Posted on 10/29/2005 3:10:01 AM PDT by YaYa123
Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation took nearly two years, sent a reporter to jail, cost millions of dollars, and preoccupied some of the White House's senior officials. The fruit it has now borne is the five-count indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff--not for leaking the name of Valerie Plame to Robert Novak, which started this entire "scandal," but for contradictions between his testimony and the testimony of two or three reporters about what he told them, when he told them, and what words he used.
Mr. Fitzgerald would not comment yesterday on whether he had evidence for the perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement counts beyond the testimonies of Mr. Libby and three journalists. Instead, he noted that a criminal investigation into a "national security matter" of this sort hinged on "very fine distinctions," and that any attempt to obscure exactly who told what to whom and when was a serious matter.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
I guess you can say he was "Martha Stewarted".
Nonsense. Using the letter Libby sent to Miller releasing her from her oath of confidentiality as a reason for an "Obstruction of Justice" charge clearly shows Fritz lacked the guts to go out and tell the Media the truth. There is NO crime here.
So Fritz threw up anything he could dream up to prove he was "Doing his job". Just like the Delay matter. Friz proves the dangerous powers the Prosecutes have. The MINUTE they accuse a certain segment of the public ASSUMES guilt.
If that's the case, why did Fitzgerald go out of his way yesterday to stress that his case should not be used by critics of the Iraq war for their own political purposes. Face it, this prosecutor is about as good as they get when it comes to fairness, which is why he was chosen in the first place and why the White House is not going on attack.
It was pathetic. A desperate attempt to rationalize his complete failure to find any crime to charge anyone with. Real courage would of been to come out and tell the Dinosaurs the truth. There is NO crime here. Sorry JUST because a Prosecutor makes an accusation does NOT mean he is being truthful. This is a Political CYA cause after the feeding frenzy, he KNEW he would get a Media ream job if he did not charge SOMEBODY with SOMETHING
Exactly!
At the risk of offending with the example (certainly not my intent, but it's pertinent) this seems a bit like Martha Stuart being prosecuted for proclaiming her innocence to her stockholders - that's stock fraud?
Rather like basing the definition of grand larceny on a set dollar amount, as inflation slowly drops that threshold day after day. The alternative minimum tax - which becomes a lowering ceiling of taxation. We're massively over-litigated.
Bush should start, next week, to be the Alpha Male which Bill Clinton always wanted to be. He should pardon Libby, announce the construction of border fences from Brownsville to San Ysidro, from Vancouver to Bangor - nominate Janice Rogers Brown for the Supreme Court, then publicly condemn: the politics of personal destruction.
CLEARLY.
It worked for Clinton, because it was true then and it's true now.
It's consistent with Bush's management style as Governor. He needs to face up finally to the combativeness of his opponents, and clearly draw a line in the sand about it.
IMHO it will work to everyone's advantage, to point to so obvious a truth.
It's possible Libby was just badly mistaken, but he'll have to convince a judge or jury of that if he lets this go all the way to trial. If I was him, I'd be working on a deal. Something tells me that jury pool in D.C. isn't gonna be GOP-friendly.
Fitgerald is a FLAMING IDIOT BEYOND BELIEF if at this point in time, THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT, is still unknown or uncertain. It's makes such a mockery of his much vaunted 'thoroughness'.
A major portion of the charges hinge on Libby's versus Russert's recollection of what they discussed.
I know I've had mistaken recollections about conversations in the past, and I know others have as well.
So when Russert says he learned about Plame only after Novak's article, well, maybe he did and maybe he didn't. His memory could be at fault (unless he has recordings, which are illegal under DC law).
It is literally a "he said, she said" sort of argument, and I'd be surprised to see it stand up in court.
If that's the case, why aren't Bush and Cheney expressing outrage at the indictment? Why aren't they going to bat for their loyal aide? Why did they accept Libby's resignation almost before it was handed to them?
"I was very impressed with Fitzgerald's press conference yesterday"
I have no idea is Libby lied, forgot, twisted the truth or what. But I do know that Fitz was not impressive at this press conference. He looked nervous to the point where he looked like he was going to break down in tears. As he was explaining the case, his points were not clear. Plus, it's not too hard to make it sound like you have a good case when people are only hearing your side. My guess is that he will not look so "impressive" when he faces a team of high price lawyers.
While I agree, in general, that lying to GJ is obviously wrong, the problem I have here is that there appears to be no underlying crime and I know this all started with Joe Wilson's lies about his trip (and attempt to undermine this country's war on terror). I consider Wilson the perjurer and Libby the whistleblower.
Let me add a footnote please:
"It worked for Clinton, because it was true then and it's true now."
That is to say - there was a (massive) amount of the Politics of Personal Destruction going on - most of which was being done by Carville, Hillary, et al.
:)
Just to clarify.
I think it's a complete set-up. They interview you like a Philadelphia lawyer, trap you with trick questions until you make a minor mistake and then indict you for "lying". They do that because they want to prosecute you but they don't have anything on you.
Thay did the same thing to Martha Stuart. Slimy bastards!
Great headline!
Evidently, if Scooter hadn't lied Fitzgerald would have gone home empty?
Evidently Scooter became a criminal but not for the crime under investigation?
Weird!!!
Why didn't Fitzgerald say that plainly?
Folks, there was no Valeri Plame crime!
If he lied under oath about anything, even having sex with an intern, he deserves to be indicted.
Why did W allow Ted Kennedy to write the education bill? Why doesn't W veto any spending bills?
Since Libby's testimony was basically that no crime was committed re: Plame, and so far it appears that no crime was committed re: Plame, he didn't obstruct justice. Maybe he should be charged with "Facilitation of Justice."
The reason we have perjury and obstruction of justice laws is so that time and money aren't wasted when people try to stop an investigation from moving forward and finding out the truth. If Libby won't tell the truth, we may never know exactly what happened in this case.
Fitzgerald was given a mandate to find out exactly how the CIA employee's name was leaked. If anybody intentionally blocked him from doing his job, there should be serious consequences.
As far as him being nervous, I noticed both him and the guy next to him seemed to be a little jittery when the press conference first got going. Considering Fitzgerald has successfully prosecuted mobsters in the past, I found it refreshing that he still gets stage fright when he goes in front of TV cameras. He seems like a down-to-earth guy who is telling the truth when he says he wants to return to his life in Chicago as soon as possible.
Fitzgerald also deserves credit for a lack of leaking by him and his staff in this case. It appears all the leaks were being made by witnesses and their lawyers, who are the only participants allowed to talk about grand jury action.
The lie has to be material to the investigation.
If they asked him what he had for lunch, and he said "a hot dog," when in fact he'd had a chicken sandwich (and knew he was lying!), there is no crime.
This investigation was centered on who learned what about Plame, from whom, and when. The indictment charges that Libby lied about how and when HE learned about Plame.
Right!
Libby was the whistleblower for Valerie Plame's nepotism which produced the Niger trip, that led to the very partisan report, that led to the very public humiliation of the Bush administration. She recommended her Democrat hubby Joe Wilson.
THAT IS THE STORY.
It wasn't a crime.
It wasn't "outing a CIA operative".
It was exposing the rank partisan bias that led to the whole story.
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.