Jan 21 2007
Is Fitzgerald On A Personal Vendetta?
It would seem Fitzgerald should be investigated for lying to the Federal Courts (Appeal Cour and US Supreme Court and whether his obsession with Libby, even in the face of Deputy Sec of State Armitage as the source of the Plame leak, was all an act of a personal vendetta.
Two of the prosecutors who worked on the Rich case over the years were none other than Mr. Fitzgerald and James Comey, who while Deputy Attorney General appointed Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. Mr. Fitzgerald worked in the Southern District for five years starting in 1988, at the same time that Mr. Libby was developing a legal theory of Mr. Rich’s innocence in a bid to get the charges dropped. The prosecutors never did accept the argument, but Leonard Garment, who brought Mr. Libby onto the case in 1985, says that he believes Mr. Libby’s legal work helped set the stage for Mr. Rich’s eventual pardon.
Fitzgerald is as worthy of investigation as is Libby. Especially since he knowingly withheld information from the courts that would have ended is investigation before he subpoaned and jailed reporters.
33 Responses to “Is Fitzgerald On A Personal Vendetta?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The original complaint was not of the scope that it turned out to be. Why was it enlarged, especially when Comey and Fitz KNEW that Armitage was the one speaking of Valerie and that NO CRIME had been committed?
And, Timmy Russert’s memory is just as capable of being wrong as anyone else’s ….especially Scooter who was dealing with a hell of a lot more on his plate of monumental significance than Timmy.
This whole affair is about the undermining of a sitting President during war…by rogue elements in the CIA..oh, and Armitage…THAT IS THE REAL CRIME…
with a shabby cover-up.
UNACCEPTABLE.
Fitgerald and Nifong are cut from the same cloth.
I don’t know when prosecutors began breaking our laws, wholesale; but I’d put money on betting that it started when they used tactics having nothing to do with murder charges; when they wrapped up Costa Nostra, otherwise known as America’s Italian Mafia, organization. You like the movies The Godfather? So what?
The other things, NOW, being tested, also goes back to HOW Nixon got taken out. By elite media types. And, this, too, had nothing to do about the “law” … since the head leaker was at the top of the FBI food chain. (Which proves my first point, here, by the way.)
The media is still entrenched in a “gotcha” game. And, the two prosecutors I mentioned actually come off a whole bunch of grapes. (These are not the only two!)
What is spectacularly WRONG, is that blacks, who used to be dangled willy-nilly from ropes, and KNEW FIRST HAND who deceitful a few bad prosecutors were; are now on the side of the law-less. Since OJ.
In other words, you’d have thought civil rights was necessary. While it turns out it went overboard. It changed credentialing habits, where bad white men could grow tough and ugly (J. Edgar Hoover. LBJ.) To a place where lesbians and gays grabbed hold of the system. Meaning? We know have worse judges “benched” than ever! And, if the judges aren’t tossing bad cases out the window, who is there “officially” to fix this broken monster?
Libby’s persecution is WORSE THAN the French Dryfuss case. And, here? You’re not finding a single Emile Zola, willing to write the truth, and advertising the wrong-doing.
Media, today? Well, it adopted tabloid journalism’s methods of grabbing attention. Even though we don’t get the headlines declaring that aliens have invaded earth. Aliens have invaded our news rooms.
And, as an aside, the civil rights measure of the 60’s are an abysmal failure.
What do you think People will try next?
You know, I can’t read Reggie Walton! He’s done nothing to slap Fitzgerald. While Theodore Wells, counter to my remark above, about the failures of civil rights legislation; we’re looking at a black man in the DC courtroom who knows his stuff! And, to get to where he is, he’s faced more Fitzgerald’s than you can count!
Ahead? I see a choice. In ONE, the jurors are as dumb and obnoxious as the OJ jurors. Those IDIOTS never saw the harms they brought into their own communities. Because a pretty dead white/blonde woman suits their hatreds. And, Goldman? A Jew. They farted on Jews, too. (Usually this crap does not bring benefits back into your community.) You suffer LOSSES, instead. But you can’t convince idiots of anything.
While the IDIOTS are convinced that they’re better off hating George Bush, than they are in real participation with others, where INDIVIDUALS find comfort in democracy.
It’s not strictly “black and white.” But in America? Yes, color lines and sexual choices DIVIDE. It’s “very in your face.” Even now, after AIDS came along and showed ya some consequences you don’t see advertised.
This case remains watchable … Just as OJ’s did. Because the process was fascinating. A can still recall my mom’s face when the verdict came in. She couldn’t believe it! But, I knew.
