And If Rove Isn't Indicted?

The NYT rumor du jour is that a Libby indictment is likely, but Rove won't be tagged. WSJ and WaPo are both strong-rumor on Libby and iffy on Rove.

We'll know at 2 p.m. eastern. If it's just going to be Libby, batten the hatches! Having recently been subjected to angry comments from a couple dozen lefties who want very much to see Rove, Cheney and Rice (Rice?!) indicted, here's what will likely happen:

• Fitzgerald, who they've reverred as calm, thorough and leak-proof, will be viciously villified as another tool in the Rove machine.
• Roveanoia will increase to near-fatal levels. How they can loathe this man so much but think Carville was a fine aide de camp is a curious bit of liberal psychology.
• Fitzgerald will lose control of his staff and leaks regarding process and deliberation will keep the lefties angry for some time to come. Because this scandal is basically not a big deal, they've had to become incredibly nuanced in their study of it, so they'll be feeding off the bones of the investigation for some time to come.
• They will continue to push for a Rove indictment. As Kos puts it, "Rove remains tied to the tracks, but the oncoming train has backed up a little." They will not read this to mean that Rove's involvement was minimal and the route to an indictment is not at all clear; they will read it that Rove continues to work the system.
• If Rove isn't indicted, but Fitzgerald continues to look for a way to do so, look for the White House's polite treatment of Fitzgerald to end -- for very legit reasons. At that point, Fitzgerald will have become partisan.

And most importantly, if Rove isn't indicted, perhaps the president will have his undivided attention again, and we can get a good SCOTUS nominee and can keep working towards 2006.