Posted on 10/24/2005 1:16:10 PM PDT by churchillbuff
As the White House and Republicans brace for possible indictments in the CIA leak probe, defenders have launched a not-so-subtle campaign against the prosecutor handling the case. "He's a vile, detestable, moralistic person with no heart and no conscience who believes he's been tapped by God to do very important things," one White House ally said, referring to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald was tapped nearly two years ago to find out whether anyone in the White House broke a federal law by blowing the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame after her husband, Joseph Wilson, debunked administration claims about Saddam Hussein's nuclear activities.
President Bush recently praised Fitzgerald on NBC's "Today" show, saying: "The special prosecutor is conducting a very serious investigation. He's doing it in a very dignified way, by the way, and we'll see what he says."
But now friends of the White House have started whispering that the Brooklyn-raised prosecutor is overzealous after it became clear that Bush political mastermind Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, are in Fitzgerald's cross hairs.
Such hints surfaced publicly for the first time yesterday when Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), armed with comments that sources said were "shaped" by the White House, suggested Fitzgerald might nail someone on a "technicality" because they forgot something or misspoke.
"I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment ... it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime, and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste," Hutchison said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Fitzgerald was first tasked with finding the Plame leaker, but his mandate expanded to include counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, intimidation of witnesses or destruction of evidence, should anyone undermine his probe.
There were several reports yesterday that Fitzgerald could warn people they've been indicted as soon as today, and that the grand jury could be called in for an unusual session tomorrow, but his office declined to comment.
#1. You are dense if you don't know that answer.
#2. It is polite to include Rushmom in the heading if you are talking about her.
Clyde260 & Churchhillbuff, to what party are you registered at this point in your lives?
of course thats true , if it is decided so by a jury.
Yes, good thought.
You go after people who may have lied before a grand jury to cover up a crime that never happened.
Republican. Always have been. First presidential vote, for Nixon. Voting GOP ever since.
Translation: "I can't refute his point so I'll call him a troll and ping a moderator."
Clyde, have you ever considered an anger management course? Did someone hurt your feelings?
YOU'RE DENSE if you think I ever was part of the attack-Starr crowd. That's what Rushmon either ignorantly or deceitfully claimed -- without proof, because there is none. I wanted Clinton impeached and convicted. No censures, no wrist-slaps, no "Scottish law," Impeacment and conviction FOR LYING UNDER OATH.
If you think I'm now going to soft-pedal perjury, if it turns out that a Republican or two might have committed it, you don't know me or my commitment to rule of law.
Really? A HYPOCRITE? Why, that's about the worstest thing in the world, isn't it.
IMO, your posts are heavily tilted towards the White House lying & obstructing. Perhaps I missed your posts where you posting the other possibilities. I can see why folks think that you are a troll.
Any reader of the New Testament knows that it's a pretty bad thing to be. Jesus had some definite things to say about hypocrites.
I wasn't going to reply because it seems you are also one of the brainless.
Someone sarcastically tells Church to STFU, and I need anger management? You need to learn how to read.
This whole thing is starting to make my stomach turn, think I'll go catch the end of Sean. See ya, and have a great day.
IMO, you don't like reading news that doesn't fit your preconceptions.
Clyde WTF I don't think I was responding to your post. MY POST WAS DIRECTED TO THAT TROLL.
She was even a Freeper during the Starr investigaton, but somehow she recalls that you out of thousands of posters attacked Starr.
Remember when we just shot it out and had no zots and kitties. I miss those days.
Of course it's a big deal.
Here's the trouble I've gotten myself into: I agreed with Bush in the 2000 campaign when he said US military shouldn't be used for "nation building," the way Clinton had used it. Then, when he switches course and deploys troops to Iraq for "regime change" -- i.e., nation-building -- I didn't change the views that he and I shared in 2000. So because I didn't change, I'm now a "troll" -- even though I am a lifelong conservative Republican.
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.