I knew we don’t live in “one great village,” anymore. But with the hostilities; which is the ONLY THING DESPOTS use, when they try to grab political powers. The donks are terrified of a decision where Libby’s innocence would register with the “average DC clown,” who is being asked to do jury duty.
Pity the black man? Ya know, when the civil war broke out, the distaste for slavery was so great, Lincoln got PUSHED FORWARD into fighting mode. (He came into office CONCILIATORY.)
The moods of Americans, so far, has been different that what the europeans, elites, mexicans, and other assorted uneducated rabble, seem to share with the rest of us. If this wasn’t so, Darfur would have hit our own black community so hard, they’d have cried in outrage.
Seems you can bankcrupt some people, and they don’t even know they’re outside in the rain, without an umbrella. And, without friends. (Within their families, too, it’s wall-to-wall dysfunction.)
The old rule, by the way, still applies. Opportunities come when INDIVIDUALS fight for their own successes. And, they’re not bought out wholesale by dishonest politicians. Or the movies.
Whatever you’re smoking – I want some of it. Let’s go over it one more time: just because Armitage might have been the first to leak – does not mean that others did not leak before Novak’s article appeared and the cat was out of the bag.
Then Fitzgerald should have not violated ethics rules -
Model Rule 3.6 recognizes that “the announcement of an indictment . . . will necessarily have severe consequences for the accused.” According, it says that “a prosecutor . . . should avoid comments which have no legitimate law enforcement purpose and have a substantial likelihood of increasing public opprobrium of the accused.”
and you know, making false statements when he said Libby was the first government official to talk to members of the press about VP.
Particularly, since the charges, as you say, have really nothing to do with a leak.
Or he could have just conducted and actual thorough investigation instead.
Armitage voluntarity told the FBI about Novak in early October 2003, which was several months before Fitzgerald was appointed by Comey. So the claim that, re:Armitage, Fitzgerald:
“knowingly withheld information from the courts that would have ended (this) investigation before he subpoaned and jailed reporters”
… is absurd.
Jerry,
Fitz was told about Armitage when he took over – or did you forget that?????
Conesplif,
Follow the links and they point to actual statements in the filings by Fitzgergald which were clearly false once it was confirmed they knew Armitage was the source of the Novak story – which was THE claim they were investigating per the CIA referral. Fitz was NOT authorized to invesitgate any other discussions to the press, only the one that led to her employment being made public by Novak. Obviously you have your knowledge of the law is limited to being able to spell the word ‘law’.
“Logic” hasn’t been seated, yet.
But what kids today COULD LEARN, is this was how Nixon got taken out by the WaPo. Where the media hounded him, with the “halp” of the top guy at the FBI, to resign from office. Nixon didn’t have the courage to face the people. HE FEARED THEM. And, so he “took the easy way out.” That resignation, you’ll notice, was not taken up by Clinton. Who got to stay. (Even though between the two presidential pieces of timber, Nixon’s held more quality.) But you can’t put genies back into bottles!
So far, if there was a score card, the media would become alert to SHRINKING subscriptions. The losses of income are really there. But you don’t notice.
The White House ’still photographers,’ just got locked out of Bush’s presidential speech to the people. Because they had a habit of taking lots of pictures, but then choosing the one where Bush looked like Helen Thomas. Oh, yes. The snapping still photographers also won awards for this dreck. And, that boosted their resumes, and upped their asking prices.
Bush just decided that the video of him giving the speech, also contained opportunities for editors to grab off “still images.” Hence, the lockout. And, no tears from me.
The best ways you have to teach people they are in error are ECONOMIC.
Of course, it hasn’t hit the tenured idiots in academia, just yet. But down the road do you think waving credentials is gonna matter? OR will most people just be faced with tuition bills they’ll be paying for, while they won’t be able to afford “more children,” or “better housing?” ECONOMICS. Hits ya in the butt every time, if you decide not to pay attention.
As to what’s next, I’m actually banking on Libby!
Do you know why? He’s the one that’s still paying the bills. While the real liar, Joe Wilson, is in the same toilet with Jimmy Carter. ECONOMICS.
Libby’s also hired the best of the best, when it comes to defense attorneys in DC. Fitzgerald? Did you know he’s an outsider? What does he know, coming from Chicago, about the DC crowds? What if he’s as STUPID as Marsha Clark? (When you lose “big ones,” their not just fish stories. Attached to them, for losing, is watching your reputation “go south.”)
