A review of the documents surrounding the Libby indictment leaves little doubt that there are still many questions to be answered, and that at least some of those questions should relate to the actions of the highest-ranking officials in the administration.

This is why 40 members of the U.S. House have urged Fitzgerald to expand the inquiry to examine whether Bush, Cheney and members of the White House’s Iraq War Group conspired to deceive Congress into authorizing the war – thus committing the federal crime of lying to Congress. Of course, there will be those who argue that such an investigation would be too broad an extension of the special prosecutor’s brief. But that’s just the latest line from those who have always wanted to close down this inquiry.

“In their indictment of Libby, prosecutors stated that Cheney may have instructed Libby or been involved in the Plame leak.

According to the indictment, on June 12, 2003, Cheney told Libby that Plame worked at the CIA. On July 12, the indictment says, Cheney gave Libby advice on Air Force Two about how to handle the Plame matter. Later that day, Libby allegedly spoke about Plame with two reporters.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Libby

On August 28, 2006, Christopher Hitchens claimed that Richard Armitage was the primary source of the Valerie Plame leak and that Fitzgerald knew this at the beginning of his investigation.[124] This was supported a month later by Armitage himself, who claimed that Mr. Fitzgerald had instructed him not to go public with this information.[125] Investor’s Business Daily questioned Fitzgerald’s truthfulness in an editorial, stating “From top to bottom, this has been one of the most disgraceful abuses of prosecutorial power in this country’s history…The Plame case proves [Fitzgerald] can bend the truth with the proficiency of the slickest of pols.”[126]

In September 2008, Attorney Alan Dershowitz cited the “questionable investigation[s]” of Scooter Libby as evidence of the problems brought to the criminal justice process by “politically appointed and partisan attorney general[s]“.

But apparently one’s definition of “immoral” is determined by party platforms … and the entire legal slate should be wiped clean every four/eight years?

And I’m conferring Ancient Rome. The comparison fails. (Didn’t someone else already threaten to compare Obama to Clodius prosecuting Cicero if he so much as considers investigating torture? Can we please stop abusing references to the collapse of the Republic? And stop co-opting Cicero for Cheney’s side?)

On a First Things blog, J. Bottum writes that torture is immoral, but that Eric Holder’s pondering whether or not to prosecute Bush officials for torture endangers the republic. Excerpt: Say you have a system of government in which policy……