ANALYSIS / In public's mind, White House is guilty / Its campaign to discredit its detractors will be remembered after Libby is forgotten

** RETRANSMISSION FOR ALTERNATE CROP ** Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby walks past a line of photographers as he prepares to give a news conference outside federal court in Washington, Tuesday, March 6, 2007, after the jury reached its guilty verdict in Libby's perjury trial. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) less ** RETRANSMISSION FOR ALTERNATE CROP ** Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby walks past a line of photographers as he prepares to give a news conference outside federal court in Washington, Tuesday, ... more Photo: Gerald Herbert Photo: Gerald Herbert Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close ANALYSIS / In public's mind, White House is guilty / Its campaign to discredit its detractors will be remembered after Libby is forgotten 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

2007-03-07 04:00:00 PDT Washington -- People will soon forget the details of the Lewis "Scooter" Libby case, if they knew them in the first place.

Whether the vice president's former chief of staff gets 25 years in prison or even a presidential pardon after his conviction Tuesday for lying and obstructing justice is of little consequence to most Americans.

What will endure is damning testimony that confirms the public's worst fears about the Bush administration's behavior during the lead-up to the war in Iraq and its truthfulness since then.

The monthlong trial established beyond a reasonable doubt that White House officials at the highest level conducted a campaign to discredit those who questioned their declarations about Iraq's weapon capabilities -- declarations that turned out to be wrong.

And the testimony showed that President Bush either was lying about the White House's role in outing a CIA officer at the center of the scandal or was kept in the dark by top aides who defied his orders to come forward.

"I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information," Bush declared in September 2003. "If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know about it, and we'll take the appropriate action. ... I want to know who the leakers are."

Testimony at the trial made plain that when Bush spoke those words, Karl Rove, his top political aide; Ari Fleischer, his press secretary; Richard Armitage, the No. 2 man at the State Department; and Libby had each discussed the matter, on background, with reporters.

Prosecutors apparently did not feel they had enough evidence to prove that the leaks were criminal, and Libby's conviction was limited to his dishonesty. Yet the trial raised questions about who directed the leaks and why it took a federal investigation to uncover information that apparently was widely known inside the administration.

"The trial has been very embarrassing to the White House," said Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University who has been closely monitoring the case.

"This is one of the most closed administrations in modern history, overtly hostile to any transparency over how it operates," Turley said. "The trial riveted the city because it gave a rare insight into the Bush White House. And what we saw was hardly flattering to either the president or the vice president."

Bush watched news of the verdict on television in the Oval Office and was "saddened for Scooter Libby and his family," according to White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. Vice President Dick Cheney issued a two-sentence statement that said he was "disappointed with the verdict."

Libby showed no emotion as the verdict was read and declined to talk to reporters as he left the courthouse.

"We have every confidence Mr. Libby ultimately will be vindicated," Libby's attorney Theodore Wells told reporters, pledging to push for a new trial or to appeal the verdict if that effort fails. "We believe Mr. Libby is totally innocent and that he didn't do anything wrong."

Jurors spent 10 days dissecting the testimony of 19 witnesses and hundreds of pages of documents to determine whether Libby had lied to federal investigators and a grand jury about his role in the leaks or had simply suffered -- as he asserted -- from a poor memory.

The complexities of the case made it difficult to follow even for many Washingtonians with a stake in the outcome.

Libby was charged with impeding an investigation into whether anyone violated a little-known law that makes it a crime to disclose information about a covert agent with the intention of exposing the agent's identity.

The circumstances involved former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger in 2002 to gather evidence regarding allegations that Saddam Hussein was purchasing enriched uranium and other materials there needed to build a nuclear bomb in Iraq. Wilson, dispatched by the CIA, quickly determined that the charges were not credible and informed the administration. He was surprised to hear Bush repeat the allegations during his 2003 State of the Union Address and wrote an op-ed piece in New York Times in the summer of 2003 titled "What I didn't find in Africa."

"Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat," Wilson wrote.

Within days of the article's appearance, administration officials, including Libby, began telling reporters that Wilson's wife, Valerie, worked for the CIA, which was classified information. The leaks appear to have been motivated by Cheney's concern about reports that his office had dispatched Joseph Wilson to Niger. Apparently they were intended to undermine Wilson's credibility by making it appear that he had been sent on a junket by his wife, who was known by her maiden name, Valerie Plame. Some Bush critics have suggested that Valerie Wilson's identity was leaked to ruin her career in retribution for her husband's outspoken criticism of the administration.

Libby told a grand jury that he simply repeated information told to him by Tim Russert, NBC Washington bureau chief. Russert testified that such a conversation never took place. Libby did not testify at his own trial, but his lawyers insisted his misstatements were the result of a bad memory, not any intention to deceive.

In the end, the jury found Libby guilty of one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and one count of lying to the FBI. Sentencing is scheduled for June 5. Libby faces up to 25 years in prison, but experts said it is unlikely he will receive a sentence longer than several years.

