Fitzgerald Documents on his Website

Office of Special Counsel ^ | Oct. 28, 2005 | Patrick J. Fitzegerald

[Terridan]

This is what is really getting me... none of THAT mattered to the media... How can we bust the NYTimes and others.. ruin them and credibility? There has to be a way, power in numbers... I may be stupid to hope, but there has to be a way, enough is enough. Great post.

[Paloma_55]

From the indictment: "Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."

I think this statement has been proven false many times.

[nopardons]

By many and publicly; even on T.V., where Andrea Mitchell said that she knew all about Valerie and her "job" and who she was.

[fight_truth_decay]

So why isn't Russert indicted for contradicting Libby?

Because he did not, Libby he alleges called him as an upset viewer over something he had just seen on MSNBC and complained about a commentator. Russett said he would pass it on but why not call his bossess. Libby upset then asked if Tim knew of a Valerie Plame. Russett said he did not. Russett relayed this "upset viewer" at " a high level " then left on vacation to return to hear the buzz over the Wilson/Plame story written by Novak. Tim then said it hit him he was on the list of those Libby called and put two and two together. What upset Libby the possible "straw man" to make calls in the first place? Libby is loyal to whom ever he is working under and Tim Russett whether we like all he has to say is also considered a man of integrity. You would not want Russett on the stand contradicting what you had testified to.

Something happened to rattle Libby coming off from MSNBC to cause him to make the call complaining about a commentator, unless it was a bogus lead in complaint and I would not hope that Libby would intentionally do such a thing. Remember Libby was loyal to all those he has worked under or for-mention is made of that in the testimony for Marc Rich's innocence and end result his pardon.

[fight_truth_decay]

Sorry, in the post above I read your "contradicting" as "contacting" in my sugared up (halloween candy) brain this morning! But my comment to you does raise questions.

[Inwoodian]

There is a difference between classified and covert.

[MortMan]

If you accept the underlying charge argument, you're giving defendants a green light to perjure themselves and obstruct investigations.

Not really. Fitzgerald's mission wsa to investigate whether the leak of Plame's name (however it happened) was a crime, and then to pursue the leaker if it was found to be a crime.

Because Plame did not have "covert" status per the statute, the GJ should have been dismissed shortly after starting the investigation. I would liken this to a case like this:

One dark night, I sneak up to my own house while wearing dark clothing, open the door, grab some forgotten item, then leave. My neighbor sees me, and calls the police. When I am detained, the police discover that no law was broken, and I am released. The "case" is solved - no law was broken.

In Libby's case, the indictments are part of the investigation of a non-crime. A 2 year investigation, where 2 months should have been sufficient.

I am not condoning perjury. If Libby lied, he should be given a just punishment (we can debate that another time).

But we also need to realize that the basis of the investigation should have been negated within a VERY short time - and that makes the length of the investigation, and even its depth, suspect.