I think this qualifies as a Captain Reneau moment from Casablanca:

I am shocked, shocked, to discover there is gambling going on on these premises.

Seriously, the wingers are hitting the roof about how the jury was packed with enemies of the administration, but I live in the Dc area, and it took forever to seat the jury, for that very reason. The people they found seemed very fair, several even recommended that he be pardoned.

Yes, this requires speculation, and I am speculating that a deal could have been worked out for the pardon by the intermediary. (Fred Thompson?)

The usual WH plan of attack during controversy is to have the president stay neutral- and get allies in the media to drum up outrage or support for their policies. This is no exception as the WSJ, WS, and columnists like Novak and Krauthammer go to bat for Libby’s eventual pardon. They are hoping to buffer the blow to the GOP’s chance of success in ’08, and prepare the country for the pardon. Its no longer if, but when.

Now that the verdict has come down, Libby has been deemed guilty of nothing worse than a “memory lapse”, has been declared victim of an over-zealous prosecutor, and the veridict itself, is of course, a gross miscarriage of justice. Complete spin cycle by the very conservative pundits who demanded justice because we must govern ourselves “by the rule of law” during Clinton’s impeachment for perjury.

The conservative media has been in full howl over the need for a pardon. That makes the absence of such calls from elected Republicans so conspicuous.

What evidence do you need that the administration is considering a pardon? Bush walking the halls of the White House late at night talking to the presidential portraits? Of course the pros and cons of a pardon are being discussed by the inner circle.