UBERMAN AND EVERYMAN

EVERYMAN AND UBERMAN are the coming defenses for Scooter Libby and his like now being put forth as his name floats in the news like driftwood headed over the dam of the politically damned.  Before Libby reaches that dam, the dam will likely break and the flood will wash away the White House white wash of what was going on in all things Iraqi, WHIG, and Plame.  Twins stories now will be a pincer rear guard action to save somehow Scooter Libby and even more his bosses. [story]

But friends and associates said Mr. Libby is not at heart a political animal. They suggest that whatever legal problems he faces from his role in pushing back at criticism by a former ambassador, Joseph C. Wilson IV, of the administration's use of pre-war intelligence about Iraq's weapons programs, he was acting not as a political hatchet man but in defense of ideas and policies he believed in.

SCOOTER IS EVERYMAN caught like anyone by events beyond him.  Everyman Scooter acted not with animus, even though he watched Joe Wilson all day and night on television.  Read that as Scooter watches television, just not Oprah.  Oh, and Scooter would just love to kick back, hit the slopes, and knock back some shots of tequila. But he can’t.  Because he is serving his country.  Or not.  Who said patriotism is the last defense of the scoundrel?

OF ALL PEOPLE John Dean has a surprising take on this.  John Dean who saw a cancer growing on the presidency in domestic realm of Nixon’s misrule seems to afford the likes of Libby far more leeway when the policy and politics deal with national security fought over a war in a far away land now brought home in headlines hot and heavy with foreboding for Joe Wilson’s foes.  The attack on Wilson to Dean could just be politics and policy, not crime. So says Dean.

But national security is a very gray area. Was the Bush/Cheney White House operating in the best interest of the country, or did they have a private agenda (oil fields in Iraq)? Did Cheney, Karl Rove, and Scooter Libby believe they had national security reasons to discredit Wilson's claims, and act accordingly? This is an area where there is no law, and it compounds the assessment of the actions of those involved.

It is difficult to envision Patrick Fitzgerald prosecuting anyone, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney, who believed they were acting for reasons of national security. While hindsight may find their judgment was wrong, and there is no question their tactics were very heavy-handed and dangerous, I am not certain that they were acting from other than what they believed to be reasons of national security. They were selling a war they felt needed to be undertaken.

WELCOME TO THE WORLD of the Uberman.  Here is a story of real men in the real world in real time with no time to lose in their bid to save the world.  Everything must be allowed for these men to save the world. It is impossible to reconcile this realpolitik John Dean with the Dean who spoke of a cancer.  This sounds more like the Nixon who said about crime that when the President does it, it is not a crime.

DEAN HERE SPEAKS about the intent of Cheney et al as being a reason they should  not be charged in this grave matter.  But the results of their actions are the same, regardless of their tent.  We are in a dubious war and an agent was outed.  Whether the agent was covert or not,  others may forever argue, but a guilty conscience is found in those who cover up what they have done.

SOME WILL SAY SO WHAT? This is just politics and war is politics by other means.  We should give our leaders the benefit of the doubt (as Dean seems to).

WHY IS IT THAT WHEN THE STAKES ARE GREATEST, we lose our critical faculties and fail to call things for what they are?

IF THE PROBABLE Fitzgerald prosecution were analogous to a murder trial, the body would still be dead. The defendant could argue their perception of "national security" as a mitigating factor in sentencing.  And that is about it.

PLENTY OF LEADERS have taken their countries to war for what they considered national security intent.

IF A LEADER USES lies and disinformation to go to war, how is national security served?   And if his aides use the same lies and disinformation, none of us are served. If the followers of the leader attack those who discovered the lie by committing a crime, what sort of national security do we have?

EXPECT THIS ALL to be waved away in the case of Scooter Libby. On the one hand Libby is everyman caught up by events.  Or he is the Uberman who must be beyond the judgement of others who know less well than him the risks and dangers we face.  John Dean would have Libby fade into a ground of gray, but Dean's gray area is actually black and white.  We are a government of laws, not men.

RECOMMENDED READING
[Reddhedd/ Firedog Lake] Up or  Down?
[Slate] Who is Scooter Libby? 
[Jane Hamsher/ Firedog Lake] Scooter Bond: Shaken, Not Stirred