The felony convictions are likely to further erode the White House's credibility on Iraq, which is already at an all-time low.

Bush has never reconciled his public statements demanding to know the identity of the leakers with evidence that showed they included some of his top aides. If Bush didn't already know their identity, his most trusted advisers were willfully defying his instructions.

"We could clarify this thing very quickly if people who have got solid evidence would come forward and speak out. And I hope they would," Bush declared to no avail in 2003.

Among those who likely had a good knowledge of the leakers was Cheney, who discussed the identity of Wilson's wife with Libby a few weeks before it became public.

The trial showed the extent to which senior Bush aides, including Cheney, were alarmed at Wilson's public rebuke of their assertions about Iraq's nuclear weapons. Among the evidence submitted was a copy of Wilson's op-ed piece with Cheney's notes scribbled in the margin demanding to know if Wilson's wife had sent him there on a "junket."

"Clearly Cheney understood immediately that this article could produce a cascading political crisis for the White House," Turley said of the evidence. "The trial revealed a surprising level of both hysteria and hypocrisy in the White House."

The White House was not the only institution tarnished in the trial. The witnesses included at least nine prominent Washington journalists, whose testimony made plain the cozy relationship between some top administration officials and the reporters who cover them.

"This is a quintessential Washington morality play where there are no redeeming characters," Turley said.

The Libby verdict

What happened: Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was convicted of lying and obstructing the investigation into how the name of CIA official Valerie Wilson - wife of an Iraq war critic - was leaked to reporters in 2003.

Counts: Libby was found guilty of one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and one count of making false statements to the FBI. He was acquitted on one count of making false statements to the FBI.

Punishment: At his sentencing June 5, he could receive a total of 25 years in prison and could be fined as much as $1 million.

Case chronology

2003

Jan. 28: President Bush asserts in his State of the Union address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

March 19-20: The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq begins.

May 6: New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof reports that a former ambassador, whom he does not name, had been sent to Niger in 2002 and reported to the CIA and State Department well before Bush's speech that the uranium story was based on obviously forged documents.

May 29: Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, asks Marc Grossman, an undersecretary of state, for information about the ambassador's travel to Niger. Grossman later tells Libby that Joseph Wilson was the former ambassador.

June 11 or 12: Grossman tells Libby that Wilson's wife works at the CIA and that State Department personnel are saying Wilson's wife was involved in planning the trip. A senior CIA officer gives him similar information, as does Cheney's top press aide, Cathie Martin, who had learned it from CIA spokesman Bill Harlow.

June 12: Cheney advises Libby that Wilson's wife works at the CIA.

June 13: Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage tells Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward that Wilson's wife works for the CIA.

June 23: Libby tells New York Times reporter Judith Miller that Wilson's wife might work at a CIA bureau. Libby denies saying that.

July 7: Libby meets with then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. Fleischer says Libby tells him that Wilson's wife works at the CIA and that the information is "hush hush." Libby denies that.

July 8: Libby meets with Miller. She recalls Libby saying he believes Wilson's wife works for the CIA. Libby denies saying that.

July 8: Syndicated newspaper columnist Robert Novak interviews Armitage, who tells him that Wilson's wife works for the CIA. Novak says this was confirmed the next day by White House political adviser Karl Rove.

July 10: Libby calls Tim Russert, NBC Washington bureau chief, to complain about a colleague's news coverage. At the end of the conversation, Libby says, Russert tells him that "all the reporters know" that Wilson's wife works at the CIA. Libby says he was surprised to hear it. Russert denies saying it.

July 11: Fleischer tells two reporters that Wilson's wife works for the CIA. Rove tells Time magazine's Matthew Cooper that Wilson's wife works for the

CIA.

July 12: Libby confirms to Cooper that he has heard that Wilson's wife was involved in sending Wilson on the trip. Libby also speaks to Miller and discusses Wilson's wife and says that she works at the CIA. Libby claims he told Cooper and Miller he only knew about Valerie Wilson from talking to other reporters.

July 14: Novak reports that Wilson's wife is a CIA operative on weapons of mass destruction and that two senior administration officials, whom Novak did not name, said she suggested sending her husband to Niger to investigate the uranium story.

Sept. 26: A criminal investigation is authorized to determine who leaked Valerie Wilson's identity to reporters. A short time later, Armitage tells investigators that he may have inadvertently leaked her identity to Woodward.

Dec. 30: U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is named to head the leak investigation.

2004

January: A grand jury begins investigating the possibility of federal criminal law violations.

March 5 and March 24: Libby testifies before the grand jury, saying that he forgot the information about Valerie Wilson working for the CIA until he heard it from Russert.

2005

Oct. 28: Libby is indicted on five counts: one of obstruction of justice and two counts each of false statement and perjury.

2006

Sept. 7: Armitage admits he leaked Valerie Wilson's identity to Novak and Woodward. Armitage says he did not realize her job was covert.

2007

Jan. 16: Libby's trial begins with jury selection.

March 6: Jurors return guilty verdicts on four of five counts.

Associated Press