[wotan]

I thought it might be interesting for everyone to see just what Patrick Fitzgerald's charter is. Notice that he is not charged with simply identifying and prosecuting the leaker, but with investigating and prosecuting "violations of any federal criminal laws related to the underlying alleged unauthorized disclosure", etc. There is no requirement imposed that the "alleged unauthorized disclosure" must be proven to have actually been unauthorized.

[MNJohnnie]

Yes, but he DID have the Procedural judgment call to make. He COULD of said "Look this may all be an innocent mistake and since it does not materially reflect on the cause of this investigation, I will choose not to prosecute." I mean using the letter Libby sent Miller releasing her from her oath of confidentiality as a basis for the Obstruction of Justice charge??? That is sign of a Prosecutor OBVIOUSLY reaching for ANY reason to charge someone. This is all just a smoke job designed to keep the Dinosaur Media from turning on Fritz.

[There You Go Again]

I do agree that Libby should be charged if he knowingly lied under oath. (Sounds like he may have, but that is what a trial is for.)

What confounds me is why he would have lied under oath. (Again, if he indeed did.) I can only believe he thought he was protecting V.P. Cheney. He must have erroneously thought that V.P. Cheney could have been charged with outing a CIA agent. But, I wonder how an intelligent lawyer could not see that such a charge would not apply in Valerie Plame's case. I don't know, but I do wonder what the thinking was......

[OneLoyalAmerican]

Good Morning wotan:

Thank you for posting this scope of investigation and authority document.

Because Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has not impressed me. Now this limited scope nonsense will have a life of its own, as it becomes the self-centered politician's fodder for one-upping another politician.

The document explains why Fitzgerald will not indict Ambassador Joe Wilson. Although we know Wilson lied about the trip to Niger, Wilson can not be indicted by Fitzgerald.

However, Wilson has proved himself a useful idiot for an alternate "mission." And that alternate "mission," sadly, was never the focus of the investigation. The alternate "mission" should actually be the Special Counsel's investigation subject.

Where is an investigation into the rouge elements within an unaccountable, government agency? The “agency” which actually provided the faulty intelligence which lead our Nation to war in Iraq, remains unaccountable for the quality of their workmanship. Then afterward, elements within that unaccountable “agency” undermined a President of the United States, during that war.

[queenkathy]

I read that first this Comby guy was going to be the special prosecutor but because of some conflict he couldn't do it, so he then appointed his best friend, Fitzpatrick to do it.
Then when Fitz couldn't find any law broken, he asked his "friend" Comby to expand his scope.
Anyone else remember this article that said this?

[SERKIT]

OK then who would start the investigation as to Wilson's fibbing to Congress and how soon can that investigation commence?

[Anselma]

I heard yesterday (10/28/05), on NPR*, that Fitz got his first letter/order to hold a GJ, and about one month later, he asked for an expansion ot it (to be the one you quote?) What is the date for the letter you've posted here? Can we be certain it is the ORIGINAL order to Fitz???

* Not that I'm proud of listening to their prattle, but sometimes a germ of truth will emerge.

[Anselma]

So Sorry!!! I reread the posting, and in the 1st sentence it refers to the original order to Fitz: December 30, 2003; and thus this- whatever the date (but it may prove instructive) of this later letter, it is, indeed, an expansion of Fitz' original order.
How would you characterize it if Fitz' did NOT find any crime relating to his original order (limited to the purposeful & illegal outing of a COVERT agent) but wanted to pressure Republicans/Bush/Bushies so he could maneuver one of 'em into a perjury charge? Wouldn't that qualify as Malicious Prosecution, politically motivated? At the very least, if not politically motivated, then personally motivated (more time/more money/more fame for The Fitz)???
I smell a Dem, here.

[Anselma]

Jeepers, I'm getting sloppy in my old age; I see, on my 3rd reading of Comey's order to Fitz, that it WAS dated about 1 month after the original order, i.e. the first order was 12/30/03 and the EXPANDED and revised order was 2/6/04! So, NPR (ugh) was correct, in that the original order was revised/expanded about a month after Fitz began his "investigation" began!
Gosh, even I, untutored as I am, could find out in, oh, probably 5 minutes if I had the legal authority, whether or not Plame was a covert agent as specified in applicable law. But this guy, this Freaky Fitz, wanted to catch a Republican, and wanted to keep the heat on, and deflect attention away from the rogue CIA/Plame/Wilson (and the Kerry Krowd?). But who will prosecute the prosecutor?