similar charges are emerging regarding Libby.

The conspiracy charge would stem from the uncovering of a heretofore unknown committee, the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). This secret panel of insiders was started by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, and was charged with spinning perception to make the future Iraq War sellable. Allegedly, according to notes handed over to Fitzgerald from the group’s meetings and exchanged emails, they were discussing how to neutralize the Wilson problem months before his op-ed.

The case is getting breathless: early on its potential was known, but now the comparisons to Watergate are growing both more strident and more frequent. Newspapers around the States are giving the investigation daily front page treatment, and headlines are talking about (officially denied) strategic meetings hashing out a post-Rove – and possibly post-Cheney – White House.

Some commentators are calling this “The Most Important Case in American History.” Others foresee a coming constitutional crisis, should certain threads be followed to possible conclusions. Specifically, observers have noticed that Fitzgerald has done some investigating beyond the leak – into the forgery of the initial Niger documents.

This is one other reason the White House is so nervous; Fitzgerald has been given authority to uncover any wrongdoing he might find; unlike the occasional deflating Supreme Court rulings that throw cases out on technicalities of jurisdiction, this Grand Jury has free reign to legally explore the entire web this leak emerged from.

Bush’s unusually tight ship is springing leaks as opponents and non-ideologues within the administration smell blood in the water and are letting loose with years of grouses that had, until now, been successfully bottled up. Everything is still being done anonymously, making it difficult to tell fact from fiction. More than likely, though, some accusations will prove true; the floodgates have opened, and the reverberations of this trial are likely to be felt in entirely unrelated areas.

Juicy, isn’t it? For details about the participants and their roles, use the links to the left of this opener to guide your way through the tangled web of, perhaps, the end of the Bush administration’s effectiveness.

Robert Fitzgerald

Perhaps the only person coming away from this smelling like roses is the Chicago District Attorney. He is extremely non-partisan – originally registered as an Independent, he changed to Non-Affiliated when he learned the Independents were a party – and thus far no one on either aisle has accused him of favoritism. His background helps here – the Chicago office he oversees is investigating both Illinois Republicans and Chicago Democrats with equal vigor on a variety of accusations.

Fitzgerald’s reputation is that of a thorough, hard-nosed, and fair prosecutor. He’s also renowned for his attention to detail; he knows the most obscure passages of all related documents better than anyone else involved in his cases. Fellow lawyers all speak of him in glowing terms.

Some journalists have complained because he jailed reporters for not ratting on their sources; it’s been said he’s ruined the gentlemen’s agreement that journalist-source communication is as sacrosanct as attorney-client privilege. In truth, you can’t really blame Fitzgerald for playing the game by its current rules; blame the Supreme Court, if anything, for refusing to hear the constitutional case.

Some Republicans have complained he may seek out other charges should the leak case prove untenable. They say there can be no cover-up to investigate if no crime was committed. Leaving aside Fitzgerald’s wide mandate, this is a weak argument as well. Crimes come in many forms, and they aren’t necessarily predicated by earlier crime.

What’s more, the complaint is based on a number of hypotheticals; the likelihood of all of them coming true is slight. First, no leak charges could be made, and second, very specific other indictments would have to be handed out. The chances of both happening are remote.

Another complaint media members have is Fitzgerald runs an extremely tight-lipped inquiry. As one observer noted, if he kept his cards any closer to the chest, they’d be in his underwear. Nor have his helpers been forthcoming.

This has made investigating the case exceedingly difficult, with the best information coming from friends’ guesstimates and lawyers brought on to consult about various details. In short, we’re all left reading tea leaves. Frustrating as that is, you can’t really see this as a negative. For the District Attorney, it speaks well of his no-nonsense approach, his non-partisanship, and his professionalism and respect throughout the community.

Much has been made of his modest beginnings, the son of a New York doorman. Luckily, in America competence can trump all other factors, no matter your background. Fitzgerald is universally recognized as one the most competent attorneys in the business.

This likely spells trouble for anyone he might indict. He will only do such a thing if he clearly sees wrongdoing – he’s not going to try and trip suspects up on small technicalities. Politically, he is nearly unassailable, making it very difficult to spin his findings.

Conversely, if he clears participants of charges, even the fiercest critics will realize there isn’t a good case. Should he avoid indicting any major players, the White House can let out a long sigh and immediately put this all behind them. They’ll probably receive a bump in their approval, and might make it through other current scandals relatively unscathed by virtue of having been cleared in this most serious one.

The Reporters

An early unsourced revelation in this case was the number of reporters used in the White House’s attack on Wilson and Plame: six. Is it true? Maybe, but we’re not even decided on whether a leak occurred or not. Still, that factoid has come back to bite one of our journalists recently.

Before getting there, let’s examine the role of the media in the case. The Plame game was set in motion with an article by Robert Novak, who cited two White House insiders as his sources. He’s been interviewed by Fitzgerald and has complied well enough that he’s personally in the clear.

A plethora of other reporters were interviewed – some who wrote about Plame early on, others who seemed to know who-said-what well before the inquiry even started. However, the two reporters most famously involved are now Tim Cooper and Judith Miller. Both refused to divulge their sources, and they also refused to reveal any of the information involved in the investigation.

