Posted on 09/01/2006 8:50:56 PM PDT by rightgrafix
WASHINGTON, Sept. 1 An enduring mystery of the C.I.A. leak case has been solved in recent days, but with a new twist: Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor, knew the identity of the leaker from his very first day in the special counsels chair, but kept the inquiry open for nearly two more years before indicting I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheneys former chief of staff, on obstruction charges.
Now, the question of whether Mr. Fitzgerald properly exercised his prosecutorial discretion in continuing to pursue possible wrongdoing in the case has become the subject of rich debate on editorial pages and in legal and political circles.
Richard L. Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state, first told the authorities in October 2003 that he had been the primary source for the July 14, 2003, column by Robert D. Novak that identified Valerie Wilson as a C.I.A. operative and set off the leak investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Hopefully Libby can successfully sue Fitzgerald for malicious prosecution.
1. What if (as some here have opined) there really is a huge anti-Bush cabal within the government? If so, throwing Armitage and Powell to the wolves deflects from deeper digging.
2. Since the 2008 political season is already in play, and since Armitage has signed on with McCain, and since due to the polls the Rats think McCain is the frontrunner (more fools they) perhaps this is a misguided effort to derail McCain, causing a supposed fight within the GOP. (As I said, this could only be the motivation if the media is starting to believe their own lies and are ignoring what Republicans have been saying since 2002.)
3. A mysterious, unknown motivation caused by undercurrents that have yet to surface. This goes to my point of us not knowing a lot of the things happening.
4. Isikoff's publisher wanting to salvage some profit from an otherwise lame and irrelevant book.
I will also cheerfully accept any other theories. Things are now so weird that anything seems possible.
there isn't much time. its very hard to turn public opinion, the left has lied and beat this issue to death - with no rebuttal from the white house at all, how many times have we heard the president say this was a "serious investigation" when he talked about white house cooperation with it.
4. Isikoff's publisher wanting to salvage some profit from an otherwise lame and irrelevant book.
Which, btw, makes Isikoff (or at least his publisher) a whole lot smarter than Valerie "Natasha" Plame, who bet her book deal on nailing "Moose and Squirrel".
You're welcome!
Seems there is much more to many of these BDS events than can be readily discerned and, you're right, what is omitted is sometimes more revealing than what is stated.
I was hoping the original poster of this article would remember something about it and chime in. Before posting the article again, I was checking the links to make sure they still worked and found it stripped to bare bones from what was originally there. The difference took me aback, to say the least.
I suspect you are right about that, as well.
There is a certain "dead horses should be buried, not beaten" quality to the article...
Armitage is toast, and if "Amnesty John" McCain is dumb enough to have him on his campaign staff, McCain is showing how much dumber he is now than he was in 2000.
Colin Powell is also toast. No political future for him in either party.
Fitzgerald is totally discredited even though most likely nothing will happen to him -- he will just disappear into the woodwork.
Judith Miller must feel like the complete idiot she is. Ditto Cooper.
Bush wins another victory for the history books, though it will take two generations for that to come out.
Two important points:
1. Armitage sat quietly and let the SP go forward *knowing* he was the source. He deliberately chose not to inform the White House.
2. How long has the NYT known about this story? I say from the beginning.
I want the US Justice Department to open a probe of Fitzgerald's prosecutorial ethics in this matter. It reeks to high heaven of injustice!
First of all there has never been ONE instance of these files being used. I realize it shatters a favortite FR myth which blames EVERY odd action by a politician on the dreaded omnipotent FBI files but any intelligent person knows that they have no more bearing upon reality than a unicorn.
Typical silliness.
I'm surprised Jefferson hasn't claimed the money came from his share of helping a Nigerian bureaucrat take his money out of Nigeria. I get those offers all the time.
We were shown many instances of the Clinton's goon squads in operation and none needed FBI files to do their work. The famed files of fable and fantasy only went half way down the alphabet in any case.
Maybe Jefferson is the guy that has been sending those messages out . . .
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.