Elizabeth de la Vega's book, "U.S. v. BUSH" makes the case for indictments of the gang of five on the grounds of conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The following is a commentary extracted from her very persuasive argument:
    President Bush would have us believe that the intelligence community of the whole world was of one mind: that Iraq (1) had WMD, (2) the nuclear capacity to strike the US with missiles, (3) was in cahoots with bin Laden in the 9/11 attack, (4) was conspiring with terrorists to attack the US and (5) was posed to attack the US at any moment if we did not act immediately.
When we got into Iraq and found none of this true, he would have us believe that it came as a complete surprise...a bolt out of the blue...something that no reasonable person could have anticipated and that, therefore, the intelligence community, for some twisted reason, must had hyped all that stuff and the Bush team fell victim to a rouge IC conspiracy that resulted in the people of Iraq falling victim to a cruel hoax.
    Nothing could be farther from the truth! The reality is that there were red flags all around these so-called reasons for attacking Iraq, but no one in the administration wanted to heed them. Accusations were made and repeated long after every reliable sources said they were bogus. An example of this duplicity was Cheney's declaration on December 10, 2001 that it was "pretty well confirmed" that Mohammed Atta, the 9/11 ringleader, had met with the head of Iraqi intelligence in Prague the previous April. Whatever investigation "confirmed" that information must have not talked to the Czechs, because they had determined that the Iraqi intelligence officer was not in the country in April of 2001 and Atta, according to the FBI, was in Florida!
   So, Cheney's so-called "confirmation" did not bother to ask our own FBI much less the Czechs. And several members of the administration said there were "no plans on the President's desk to invade Iraq." The statement could only be interpreted as an effort to deceive the listener because plans had been in the works since November 17, 2001. They might not be "on the President's desk" but there were filing cabinets full of them in the Pentagon.
   The bottom line is that the Bush administration was primed to invade Iraq and depose Saddam even before it took office and through the coordinated effort of individuals and organizations misled the Congress into authorizing a legitimate and limited use of force under UN guideline, that was then, through deceit and misrepresentations, morphed into a justification for a war against the innocent people of Iraq.
   It has been said that Bush has lied. That may or may not be true. What is beyond reasonable doubt, however, is that the Bush administration set out to deliberately distort information the American people and Congress needed to make vital decision regarding national security and in so doing has perpetrated a fraud on the whole country. A lie might not be a crime, however, a fraud is...every time.
   Some have suggested that ending the war in Iraq before "victory"...whatever that means...is achieved, will mean that all those who have died will have died in vain. On the contrary, they will have died in vain if those who sent them to their most tragic and needless death are allowed to escape the justice those who subvert the laws of this country deserve. A nation that turns its back on criminal behavior by those in the highest offices of the land forfeit their claim to the freedom our patriots died to protect.