They say Theodore Wells is among the BEST LITIGATORS. Most Americans don’t know what this means. But it’s like saying Lawrence Olivier could really play Shakespeare! Even Brando tried his hand at getting this complement, when he was young. He went on screen as Marc Antony, the lone voice to rise up and complain about the brutes who killed Juilius Caesar. He played it well,too.
So don’t underestimate what it means when you know that Theodore Wells is a GREAT LITIGATOR. (They say the same about BELDAR.) And, there are really only a few men, who rise above most lawyers, who have the ability to capitvate the imagination with rhetoric. As it applies to the LAW. Abraham Lincoln was another.
So before I’d draw a conclusion that Wells can’t get Libby’s case heard in front of black people, I’d pause.
From where I reflect things, the phonies in the black community, these days, are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. (But blacks don’t seem to advertise much. Except you feel their indifference.)
Given how BAD polarization IS, I’m willing to watch what happens, next. How smart is Libby? I know lots of Jews who like Blacks, and get along with them at the same time. Those old southern anamosities just don’t beat in Jewish hearts. What are the stakes here?
Bush Derangement Syndrome? It seems to be that those who followed the garden path on that one haven’t, as yet, learned all there is to know about ECONOMICS. Even though newsrooms today are passing out pink slips, WHOLESALE. And, the fallen? More often than not, a credentialled black. Who bought into the nonsense while at college, that journalism was a subject to conquer, so you could walk with the powerful. And, feed your families.
What happens if a giant pin goes into that balloon?
Just asking?
No, I don’t think it means much in terms of the donks, and politics. But Richardson’s just entered the race! And, talk about polarizing your choices, among your flocks, when the choices will center on a black, a brown. And, a flying female pig.
Won’t it be nice to see something coming down the pike that offsets the horrors delivered after the OJ verdict? (I had once believed in the fairness doctrine. I didn’t know a few despots would rise up and grab off more than their share on college campuses. But so what? Time does strange things when she marches on.)
Ahead? Reggie Walton may toss the case? Reggie Walton might go against character, and give Fitzgerald all the advantages. But then what would average Blacks do? Think it’s great to watch one of their own best litigators get ripped apart? Think again. And, let’s just wait.)
I suppose the obvious in all of this is that Fitzgerald must have political ambitions and he is simply laying the groundwork now for more overt partisan plans later. Bet you he runs as a “law and order” candidate for mayor of Chicago or some other office … as a Democrat. And will figure the DNC “owes” him support.
Basically I see what he is doing as putting some political capital in the bank.
Cone, you and your 3rd grade emotional issues are outta here. Sorry – this site is for adults only.
Some people never learn.
I’ve already stepped forward and said that Libby doesn’t lose.
He’s holding the high ground.
And, he has enough money to hang tight.
Most people who “lose” in court are people without financial resources.
The other reason I’m not betting against the DC jury pool? Well, Theodore Wells, a very gifted Black lawyer, THRIVES withint DC. He’s WON before!
Fitzgerald’s just from out-of-town.
And, Fitzgerald, as yet, has not charged the REAL LIAR: JOE WILSON with anything at all. It wouldn’t be the first time that a prosecutor guessed wrong about how “strong” his case is. And, I actually think Fitzgerald had been hoping Reggie Walton would have tossed the case “long ago.” But that didn’t happen.
And, you can’t peak under Walton’s robes.
But he might not like Fitzgerald all that much; because Fitzgerald kept filling papers FULL OF LIES IN THEM. You think judges just sit there, too stupid to have an impression of the prosecutor with the weakest case, who has used official documents to lie straight at the judge?
Well, then. You and I hold differing appraisals about human nature.
And, yes. Plame’s blonde. And, no she is not dead like Nicole Simpson. On the other hand, how many black jurors sympathized with Nicole? Why assume the numbers just up when Plame shows up. Having held a better government job than any one of the seated jurors?
Sometimes, people make assumptions.
Lincoln once made assumptions that Blacks would never be as smart as whites. And, just needed to be “shipped away.” Then, he changed his mind. A lot of stuff in DC came to his attention. Including Frederick Douglass.
Never, ever underestimate how bright men behave when they’re faced with prejudice.
Libby also knows the score. While a few idiots thinks Jews always lose. Too bad they don’t watch the ironies playing out. (Even Dryfuss, in france, didn’t lose his case.) And, the europeans are the worst dreck when it comes to holding race and religion against others.
I’ll even extend this to my current belief that the muslems in Londonstan aren’t standing on terra firma. Just that the enemies they make every day choose not to share heartfelt motivations with them.
