Posted on 10/16/2005 4:01:48 PM PDT by RWR8189
The White House is bracing itself for the possible indictment of senior officials as Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, prepares to wrap up his two-year inquiry into the leaking of a covert CIA agent's name.
Further details about the role of White House officials were underlined in a report in the New York Times on Sunday.
Judith Miller, the reporter released from jail after 85 days after she agreed to testify before a grand jury, gave an account of her conversations with Scooter Libby, chief of staff to Dick Cheney, vice-president. She also admitted that Mr Fitzgerald had asked whether Mr Cheney had personally authorised Mr Libby to speak.
In a more ominous sign, Ms Miller said Mr Fitzgerald's questions went beyond the leaking of the CIA name to probe the administration's selective leaking of intelligence information ahead of the Iraq war. During the hearing, she said he repeatedly asked how Mr Libby handled classified information and showed her some documents.
“[They] seemed familiar, and that they might be excerpts from the National Intelligence Estimate of Iraq's weapons. Mr Fitzgerald asked whether Mr Libby had shown any of the documents to me. I thought I remembered him at one point reading from a piece of paper he pulled from his pocket,” she wrote.
It remains unclear whether Mr Fitzgerald will issue indictments the grand jury is due to be dismissed on October 28 but the mood at the White House is one of foreboding. It could prove to be one of the most critical weeks of George W. Bush's presidency. It comes amid deteriorating poll numbers for Mr Bush, with only 28 per cent of Americans agreeing that the country is on the “right track” the lowest level for a decade.
Of most concern is the role of Karl Rove, Mr Bush's chief political strategist. On Friday, he testified for a fourth time before the grand jury. Ahead of his testimony he was warned that there was no guarantee that he would not be indicted.
Mr Rove has not received a letter saying he is a target of the investigation but he has been adopting a lower profile recently. He was due to speak at a fund raising event on Saturday but cancelled. He did not return to the White House on Friday after his testimony, according to the New York Times.
Last week, there were signs that the White House's usual clinical competence at staging events was coming unstuck. In one omission, broadcasters were able to watch live footage of military officials prepping soldiers in Iraq for a satellite question and answer session with Mr Bush.
In an awkward moment on Friday, Scott McClellan, White House spokesman, was asked whether the administration was distracted by the CIA investigation. He attempted a joke, pretending to ignore the question. No one laughed. He tried again, his eyes swivelling away from the podium. “I'm sorry, I'm a little distracted up here,” he said. Again, no one laughed.
And the Clintons walked. Now that's justice for you.
Hmmm.
Excellent example of crappy agenda journalism.
I thought it was the Grand Jury that issued indictments.
I never thought there was much to this until I just herad Brit Hume say the WH was worried.
But but but Sandy Burglar lost his secret clearance !!!!
But but but Sandy Burglar lost his secret clearance !!!!
She was asked if Cheney authorized Libby to speak to her. But what was her answer? I doubt Libby told her such a thing.
As to Rove, maybe he'll be indicted but we haven't heard of a witness pinning anything on him. Judith Miller certainly didn't. Somehow, she doesn't remember who gave her the key info.
They kissed Berger's butt and printed nothing. Yes, it was a whole year before Berger's fiasco was "leaked" to the public. Berger's attorney was furious.
Depends on whether the target of the indictments can present the appearance of being even more innocent than a ham sandwich--to all the Grand Juries that the prosecutor can find.
Where is there even any evidence in the story that the WH is bracing for possible indictments? Maybe they are, but not based on anything in this story.
The headline of the story is B.S. because the story doesn't say how the White House is preparing for the indictment. Are they praying? Are the polishing up their resumes? How are they preparing?
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1118356,00.html
But Fitzgerald's intentions aren't the only mystery. Another character in the drama remains unnamed: the original source for columnist Robert Novak, who wrote the first piece naming Plame. Fitzgerald, says a lawyer who's involved in the case, "knows who it is--and it's not someone at the White House."
"Where is there even any evidence in the story that the WH is bracing for possible indictments? Maybe they are, but not based on anything in this story."
Evidence? We don't need no stinking evidence! He's a stinking Republican!
Oh, wait. So am I.
Perhaps they see what they want to see, regardless of what is actually in front of them?
You got that right, there were some real cheap shots tossed in with nothing to back them up with.
...but the mood at the White House is one of foreboding.
Nice, Ms Daniels. I'm glad you're sharing your extra sensory perceptions with us.
When Wilson called Novak, before the article, Wilson told Novak to leave my wife out of it. Why? Wifie got Joe the Niger job and THAT is what Novak knew and wanted to reveal. Joe took the bait and outed his wife in response.
The White House is bracing itself for the possible indictment of senior officials
she provides no support for this
the administration's selective leaking of intelligence information ahead of the Iraq war
she inserts this little zinger in the middle of the article as if this were an established fact
the mood at the White House is one of foreboding.
she provides no support for this
Last week, there were signs that the White House's usual clinical competence at staging events was coming unstuck. In one omission, broadcasters were able to watch live footage of military officials prepping soldiers in Iraq for a satellite question and answer session with Mr Bush.
So according to her, Rove personally attends to details like this? B.S.
In an awkward moment on Friday, Scott McClellan, White House spokesman, was asked whether the administration was distracted by the CIA investigation. He attempted a joke, pretending to ignore the question. No one laughed. He tried again, his eyes swivelling away from the podium. “I'm sorry, I'm a little distracted up here,” he said. Again, no one laughed.
The fact that humorless PoSs like Helen Thomas and this b!tch don't laugh at his jokes is supposed to reflect poorly on McClellan? Riiiight.
"He attempted a joke, pretending to ignore the question. No one laughed. He tried again, his eyes swivelling away from the podium. “I'm sorry, I'm a little distracted up here,” he said. Again, no one laughed."
Tough crowd. He should ignore all of their lame questions.
I would be more concerned if they weren't worried. They have to be prepared for it, even if there is only a slight chance of it happening.
The WH being worried in no way reflects on how likely it is, only that they don't want to be caught off guard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.