Patrick Fitzgerald Ignored Witnesses Who Contradicted Wilson

NewsMax ^ | 11/9/05

[areafiftyone]

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's Leakgate investigation is coming unraveled, as witness after witness steps forward to challenge a key premise of his controversial probe.

Was the identity of Joseph Wilson's wife Valerie Plame really a deep dark secret before she was "outed" by columnist Robert Novak in July 2003?

The number of witnesses now saying "No" has climbed to four - and none of them have apparently been interviewed by Fitzgerald's investigators.

On Wednesday, Wayne Simmons, a 27-year veteran at the CIA, told Fox News Radio: "As most people now know, [Plame] was traipsed all over Washington many years ago by Joe Wilson and introduced at embassies and other parties as 'my CIA wife.'

Last week, Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely told WABC Radio's John Batchelor that during a 2002 conversation with Wilson while the two waited to appear on a TV show, Wilson casually mentioned that his wife worked at "the Agency." In Oct. 2003, NBC's diplomatic correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, told CNBC that Plame's occupation "was widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy to Niger."

Mitchell added: "So a number of us began to pick up on that."

And in Sept. 2003, NationalReviewOnline's Cliff May wrote that when Plame's CIA connection was mentioned in Novak's column - "That wasn't news to me."

"I had been told that [Plame was CIA] - but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of."

The day his report appeared, May told the Fox News Channel's John Gibson: "I knew this, and a lot of other people knew it."

In fact, rumors now swirl around Washington that Plame used to take her friends to lunch at the CIA's cafeteria.

So what has Mr.Fitzgerald - who was hailed as a "prosecutor's prosecutor" only weeks ago - done with the avalanche of testimony that contradicts his stated claim that Plame's job "was not widely known"?

Apparently nothing.

In the six days since he's gone public, Gen. Vallely says prosecutors have yet to contact him.

Ms. Mitchell has been mum since her "widely known" comment resurfaced last week, offering no indication whether Fitzgerald has bothered to check her story out.

If Mr. May has been interrogated, he's also keeping it to himself.

And Mr. Simmons has made no mention of any contact with Fitzgerald's team.

On the other hand, the prosecutor's prosecutor made a big show of interviewing two of the Wilsons neighbors just four days before he announced his indictment of Lewis Libby - in a bid to establish whether Ms. Plame's occupation was indeed secret.

It was, as far as her neighbors were concerned. But the revelation that Fitzgerald had waited till the last minute to confirm such a key aspect of his case raised more than a few eyebrows.

Now, with four witnesses on the record saying they knew what the Wilsons' neighbors didn't - and two of those witnesses coming forward even before the Leakgate investigation began - it's beginning to look like Mr. Fitzgerald deliberately ignored critical testimony that would have compelled him to close up shop well before he ever got to Mr. Libby.

[Cboldt]

There's a plausible explanation. He had heard that Plame was a CIA employee, and he needed to verify it officially because he was going to correct the disinformation that Wilson was spewing. He misremembered which reporters had told him that Plame was CIA, but so what?

Have you read the indictment? Carefully?

1. Libby calls CIA to check up on Wilson/CIA connection. He obtains authoritative answer from the CIA, including the fact that Wilson's wife was involved in setting the assignment.
2. Libby has conversations with reporters after calls to CIA - weeks after.
3. Libby testifies to investigators and paints a picture that he first heard of Plame/CIA from reporters - that when he spoke to reporters he as a matter of fact did NOT know that Plame worked for CIA - but, says the indictment, Libby DID know Plame was CIA, becuase Libby asked CIA and was given an answer, before Libby talked to reporters.

Under the facts as set out in the indicment, the question isn't which reporter Libby heard from first, nor is it whether the reporters all knew it before Libby did. The issue is whether or not Libby was truthful with investigators. Did Libby know Plame was CIA after he asked CIA, but before and during his subsequent talks with reporters? He told investigators he didn't know Plame was CIA (says the indictment) when he had discussions with reporters, a few weeks after his inquiry about Plame to CIA.

[BARLF]

You might try Patrick J. Fitzgerald.

[chesley]

True. question was: But the How does one get "un" indited(sic) I wonder? .

And, I'm pretty sure the judge could dismiss the charges anyway, if he thought the evidence wasn't sufficient, or that an injustice was being committed. Ha! Not that that's likely to happen.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

My understanding is that, in effect, Libby is now facing a trial for having supposedly lied under oath to cover-up something that is obviously not a crime (as in a violation of the statute of "outing" undercover CIA agents)...?

So what am I missing in this puzzle..?

Why Scooter lied.

[js1138]

As interesting as this stuff is, do I have to remind everyone that Fitzgerald didn't indict anyone for leaking classified information? So none of this contradicts the actual charges he made.

The defense rest on when and where Libbey first heard Plame was CIA. All Libbey has to establish is reasonable doubt.

[stevengrant98]

NO PARDON!!!!.....Full finding of innocent.... a pardon looks like a cover up

[maro]

WHAT IF before the call to the CIA, before the meeting with the Veep, LL had heard from reporters that Plame was a CIA agent. Not implausible--some say that Wilson was introducing her at cocktail parties as his wife, the CIA agent. Many people may have known. LL misremembers the chronology and forgets which reporters he heard it from. He mixes up dates. But his basic point is truthful--he first learned of it from reporters. That is not a crime.

[sport]

This was/is a way to get President Bush through Cheney.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I would just like to see the Treason media go into full meltdown. Of course, I would also like to see Bush take a big club to the reporters in these conferences and beat the hell out of them then turn and ask "Any more dumb assed questions?"

