The Scandal that (Probably) Wasn't There

When allegations that the Bush administration had deliberately outed the identity of a covert CIA operative for base political reasons first arose two years ago, I initially thought of all the wild and outlandish charges levied at the administration, this one might actually have merit. On the face of it, the anonymous administration official's leak to columnist Robert Novak smacked of Nixonian vindictiveness. Cultivating a covert network of agents can take years of hard, dangerous work, and that work should not be threatened for any political reason whatsoever. Too much can be at stake.

Since then, all of Joe Wilson's (the husband of the CIA employee) actions have confirmed my initial impression that he is something of a buffoon. He has been thoroughly discredited, both by the Senate Intelligence Committee and his own contradictory statements, but this, of course, does not excuse what the administration may have done. If the more innocent justification (that Rove really didn't know that Wilson's wife was a former covert agent, and that he was merely telling the press that the sanction for the Niger trip had not come from the White House) is true, then this whole thing is just careless politics. If Rove and another unnamed official were acting maliciously and knowingly, however, then they should face the consequences.

The first scenario seems more likely to me at this point, but we'll see. In the meantime, the fever swamps of the Left are salivating over the prospect that the hated Rove might be charged, or at least be forced to resign. They are overreaching in their attacks, as usual. Read the vitriol being spewed toward Rove from peace-loving leftists; liberals are falling over themselves in their hyperbolic condemnations of Rove's supposed "treason," because this gives them an opportunity to act as if they actually care about national security. But ask yourself: When was the last time liberals spoke out so strongly against, say, Islamic terrorists?