Posted on 10/20/2005 7:14:44 PM PDT by Pikamax
Cover-Up Issue Is Seen as Focus in Leak Inquiry By DAVID JOHNSTON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 - As he weighs whether to bring criminal charges in the C.I.A. leak case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel, is focusing on whether Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, sought to conceal their actions and mislead prosecutors, lawyers involved in the case said Thursday.
Among the charges that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering are perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement - counts that suggest the prosecutor may believe the evidence presented in a 22-month grand jury inquiry shows that the two White House aides sought to cover up their actions, the lawyers said.
Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been advised that they may be in serious legal jeopardy, the lawyers said, but only this week has Mr. Fitzgerald begun to narrow the possible charges. The prosecutor has said he will not make up his mind about any charges until next week, government officials say.
With the term of the grand jury expiring in one week, though, some lawyers in the case said they were persuaded that Mr. Fitzgerald had all but made up his mind to seek indictments. None of the lawyers would speak on the record, citing the prosecutor's requests not to talk about the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I don't know .. the whole thing is such a mess - I still say this "mess" has Hillary's fingerprints all over it.
Bill Clinton knew this was going down when he and Hillary were perusing Europe trying to sell her book. At a London function, Clinton was overheard to say to Blair, "If you don't stop supporting Bush and his war, you will not be able to win your next election". Within a few days of that exchange of words, the Wilson story broke.
Was there more to that conversation, and was Bill trying to warn Blair about what was coming down about Niger and the yellowcake ..?? And .. how would Bill have known about Wilson .. except for the connection to the Wilsons - who were fund raisers for the Clintons.
When you have people raise money for you - you know everything about them. I still believe it was Hillary who told Miller about Valerie - and that's why Miller now says that she cannot remember who told her .. and why she was willing to sit in jail until Fitz agreed not to ask her about any source other than Libby. I love that condition - you can't me about any other source except Liddy - which means that she doesn't have to expose it was Hillary.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Rove or Libby. They are just the scapegoats to protect the Clintons - AGAIN!
So, Russert could have told Libby "Joe Wilson's wife works at the CIA", and his testimony would be technically truthful. Too cute by half, IMHO.
That shows you what kind of cowards we have in the MSM. Let the woman do the time not the ivory tower, perfumed princes.
I wish Conservatives/Republicans would learn to keep their damn mouths shut and stop talking to these back-stabbers!
It's MADDENING.....they never seem to learn that no matter WHAT, the poofs over at the NY Times are NEVER going to like them, or give them "good press", unless, like McCain, they stab the rest of us in the back.
You find the best back up quotes!
They have a direct interest in the outcome of this GJ since they testified in it. I have yet to hear one of them admit or disclose to their viewers or readers that they were PART OF THE STORY.
I think they can clearly be called whores (pardon my French). They are also the same people who are pushing this story to their desired outcome. All things being equal they are the ones who should be indicted along with JOE WILSON, the bold faced LIAR.
Do you know anyone who puts our National Security in jeopardy anymore than MSM on a daily basis? They also keep pushing the story of NO WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRUCTION in Iraq. I wonder where the hell all of it went then since Saddam had it for YEARS & USED IT? Maybe Syria since we had to WAIT for the UN to OKAY going in to Iraq?!!!
There was a guy on Fox News the other day who has written about Saddam for over 20 years who said that he had WMDs and that was the REAL STORY in all of this.
This article says nothing different than the article last week.
Indeed it does.
Who has informed Libby and Rove they are in legal jeopardy?
I've been following this case closely. While I totally understand the entire Wilson ugly story, I'm still confused as to this special prosecutor and the waste of time being spent going after Rove and Libby.
Come on. The jails are full and Osama Bin Laden still runs free. To put two people in jail for saying "I heard that" is just not going to happen.
I think Fitzgerald is somehow, someway, going after Judith Miller and the NY Times.
Indeed.
Don't forget that Judith Miller, for reasons not clear to me, WARNED two Islamic charities, back right after the 9/11 attacks (October 2001) of an impending raid on their offices.
It was guised by the NY Times as a "followup" to a story, ie Judith (and another NY Times reporter) called up the charities in question, both of whom were scheduled for a raid, BEFORE the raid and asked them questions about it.
In other words, the drug people are ready to spring on my house to look for illegal drugs on Monday. But on SUNDAY before my local paper phones me up and asks questions about the drug raid.
It's a tip off disguised as normal newspaper business.
Fitzgerald was the prosecutor investigating that bit of outright treason. The Times got away with because Fitzgerald subpoenaed the Times phone records to ascertain who at the FBI Judy Miller talked to to gain warning about the raid. But a liberal Judge, in a 157 page settlement, would not let Fitzgeral get those phone records.
Nonetheless, out there, is the factoid that the NY Times and two of their reporters WARNED our enemies of an impending raid.
I can't imagine that Fitzgerald wasn't pissed over this. Now during THIS hearing, I'm of a mind that Fitz is trying to get Judy to reveal that source.
Because somebody in the FBI, along with the treasonous NY Times, is a TRAITOR. Pure and simple.
Add to this the Joe WIlson traitorous act. His little trip to Niger. During which he also stopped in France, did you know? Wilson speaks fluent French and Chirac is one of his buddies.
The French supposedly controlled the distribution of yellowcake in Niger. Iraq was supposedly trying to buy some. The French were involved in this, don't let anybody tell you different.
Then there was that cute little forgerie that turned up in Italy. A forgery that I'm thinking Wilson himself dropped off into the swirling order of things. That's right, I think Wilson engaged in outright traitorous acts and was helped along by the NY Times.
A newspaper owned outright by Saudi Arabia. Does anyone doubt that the NY Times is no longer an American "paper of record"?
Why did the NY Times warn those terrorist funding organizations posing as charities about an impending raid? Why did they give the traitorous Wilson such a wide forum for his crop of lies about Niger? Why is everything that paper prints anti-American?
This thing is NOT about going after Rove and Libby. It's about finally getting the NY Times. Now, with this leak, it's only the NY Times that benefits by continually casting the blame on the administration. Much like they did with the Niger thing.
Seeing a pattern here?
Somebody got and is still getting oil money to protect their own behinds and to continue a propaganda war against the United States of America.
Anonymous lawyers close to the investigation say so according to the NYT.It implies they have been officially notified..We are to trust them that this is so.
I have no idea if it is true.
You might have a point there...
Denying a fact like whether you had sex with someone is different then remember a conversation a year ago. No one can plausably claim they forgot whether they were having sex with a person. But who remembers specific details about an old conversation? Shoot, I get in arguements with my wife what we discussed two days ago. That's just normal that two people remember things differently.
That would be smart politically
Is O'Donnell still pushing the 22 indictments and the indictment of Cheney. Are we now back to Rove and Libby for things that were no big deal.
We have to start putting out that everyone fibs about politics and trivalize the charges like Clinton did.
Are there enough leaks from the leak case itself for this thing to be thrown out yet?
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.