[Cboldt]

WHAT IF before the call to the CIA, before the meeting with the Veep, LL had heard from reporters that Plame was a CIA agent.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf

That hypothetical timeline and chain of events does not change the analysis and conclusion of the indictment.

Libbky to investigators that he did NOT know of Plame, until discussion with reporters in June/July 2003. If he in fact had heard of her before, even from reporters, his answers to investigators would have been different.

IOW, his answer is in the nature of "I first heard of Plame in June/July 1003, and then only from reporters."

The trial process is going to drag out, but I hope the trial evidence and transcripts, etc. are made available on the web. I'm quite curious as to the defense he plans to mount. Amnesia? The testimony wasn't material? No underlying crime? (also known as the "bogus/malicious prosecution" or "nothing but a perjury trap" defense - blame the prosecutor) Misinterpretation of ambiguous testimony? "I'm telling the truth - everyone else is lying"?

Or he may just cop a plea.

[BillyBoy]

>> try indicting 50 pubs and 2 dems in the target rich state of IL. <<

The "50 Republicans" were members of the scumbag criminal RINO George Ryan adminstration. This ridiculious atttempt to paint Fitzgerald as "partisan" because he went after Ryan's boys is tanamount to attacking someone in Vermont as "pro-Democrat" if they went after 50 Jim Jeffords staffers and 2 of Howard Dean's people. That number adds up to 52 LIBERALS in Vermont, just as it does in Illinois when it's 50 of George Ryan's people and 2 Daley aides.

Patrick Fitzgerald has done an excellent job rooting out criminal corruption here in Illinois. Republicans here applauded his indictment of RINO Ryan's criminal hencement and we hope he convicts every last one of them. He was recommended and apppointed by conservative Republicans. You may not like those facts because now he indicted someone who worked for a guy you voted for, but those are the facts.

[BillyBoy]

>> Either that or, more likely, he's setting himself up to become Hillary's AG if she wins in '08. He's already shown himself with this investigation and all the relevant evidence he didn't look at to have the level of ethics necessary to serve in such an administration.

Yeah yeah yeah, a guy who owes his entire career to conservative Republican appointing and retaining him is doing this solely to get "selected" for the A.G. slot under Hillary.

You guys are sounding more like the perjury-smerjury Ken Starr hating Democrats every day. According to the RATs, that evil bastard Ken Starr was out to "destroy" Clinton so he could get "Republicans" to appoint him to the supreme court, and Clinton being a serial liar sexual predator had nothing to do with Ken Starr's "Partisan" "Overzealous" "Fishing expedition" "Kangaroo Court" indictments -- , all because the person indicted happened to work for a guy you voted for.

DemocRATs had nothing but praise for Ken Starr until Janet Reno appointed him to investigate Clinton and he did his job. Sadly, some "defend anyone with 'R' next to their name' crowd feel the same way about Republican appointee Patrick Fitzgerald, who had been universally praised by conservative PRIOR to the Libby indictment. I guess we'd all be better if Da Mayor of Chicago and Barack Obama picked the U.S. Attorney for Northern Illinois, eh?

[libstripper]

Take a look at Fitzgerald's Wikipedia entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Fitzgerald He spent most of his career before September 1, 2001 in the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, eight years of which was under the Clinton administration, whose AG was Janet Reno.

Fitzgerald was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois on September 1, 2001. At the time it was likely he'd only serve about four years, ending September 1, 2005, after which he'd be looking for other employment. Indeed there were rumors to that effect in Chicago. Being appointed special prosecutor was a gold mine for him in that it opened up a host of new career opportunities, including becoming Hillary's AG if he could destroy the Bush administration with this investigation.

The investigation was of a non-crime, something he could have determined in the first few days just by looking a Plame's personnel record and discovering that she wasn't legally "covert" in the five years before her identity was revealed. If he wasn't a self-seeking climber out to destroy the Bush administration, he'd have wrapped it up right then. Instead he continued in an effort to manufacture "crimes" out of air.

In the course of this search he managed to develop discrepancies between the testimony of Libby and three reporters about alleged conversations between Libby and those reporters. At the time Libby didn't have any motive to lie about his recollection of the conversations because the incident Fitzgerald was investigating was a non-crime.

OTOH all three reporters either misspoke or had real motives to lie. Before Andrea Mitchel backtracked a day or two ago, she pointed out that Russert failed to remember, in his GJ testimony, how generally known Plame's identity was. Judy Miller was on the skids at the NYT because of her earlier, probably accurate, reporting on the WMD issue and had every reason to slant her testimony against Libby to try to keep her job. Cooper, of Time, had almost as much motive to slant his testimony against Libby because his employer was also trying to get the Bush administration.

Nevertheless, Fitz chose to believe these three very flawed witnesses instead of Libby. That leads straight to the reasonable conclusion that he did it for an ulterior motive, the most logical of which is being on Hillary's short list for AG.

A few weeks ago Newsmax picked up on the fact that Gerald Nadler, a far left New York Democrat, thought Fitz would be great to lead an impeachment investigation against President Bush. Nadler is a close ally of Hillary's. It's very unlikely he would have made this suggestion if he didn't know a lot about Fitz that we don't. Hence, I stand by my view that Fitz is an ambitious, unscrupulous lawyer who's just let his real colors show, something that would make him well qualified ethically to be Hillary's AG.

[libstripper]

Starr ignored the little fact that there was no forensic debris around Foster's body at Fort Marcy Park, a clear indication that he was killed elsewhere and his body moved to Fort Marcy Park. Everything certainly did turn out OK--for the Clintons.

[fooman]

to a dem a rino is still a pub. If he werent partisan, he would have gone after the chicago machine.

Now we find out TONS of people saying they knew about plame which is exculpatory. Fitz didnt bother and it is obvious.

Scooter is being Ray Donovaned.