Posted on 03/20/2006 7:57:28 AM PST by Cboldt
All of your summations were great. The one above, however, leads me to conclude that Fitzgerald is a sonofabitch to have brought such bogus charges against Libby. I hope he can't sleep at night knowing that he's done irreparable harm to a dedicated and decent man's career and finances all because he wanted the approval from the left and his one hour of fame, giving his ridiculous joke of a press conference.
It's down right nauseating and I hope what goes around comes around really soon and smacks Fitzgerald upside the head so hard that he'll never recover.
Does Patrick Fitzgerald Get Two Salaries?
He has two jobs.By Daniel Engber
Posted Friday, Oct. 28, 2005, at 6:12 PM ETThis afternoon, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald announced the indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide. Fitzgerald also serves as a U.S. attorney based in Chicago, and his office is prosecuting the former governor of Illinois. Does Patrick Fitzgerald get two salaries?
No. In December of 2003, the U.S. Attorney General's Office appointed Fitzgerald to be the special prosecutor for the CIA leak case that led to today's indictment, but that doesn't mean he left his job as U.S. attorney. Since he was already on the government payroll--making $140,300 a year--he wasn't eligible to receive any more money for the additional work. To handle both jobs, Fitzgerald--or "Fitzie," as he's known to friends--shuttles to Washington, D.C., from the Windy City, where he spends most of his time.
Also, how much is he paying his staff and what is the total so far.
I'd also like to know the total so far for Fitz's personal expenses.....and for the personal expenses for his staff. Travel, hotels, meals, gasoline, car rentals, you name it....I'd like to see it.
A Tough Investigation Is Also Praised as NonpartisanFor breakdown, see GAO reports, for example ...By Peter Slevin and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 24, 2005; A03Known for convicting Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and for compiling the first criminal indictment against Osama bin Laden, Fitzgerald is an Irish doorman's son who attended a Jesuit high school, then Amherst College -- where he was a Phi Beta Kappa mathematics and economics major -- and Harvard. ...
While supervising at least four lawyers and an FBI team in the leak case, Fitzgerald jetted between his downtown Chicago office and borrowed space at 1400 New York Ave. NW, not far from the courthouse where the grand jury meets most Wednesdays and Fridays. In its first 15 months, the investigation cost $723,000, according to the Government Accountability Office.
This is starting to remind me of that old song, "Nice work if you can get it...and you can get it if you try".......tra, la, la......
Leni
I don't recall the President ever saying that.
President Bush did lend gravitas to post-indictment activity ...
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 28, 2005President's Remarks on the Resignation of Scooter Libby
3:51 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Today I accepted the resignation of Scooter Libby. Scooter has worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people and sacrificed much in the service to this country. He served the Vice President and me through extraordinary times in our nation's history.
Special Counsel Fitzgerald's investigation and ongoing legal proceedings are serious, and now the proceedings -- the process moves into a new phase. In our system, each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to due process and a fair trial. ...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051028-7.html
I don't believe it. I'm just trying to understand the dynamics that indicate why Fitz didn't "check up" on "covert or not" as a first matter, and think that the general tenor of being appointed, etc. plays into that.
I also say that Fitz has motive to not be fingered as a leaker, based on President Bush's public expressions that he considered the leak to be a serious matter.
When the DEMs howled about the word "operative", Bush's staff ran for the bunkers. They have horrible, almost debilitating PR skills.
Maybe somebody wanted to throw Libby under the bus - although there is no evidence to support that. I don't know the players, but my guess is that Libby was acting on his own judgment when (if) he decided to lead the investigation away from his factual knowledge that Plame worked at the CIA. Note that I am carefully using the same phrase that is in the indictment "worked at the CIA." Not "covert," or "calssified" or some other hocus pocus phrase. Just "worked at the CIA." Did Libby know that, for a fact? That's one aspect of the decision the jury will face, if the case goes all the way to trial.
How dare you invoke a vocable owned by the old media and used by them for the purpose of negatively assessing the character of President Bush! Fifty lashes with a kernable font!
Good post. I have little faith any proper resolution to this overly-amplified miscarriage of misdirected umbrage will ever be executed, let alone be published. At the same time my faith in liberal Democrat shenanigans remains wholly undiminished.
The train has too much momentum to stop, at this point. Proper or not, there will be a resolution. I think, given the stakes (peanuts), the resolution will be proper.
At the same time my faith in liberal Democrat shenanigans remains wholly undiminished.
Rereading the Congressional Record from Sept 30, 2003 was a hoot.
Those whacky DEMs! Sure are tons of fun.
Covert types who operate in the interest of the United States ought to enjoy certain protections (and that means the ability to be kept from harm through any public announcement of their career) whether they are currently or historically active. My question is whether Plame and Wilson even operate(d) in the interest of the United States.
Same might apply to some witnesses we only thought were 'powerful people".
Agree...His OPED pieces were misleading, and released classified info IMHO. Couple that with the fact that they had the media over to their home before the Novak story leads me to believe the were DNC partisans who put the party ahead of their country.
Whatever happens, it will not get much more press until the rules are set and the jury selection is in process.
Plame game....ping
Ping
Did it ever occur to you that what the president believed has nothing to do with the state of mind of the defendant? Further, is it possible that Bush was making a politically expedient statement after the fact so as not to fan the flames of outrage of politically motivated liberals?
The If you seem to think is so important is a rhetorical question. I'm sure you know what rhetorical means.
Well according to your democrats they argued that this was all about attacking the credibility of Wilson.
'could care less', 'couldn't care less' - irregardless!
LOL
I never thought the President based his conclusion (whatever it is - you later seem to say the the Presindent doesn't really belive the investigation is serious, that he used the term as a mer rhetorical device) based on Libby's state of mind.
... is it possible that Bush was making a politically expedient statement after the fact so as not to fan the flames of outrage of politically motivated liberals?
Certainly. But whatever his reasoning for making the statement, the statement lends gravitas to Fitz's prosecution.
Well according to your democrats they argued that this was all about attacking the credibility of Wilson.
Wilson's credibility deserves to be attacked.
You are NOT wrong.
Almost everyone uses that phrase incorrectly.
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.