Fitzgerald sued them for contempt of court, and the journalists lost each appeal until the Supreme Court refused to hear their case. Both were heading to jail for the duration of the grand jury inquiry.

At the literal 11th hour (late the night before his term would begin), Cooper received an unexpected phone call from the man who we later learned was his source, Karl Rove. Rove gave Cooper permission to talk, likely after receiving pressure from Fitzgerald. Cooper testified that he learned of Plame through Rove before the story broke, but it appears he wouldn’t say that Rove specifically used her name.

Miller received no such governor’s pardon, and she served 85 days in jail until a personal letter from Scooter Libby – her source – told her she was free to testify. At Fitzgerald’s request Libby had earlier written a blanket letter giving permission to reporters to speak, but Miller didn’t accept it. She believed it had been made under duress, and in addition it wasn’t addressed to her and thus she didn’t feel she could take it as a release from her agreement.

Instead, she eventually received a remarkably personal letter from Libby, and although this one was also in response to Fitzgerald’s pressure, she accepted. The note was odd – it said things like “You are missed,” referred to how no witnesses had refuted his testimony nor damaged him – and how he expected that to continue – and used vague metaphors employing aspen root systems to represent sticking together. All in all, the letter made him look bad.

In addition, he didn’t get the result he wanted, as Miller’s testimony called his own into doubt on a few counts, as you can see in the section talking about the leak. Miller herself is in some trouble with her employer, The New York Times.

Miller’s testimony is the one we know the most about, as she wrote a detailed account of it for the Times. However, she is having problems with her editor, who asked her in 2003 if she was one of the six reporters involved in the case. She said she was not. Having read her testimony and heard her account he believes he was misled, and is quite angry.

The paper had taken a strong stand defending its reporter, believing that she wasn’t deeply involved and journalistic integrity came before caving to legal chases. Now that the editors know her testimony was actually central to the case, they’re mad. They stuck their necks out protecting her, and in the process damaged the reputation of the paper – a reputation that has taken a beating in recent years.

Miller is currently on a leave of absence; few believe she’ll ever work at the Times again.

The Leak

According to the letter of the law, leaking a covert op’s identity is only a felony if three conditions are met: 1, the leaker was aware that the information was not common knowledge; 2, the leaker intentionally gave the information out – this requires motive, such as discrediting a critic; 3, the leaker used the person’s name.

For this reason, Rove and Libby have been explicit in talking about their information-sharing, once they stopped denying any involvement. Time and again they have stressed they said “Wilson’s wife” was a CIA op, but never used Plame’s name. Although this sort of leak is covered under the intent of the law, the letter provides enough legal wiggle room that Rove and/or Libby might be able to get out of it. Since they never “named” the source – indeed, they both claim they didn’t know her name until reporters informed them during conversations – they might not be charged on this count.

In addition, there have been some half-hearted attempts by both to claim they thought Plame was an analyst. If she was, her name would be on the public record and talking about her role wouldn’t be illegal. Hurting that argument is the fact that Novak knew she was a covert op and referred to her as such in his article. As that’s classified information, how would he know without White House insiders being privy to the same knowledge?

Although the most obvious charge, leaking Plame’s identity might be the hardest to prove in court. So much of this law is dependent upon private knowledge and motivations that are difficult to translate into fact.

That said, many people are overlooking a provision in the espionage act which allows greater latitude for prosecution. The bylaw calls for conviction of anyone who intentionally does anything that damages America’s intelligence service. If Fitzgerald pursues the espionage act angle, he know longer needs to prove a name was used; he simply has to believe that Rove, Libby et al knew Plame was a covert agent, and they leaked her identity anyway.

Perjury, Cover-ups, and/or Interference

Libby claims he found out about Plame’s covert status through conversations with journalists; where they got their information in this scenario isn’t known. Rove says he found out through speaking with Libby and later from reporters. The problem is this story isn’t checking out: Tim Russert of MSNBC was named as a source; Russert has been shocked by this assertion, claiming he didn’t know anything about the story until it broke.

On top of that, in Judith Miller’s notebook from her conversations with Libby, she wrote both “Valerie Flame” and “Veronica Wilson,” both apparent references to Plame. Since they are in a different section of the notebook Miller believes she didn’t get the name from Libby, although she can’t remember where the information came from. The fact that “Flame” was misspelled suggests it was a name she heard, not read, and most likely for the first time. The dates of her conversations with Libby also doesn’t match with Libby’s own testified time line.

Miller has testified that Libby “wanted” to talk about Wilson and Plame, and that she first learned that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA through Libby (though she doesn’t remember if Libby told her that Plame was a covert agent).

Circumstantially, Libby and Rove look like they’re lying; who is more likely to have top secret information, White House insiders or journalists? A more damning blow has come from subpoenaed notes Libby handed over.

According to his notes, Libby learned about Plame from Vice President Dick Cheney on June 12, 2003, over a month before Novak’s story broke. If this leaked information proves true, we know he lied, and perhaps Dick Cheney did as well (the contents of his testimony are largely unknown). In addition, by withholding this information he would have interfered with the inquiry, an indictable offence.

