The Lingering Effects Of Libby

By The Politico's Mike Allen and Jeanne Cummings.

Even an acquittal would have left deep scars on the George W. Bush presidency because of the immense publicity surrounding the case and its political fallout. But the guilty verdicts — on one count of obstruction, two counts of perjury and one count of lying — mean that the case remains an ugly and enduring part of the politics of President Bush's last two years in office.

Ever since President Gerald R. Ford pardoned former President Richard M. Nixon for Watergate crimes, executive branch grants of immunity have become hot political footballs in presidential campaigns. And Libby's conviction seems destined to continue the trend, even if Bush ultimately doesn't pardon him.

As soon as the verdict was announced, Democrats began demanding a commitment from Bush not to issue a pardon for Libby, who theoretically could face 30 years in prison, but is likely to get a lesser sentence. The White House won't give such a commitment, of course, and Bush has said he won't even talk about it.

Democrats, nonetheless, are trying to start a drumbeat about the question, with the aim of painting Republicans as tainted by cronyism and raising voters' doubts about the GOP's trustworthiness.

Libby's fall raises three key questions that could play a material role in who succeeds the 43rd president, and how history treats him:

1. Will Bush pardon Libby?

Catching coverage of the verdict on a television in a small dining room off the Oval Office with Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and Counselor Dan Bartlett, Bush said that he respected the jury's verdict and that he was saddened for Libby and his family, according to aides.

Libby's lawyers plan to ask for a new trial. So, the president and his spokesmen plan to cite an ongoing legal investigation as they refuse to comment on the possibility of a pardon. But that won't stop reporters from asking.

2. Was Libby the tip of the iceberg?

Denis Collins, the only juror who spoke outside the federal courthouse near the Capitol, said Libby struck him as a "fall guy," and testimony suggested he saw himself as the scapegoat for Cheney or senior Bush adviser Karl Rove.

"There was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury," Collins said as he described the jury's methodical approach. "It was said a number of times: What are we doing with this guy here? Where's Rove? Where's — you know, where are these other guys?"

The Democrats who control Congress now can use their subpoena power to try to find out.

3. Does this make Bush more radioactive for the Republicans seeking the presidential nomination?

Democrats are already working to ensure that the Libby case, which dates to a Robert Novak column in July 2003, naming Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, resounds through November 2008.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., looking ahead to congressional elections, said the Libby trial was "not solely about the acts of one individual," but produced evidence of "callous disregard" in handling sensitive national security information.

It's tough enough for the same party to win a third term in the White House, but almost impossible to do so if the nation has soured on the incumbent. While none of the top Republican contenders will face any direct fallout from the Libby guilty verdict, the decision is yet another blow against an already-wounded president and his Republican Party.

Combined with the devastating, and still unfolding, indictment about the treatment of wounded troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the specter of the vice president's top aide facing a prison sentence will only worsen Bush's already historically low standing in the public opinion polls.

Aides to the leading Republican presidential contenders declined comment after the verdict was announced. But the Democratic hopefuls pounced. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois said in a quick e-mailed statement that the conviction "underscores what happens when our foreign and national security policies are subverted by politics and ideology."

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina called the outcome "an important step in holding the administration accountable for its consistent misuse and manipulation of intelligence to further its ideological agenda." He then posed a question that is likely to bedevil the administration and the GOP for the foreseeable future.

"There are serious questions about whether the buck actually stopped with Scooter Libby," he said. "The American people deserve to know if Mr. Libby has been made a scapegoat in order to protect anyone else."

John Bresnahan, Carrie Budoff and Jonathan Martin contributed to this report.
By Mike Allen and Jeanne Cummings
TM & © 2007 The Politico & Politico.com, a division of Allbritton Communications Company