Replies

I'm reading a book called "Triple Cross" which is about terrorism and Fitzgerald. According to that book he has done more than just be a rogue prosecutor, as if that wasn't bad enough. He was handling prosecutions against terrorists and he turned some biggies loose, people involved with 9-11. He dismissed a number of items of critical information and he could have stopped 9-11 if he had been doing his duty to this country.

There were more people involved in the problem, CIA people, and some FBI agents, but the author of this book pins most of the blame on Fitzgerald.

The author accused him of lying to the 9-11 commission.

If ever a prosecutor needed to be fired when Bush took office, this is the one.

I saw Peter Lance on CSPAN2 Book Notes recently, he gave a detailed talk explaining connections between terrorists and how they had been missed over the years. He clearly mentioned Fitzgerald a couple of times as dropping the ball when he investigated terrorists in the 90's. Not like it'a all his fault, it's the whole DoJ mentality, but you have to wonder, why the disparity between enthusiastic and energetic prosecution of Libby, versus the years of playing Keystone Cops against the worst scum in the world?

Lance was also pretty harsh on the FBI at times, saying that they were foot-dragging even now on building their terrorist database to "connect the dots," because to do so will only prove how much they overlooked in the past. It's like the fear of Able Danger, nobody wants to admit that enough info was on hand to get serious about fighting terrorism pre-9/11, and the DoJ and other agencies just plain blew it.

But I find it really weird, that we (US government) pours so much into doing so little (convicting Libby), while blowing off things like the terrorist database project Lance says was junked, which would be really useful and helpful for the future. It's a failure of priorities.