Rove has his own problems; in addition to the failed journalist ruse, there are testimonies from reporters who say that he told them about Plame well before the story broke.

In fact, both Libby and Rove allegedly face documented evidence that they knew about Plame well before they claim they did, rendering their innocent bystander defense moot. Worse than knowing before the fact was lying about it on the stand. It certainly suggests a cover-up was in the works, and if Fitzgerald believes that the mistakes were more than simple memory failures, there’s a very good chance he will bring charges.

Conspiracy!

In the process of investigating this leak, Fitzgerald uncovered a previously-unknown cabal within the administration, the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). Created by Andrew Card, its membership included hot names such as Rove, Libby, and Cheney. The job of the WHIG group was to spin news on or related to Iraq in such a way as to make war palatable to the American public.

Notes from their meetings show they were talking about the Wilson “problem” months before he wrote his op-ed. Although the details are fuzzy, if their notes reveal a conspiracy to do harm to Wilson or his credibility, then the intelligence offences need not come into play. Should indictments be brought on this front, it will be devastating for the White House.

Cheney and Bush

The famous question “What did the President know and when did he know it?” is likely to be uttered often in the coming weeks. Through Libby’s notes, there is proof that Cheney knew about Plame in advance of this story breaking, and he is likely Libby’s primary source.

The Vice-President supposedly learned of her when he questioned former CIA Director George Tenet about Wilson and his background. If any of the various charges lead to Cheney being involved in a cover-up or conspiracy, he will be in deep trouble. The current scuttlebutt in Washington has one popular scenario in which Cheney is forced to resign and Condoleezza Rice ascends to be the new V.P.

It gets better: there is a deep rumor that runs through a few sources – most prominently a former assistant to Powell, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson – but it has better legs and more credibility than most. According to this rumor, former Secretary of State Colin Powell related to Senator John McCain a conversation he had aboard Air Force One with the President and Vice President.

According to Wilkerson, Powell told McCain that he informed Cheney and Bush of Plame during a briefing, long before the op-ed, the outing, or the furor that has come since. After that it’s alleged Powell said he observed Cheney become obsessed with the Wilson-Plame link.

If this is true, and if Powell testified to that effect before the grand jury, the President himself will be in a position remarkably similar to Nixon’s during Watergate. Where that would end is the biggest question percolating in political circles.

A slightly looser accusation has been leveled by Thomas DeFrank, a writer and former friend of the Bush Presidency (he was almost chosen as the Pentagon Spokesman). DeFrank reports that a White House official told him of Bush’s displeasure with Rove over the Plame leak case. He wasn’t angry it happened, the official said – Bush knew of Rove’s penchant for anonymously leaking damaging info in just this sort of manner.

Apparently, Bush’s anger was provoked by the sloppy and shoddy way the smear was done. Allegedly, it wasn’t the act, but the execution. If true, then Bush most certainly knew, even while he was defending Rove in public.

Bear in mind, an indictment of Cheney remains fairly unlikely, and proving Bush’s direct involvement is an even more remote outcome. Still, both are much more possible than the administration can be comfortable with.

The Really Wild Card

What if Fitzgerald has found proof of tampering on a much deeper level than a simple leak? What if he’s uncovered White House involvement in the original forged Nigerian documents that initiated Wilson’s mission?

Don’t laugh. The District Attorney has been investigating a robbery of the Nigerian Embassy in Italy. Oddly, the only things stolen were official stamps and stationary – the exact material used in the forgery.

What’s more, Rove is friends with Ralph Ledeen, an aggressive neo-con who favors what he calls “creative destruction” in waging political wars. He is on record saying Rove told him, “Anytime you have a good idea, tell me.”

Ledeen, by turn, has close ties with Italian intelligence. Italy’s Intelligence Director, Nicolo Pollari, and he are political operators cut from the same cloth.

Not long after the embassy robbery in Rome, a meeting between Ledeen, some fellow neo-cons, Italy’s Defense Minister, and Pollari, took place. Soon after the fake papers emerged.

Most likely Fitzgerald simply has been doing a thorough job and investigating every thread, as he is famous for. However, if he found evidence of White House participation in the forgery, then the furor over the Plame case will seem an interesting side note when all is said and done, important more for where it led than what it was.

Conclusion

No one expects this to end well for the Bush administration. At least one major persona is likely to suffer an indictment, and will most likely be forced to step aside in that event. By Friday night we’ll have a better idea, and we’ll see if any of the rumored Republicans on the inside track to replace key players actually do so.

Watchers of the Bush administration see this case not as an isolated one, but just the most heated battle in the political war over Iraq and the case made for invasion. As the war deteriorates, criticism of all aspects – including Wilsongate – will escalate.

Whether any amount of damage control will stop the bleeding is uncertain: the Republicans are in the unusual position of losing control of the political equation. There is no amount of influence peddling that will stop these proceedings, just as the administration couldn’t stop Katrina from making landfall. If things go wrong, we could be looking at the last days of the Bush White House, whether literally or simply in practice.