Convicting the sidekick

The conviction of I. Lewis Libby is a way our system of justice shows that perjury, false statements and the obstruction of justice need to be punished. That part is clear. It is also, however, a political case, and that part is not so clear.

The case had to do with a White House effort to undermine the credibility of a retired State Department man who publicly challenged a rationale for the conquest of Iraq. That man is Joseph Wilson. Shortly after the occupation of Iraq, Wilson published an account stating that in 2002 he had gone to Africa on behalf of the U.S. government to investigate the allegation that Iraq had bought uranium soils there. Wilson said he had reported back that the allegation was highly unlikely. Nonetheless, the following January, two months before beginning the war, President George W. Bush repeated that allegation in his State of the Union address.

Wilson's public accusation that the Bush administration had "twisted" the intelligence about uranium embarrassed administration officials, and some of them retaliated by trying to undermine his credibility.

One of the administration officials was "Scooter" Libby, who was chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney. Another was Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of state. Both peddled doubts to the press.

Armitage told columnist Robert Novak that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent. That was what sparked the investigation. Ironically, Armitage was not charged. Apparently, he didn't lie to investigators. Libby did — or so the jury found.

Libby's defenders point out that the most grossly wrong act, outing a CIA agent, was not done by him. The implication is that discrediting political opponents and lying to FBI agents and grand juries are standard procedure in Washington, D.C., and should be excused.

We don't think they should, whether Libby was in the driver's seat or merely a sidekick.