Posted on 03/14/2007 9:23:12 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who spent years investigating the 2003 leak of a CIA operative's identity, told lawmakers Wednesday that he could offer little help during congressional hearings on the leak.
Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., asked Fitzgerald last week to meet with members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which will hold hearings on the Bush administration's handling of CIA operative Valerie Plame's classified employment status.
Plame's identity was leaked to reporters after her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, began criticizing the Bush administration's prewar intelligence on Iraq.
In a letter to Waxman, Fitzgerald did not refuse to cooperate with the congressional probe but made it clear he had little to say.
"I do not believe it would be appropriate for me to offer opinions, as your letter suggests the committee may seek, about the ultimate responsibility of senior White House officials for the disclosure of Ms. Wilson's identity," Fitzgerald wrote.
As part of his investigation, Fitzgerald questioned President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and several journalists and senior White House aides. No one was charged with the leak, but Fitzgerald successfully prosecuted former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby for perjury and obstruction.
Fitzgerald said he was prohibited from discussing grand jury testimony and evidence that did not come out at Libby's trial, and he referred Waxman to the volumes of evidence made public during the monthlong trial.
"I appreciate the committee's important oversight interests but also trust that you will appreciate my position in the matter," Fitzgerald wrote.
A committee official said the Waxman still hopes to meet with Fitzgerald.
Plame is scheduled to testify before the committee. It would be the first time she has publicly answered questions about the case.
Unlike earlier independent counsels appointed under a now-expired law, Fitzgerald is not required to submit investigative reports to Congress.
Speaking briefly to reporters following Libby's conviction, Fitzgerald said no more charges would be filed, the case was complete and he was going back to his job as U.S. attorney in Chicago. He has not spoken publicly since about the case and has refused all interview requests.
"I think we should conduct this like any other criminal investigation: charge someone or be quiet," Fitzgerald said when he announced Libby's indictment.
Can he at least offer up one of his half-baked analogies for us to chew on?
Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the criminal case against Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, walks to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, February 3, 2006. Libby was found guilty on Tuesday of four counts of lying, perjury and obstructing justice during an investigation tied to the Iraq war. (Jason Reed/Reuters)
If he had been appointed under the earlier independent prosecutor statutes, what would have been the consequence?
Well sure, since that has little to do with his investigations/prosecutions.
Ironic, yes. But Fitzgerald wouldn't care. He showed contempt for law when he cited "facts" which the defense was specifically precluded from addressing during his closing arguments.
I'm convinced that Fitzgerald obstructed justice and lied far more than Libby when all was said and done.
.FitzFong
Notice the disingenuous wording - "the leak" occurred "after her husband ... began criticizing the Bush administration...", which would lead the typical uninformed reader to falsely believe that the Bush Administration was responsible for "the leak".
Strangely, Apuzzo manages to avoid mentioning the name "Armitage" in this article. Did he somehow "forget" about Armitage's role? The Rove "I've heard that too" response to Novak's question was no more a "leak" than was the CIA guy Harlow's confirmation of Plame's CIA employment. Journalistic malpractice of the highest order...
methinks ap ought to be a wee bit more concerned about the unacknowledged civil war we are currently in here on our own shores.. waged by a shameless media and loony leftists.
How about he withheld from Libby the fact that he knew it was Richard Armitage who leaked Plame's name?
". . . my position being that I found out during my investigation your little CIA desk-pilot was no more 'covert' than a Times Square billboard, and that Saddam had been buttonholing every uranium source in Africa for some yellow-cake.
"Naturally, being a pro-terrorist traitor like you, I didn't want all that to come out at trial, since even my stacked jury of 'Moveon.org' contributors would have laughed my case out of court. So I had the judge exclude any reference to those issues—except for my own lies about them in my summation. But if the truth comes out at your stupid self-promotion fair, we're all going to look like monkeys.
"So, stuff it, you clueless power-nerd!
Best, Pat"
Ping.
I guess this means I agree whole heartedly!
Fitz is a Liar! He lied to court!
He said the purpose of Libby's prosecution was because Libby drew a curtain between the Truth!
Fitz knew the Truth. So, he lied! There was no curtain, no obstruction, no nothing!
Fitz is a vendetta prosecutor. That is a criminal offense.
I hope he is prosecuted for Abuse of Prosecutorial powers.
eom.
I did not say that Fitzgerald withheld evidence from the defense. Nor did I say that he made up evidence. [ Is this how you win your debates? :) ]
I believe that Fitzgerald did withhold evidence from the jury. I do not believe that this jury was ever informed that Richard Armitage had admitted to divulging the identity of Valerie Plame.
Libby's defense team had located three individuals who were willing to testify that Joe Wilson had freely shared the information that his wife worked for the CIA. Fitzgerald and the Judge stipulated that since the charge was perjury, that whether Plame's identity was not actually compromised was not an issue they would allow to be brought up.
However, Fitzgerald knew full well that the jury believed that they were dispensing justice to a villain who had compromised the security of the U.S. for political purposes. Fitzgerald stated as much during the closing arguments up until the time that Libby's defense team objected. Of course, he had reinforced the lie.
So he refused to allow Libby to introduce proof that Plame's identity was already known and then proceeded to take advantage of the fact that the jury was not fully informed by stating that the security of the U.S. had been breached and then covered up by Libby during his closing arguments.
This is despicable behavior.
The whole purpose of this trial was to attempt to get Rove or Cheney called to the stand in order to go after bigger fish.
***
BTW: The real story which the MSM never covered was that an agency of the U.S. government; i.e., the CIA, attempted to influence an American Presidential election by sending a untrained operative into a foreign post to obtain information which would prove to be damaging to the U.S.
The fact that Wilson was never put under non-disclosure is strong evidence that the CIA intended for him to gather this information with the purpose of publicly spilling his guts.
We've seen this selective reporting on these types of matters before. How many people are aware that the Nixon's crew were gathering evidence of a prostitution ring that was being run out of the Democratic party offices? For some reason, that was never an interesting story! Go figure.
He didn't seem to have any problems doing it in his indictment press-conference, closing arguments and rebuttal.
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.