Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Patrick Fitzgerald Press Conference Transcript
Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | 28 October 2005 | Patrick Fitzgerald

Posted on 10/28/2005 6:35:34 PM PDT by demlosers

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
To: counterpunch

Using another baseball analogy, in this case the tie goes to the Fitz. I demand instant replay. Catcher interference.


21 posted on 10/28/2005 7:15:47 PM PDT by auboy ("Don't get stuck on whiny")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
It would be really easy for a prosecutor to get attorneys for witnesses to leak the information. They can comment, while he, by law, cannot.

The thing that made me suspicious was Fitzgerald's calling so many of the press by first name, indicating that he knew them. How convenient...and how telling. He has obviously been talking to these reporters. What were they talking about...the weather?

22 posted on 10/28/2005 7:16:08 PM PDT by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: demlosers; Torie

Fitzgerald should be removed from this investigation. He makes claims that have no basis in reality let alone fact.


23 posted on 10/28/2005 7:20:40 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
The crack investigators didn't find out that the Cubans and Russians blew her cover years ago?

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.

24 posted on 10/28/2005 7:25:27 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Well that won't happen. Lawrence Walsh (remember him, the Iran Contra guy I think, maybe something else) was far worse by the way. He chatted with his shill coterie of reporters on a weekly basis, spinning and leaking wildly, and he was proud of it. Is he a relative of yours?


25 posted on 10/28/2005 7:25:38 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
There has been confusion regarding covert vs classified because Fitz would not use the word covert.

I'm glad you brought this up.

Classifications:

Top Secret
Secret
Confidential
For Official Use Only
Unclassified

...which are among other classifications

Plame's job at the CIA is classified as = Unclassified.

Fitzgerald is playing word games and obfuscating facts.

26 posted on 10/28/2005 7:26:58 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
He said this

We can't talk about information not contained in the four corners of the indictment.

after spending 20 minutes talking about how evil outing a secret agent is - something that was nowhere in the indictment.

27 posted on 10/28/2005 7:27:26 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

I listened to this bozo's "press conference" today. He left me with the impression that he's after Crazy Howie Dean's job with the DNC. A regular Lefty blowhard. But I feel a lot more "secure" and "safer" even though there wasn't a "crime" until AFTER this blowhard began his "investigation."


28 posted on 10/28/2005 7:27:39 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (We Gave Peace A Chance. It Didn't Work Out. Search keyword: 09-11-01.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Oh yes, I remember that shanty Irish so and so very well. I made the exact same arguments back then. Nobody ever listens, the independent/special counsel stuff is nightmarish. God should ban it. {->


29 posted on 10/28/2005 7:29:56 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

I think it is interesting that he keeps saying "not widely known," some people knew- it was not a secret. Earlier, he noted that the first person to tell a reporter her name was Libby. If Libby was the first to give classified information, why not indict him for that? I think Novak had another source that told him the info. first. However, I start to wonder if Libby did not know that, and that is what tripped him up- he assumed he was the only source, knew he had leaked classified info., and was trying to protect himself. Just my two cents.


30 posted on 10/28/2005 7:31:20 PM PDT by goonie4life9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX
Here is the key language:

OK, is the investigation finished? It's not over, but I'll tell you this: Very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that's going to be tried and would you ever end a grand jury investigation. I can tell you, the substantial bulk of the work in this investigation is concluded.

He's saying: "no more indictments."

31 posted on 10/28/2005 7:33:33 PM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
The thing that made me suspicious was Fitzgerald's calling so many of the press by first name, indicating that he knew them. How convenient...and how telling.

Good observation.

32 posted on 10/28/2005 7:36:59 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

Not even close to an analogy. Just more pratter from the libs trying to convience us from their playbook.


33 posted on 10/28/2005 7:37:14 PM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Does it make any more sense reading it than listening to it? LOL


34 posted on 10/28/2005 7:38:42 PM PDT by Peach (I believe Congressman Weldon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple

I could swear that one of the reporters at the press conference started off a question about leaks with a statement about how there were no leaks from the grand jury. Glasses and a bright red dress, I wanna say she was blonde, right side of the room. Really struck me as if she knew that the truth was the complete opposite and it was said with a twinkle, was so ridiculous that I spun around to look at the TV, but didn't recognize her. So I don't know if he called her by the first name.

It does appear that so much that we heard from leaks over months and months turned out to be true. Hard to believe that all of those could have been constructed purely from piecing together leaks from those who testified and their lawyers.


35 posted on 10/28/2005 7:59:25 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat (SonofaBuckner Qualls and Lidge, king and queen of Choke City, USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #36 Removed by Moderator

To: demlosers
What it looks like to me is that Libby differentiated between his conversations within the WH from those outside the WH. In other words, he did not divulge to the GJ any of the conversations he had with DOS, the VP, or other WH personnel. His testimony seems to be only what was discussed with the reporters.

I don't believe Russert.

37 posted on 10/28/2005 8:08:35 PM PDT by McGavin999 (We're a First World Country with a Third World Press (Except for Hume & Garrett ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

Was it my imagination or did Fitz look almost tearful during this news conference. He nearly was in tears, especially when he first started talking. Even with all the blah-blah-blah, it STILL sounds like a very weak case.


38 posted on 10/28/2005 8:11:39 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Of all the crap today. Our broadcast of Rush was screwed off the air by a rotten White Sox rally. As if the other twelve stations on the AM dial were not running the same thing. We lose Rush and the press conference today. Good thing I was close enough to Milwaukee to pick up Fitzgeralds conference.
39 posted on 10/28/2005 8:35:51 PM PDT by satchmodog9 (Free choice is not what it seems)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers; jwalsh07; Howlin
QUESTION: The indictment describes Lewis Libby giving classified information concerning the identify of a CIA agent to some individuals who were not eligible to receive that information. Can you explain why that does not, in and of itself, constitute a crime?

FITZGERALD: That's a good question. And I think, knowing that he gave the information to someone who was outside the government, not entitled to receive it, and knowing that the information was classified, is not enough.

FITZGERALD: You need to know at the time that he transmitted the information, he appreciated that it was classified information, that he knew it or acted, in certain statutes, with recklessness.

And that is sort of what gets back to my point. In trying to figure that out, you need to know what the truth is.

So our allegation is in trying to drill down and find out exactly what we got here, if we received false information, that process is frustrated.

But at the end of the day, I think I want to say one more thing, which is: When you do a criminal case, if you find a violation, it doesn't really, in the end, matter what statute you use if you vindicate the interest.

--------------------------------------------

How can *the interest* be vindicated when you not only admit that you cannot prove that Plame was a covert agent, you also admit that, from a legal perspective, even providing information about a person with classified status is not even a crime?

This prosecutor is unwise.

40 posted on 10/28/2005 9:08:07 PM PDT by Kryptonite (McCain, Graham, Warner, Snowe, Collins, DeWine, Chafee - put them in your sights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson