[..."Think back to the controversial Martha Stewart case:...]
And... Martha Stewart's attorney's were heading for an appeal and likely acquittal. Stewart CHOSE to go to jail so she could get on with her life.
No argument, however, the question at hand was can he indict, not can he convict. I stated that Martha was convicted of giving false info, so it is assumed that she was indicted for that crime (which she was). I should have spelled that out. My stated bottom line was "yes, he can indict them if he wants to."
Now, I think that there's plenty of available evidence to prove intent of the postulated cabal, particularly the actions of Wilson and the recently revealed involvement of the French DGSE in the overall scandal (the forged docs and a French government company being the operator of the Niger uranium operation).
You at least have motive on the part of the French government to discredit the since confirmed intelligence about Saddam's attempts to buy yellowcake by creating fake documents to muddy the waters. You further have France's overt and covert actions to undermine us at the UN and in the EU over Iraq and the heavy involvement of French diplomats in UNSCAM and you get more confirmation. If the information about Wilson's ex wife being a DGSE spook also prove true a lot that otherwise is obscure suddenly becomes clear.
My feeling is that this is an attempt by rogue elements in our bureaucracy colluding with a foreign government's intelligence agency in time of war to undermine the actions of our elected government.
If Fitzgerald is working that angle I think he may go down as a modern Horatius at the Bridge.