It's National Security, Stupid!

John Dean argues over at FindLaw that the Plame Affair (yes, I will keep calling it that until someone makes a movie with that title) may end, not with a bang, but with a whimper.

Dean believes that Fitzgerald, the prosecutor on the case, will just close up shop with no indictments coming down because the leakers were acting in the interest 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."

Here's what Dean is saying: "Bush wants to go to war but Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction. Wilson points out Saddam has no WMD. Rove, Libby, and others orchestrate a smear campaign of Wilson and out his wife as under-cover CIA agent. Because Bush wants to go to war, this is justified."

That's preposterous. It is not lawful to endanger American operatives working abroad just because you want to go to war and then call it national security. National security is exaclty why those leakers should be burned at the stake. Valerie Plame was on the ground working on ridding the world of WMD's. Jeopardizing her cover jeopardized our ability to curb WMD proliferation on the European black market. It hurt our national security.

But I'd love to see the leakers make exactly this argument. If they do, it throws open the windows to shine light on exactly why we went to war and how justified our reasons were for doing so. They would have to explain how reasonable their beliefs were in light of all the available evidence.

If Fitzgerald does just close up shop and walk away, I will be severely disappointed. Especially because he has stated he would not issue a final report detailing his investigation. I think this is unlikely, however. I think it is much more likely that some indictments will come down, the question is on who and how many?