It only appears as if the whites, in europe, are on the run.
Like rear view mirrors, the images you see are not proportional to reality.
As to calling Libby a “perjurious little asswipe,” that just reflects on the writer. It’s a stinking opinion from a squirt.
By your vocabulary, cone, you must be a KosKid.
And my questions still have not been answered.
cone:
That was not only abusive it was just wrong. Wilson gets caught lying to the Senate itself and there are no repercussions. There is nothing that we know so far that proves Libby is a liar, unlike Wilson. And even Republicans deserve a fair trial.
The truth is people do forget things, they remember things incorrectly and since there was no crime to begin with putting someone on trial for the chronology of conversations they had years or months previously is going to be difficult to prove.
But calling the man an asswipe is stupid and says a lot more about yu than him.
A-men to the “ECONOMIC”.
I remember when I used to go to concerts for music..and not because I identified with the musicians stand on something or politics or etc.
I remember a time when “stars” and musicians and actors..etc..realized what they did was for EVERYBODY regardless of politics or religion or etc. They wanted EVERYBODY to watch the movie or buy tickets to the concert or etc. And while privately they may have held very strong views or been active in certain causes, etc.,they seperated that from their professional life, understanding that they were a “public” commodity that was bought and sold (in the business sense) and a public persona that their paying audience identified with. They wanted the widest range possible..more tickets, more money, etc. It seems now…they want to take sides on things, be controversial, want us to go see their show and often listen to them blather on about whatever their pet cause is, (other than singing the songs that we just came to hear), or what their political views are, or how much they hate certain people (like some of those in their own audience who obviously will not be back). Then,if they start to loose money, they commonly dig themselves in deeper…usually making it even worse. Or alternatively, they sometimes insist that “we” all seperate the 2 things, their singing/actig and their politics or insults (and continue to buy their products)..while they seemingly cannot seperate those things — or they would have never brought such a thing up at their performance in the first place. Bah.
It’s no different than the current problems facing some big MSM companies. It just seems more and more …some who are dependent upon wide, subscription base to even make ends meet, are perfectly content to divide their readership…based on ideology or a “position” on any given issue…EVEN if it costs them the entire firm? I guess that would at least be standing on “principal”? You’ll show us..huh? Run yourself out of business??
Ah, well. In regards to Anti-Fitzmas, I just sat back and waited when the Rove frogmarch frenzy started. I guess “truthout.org” still insists Rove was indicted?? It was just super-double-secret sealed indictment? I always wondered..what it meant that Armitage’s dept was responsible for the only piece of evidence that confirmed that people within the WH could have known about VPlame at the same time(the memo ciruclated by State Dept). And further, why, with everything that was going on, Armitage never bothered to tell anyone at the WH or the president’s staff , or even the president himself..of his (Armitage’s) invovlement…EVEN with the press laying seige to the WH and the President? Did he not think it was important that the president know…as he listend to Bush make public statements about it? Further, I wonder what was going through Armitage’s mind…as he watched the WH and the president and his staff take the heat …knowing that he was the one who leaked it and that the President and his staff didn’t know what he knew.
As to Wilson, I agree that he’s been given a BIG pass on the things that he’s said publically. At least in the MSM he has. When he went before the commission, he did’n't come off so hot.
He also seems to have quite an impression of himself and his own self-importance. And while it would be marginally beneficial to Wilson to have “only” his Iraq commission hearing testimony to judge him by, we have an entire body of work and public statements by this man that don’t reflect well on him.
I would stop short of calling them lies, because unlike somepeople…I believe that’s a word that one cannot use unless one has proof that the person knowingly himself believed differently (or knew it was untrue when they said it). I think Wilson believes his own BS for sure. I think he has a VERY high opinion of himself. There is of course, no law against “that”.
I would add, that what people say in the media…and what they say in court…might often be different things for obvious reasons. I look forward to hear what Wilson has to say under oath…and I truly hope that he gets asked some tough questions. It’s about time..don’t you think?
Dc,
Wilson lied. He said his trip debunked Niger forgeries, when he and Valerie KNEW the forgeries did not show up until 8 months after his trip. He lied that Bush lied – plain and simple.
Dear DC–
I agree. Wilson seems very dishonest and arrogant.
He was sent of a secret mission by the CIA and should never have written about it in the NYT.
Just because he learned something doesn’t mean that he has the full picture.
“Fitz was NOT authorized to investigate any other discussions to the press, only the one that led to her employment being made public by Novak.”
Was Fitz a “special prosecutor”? If so, there is no limit to what he can investigate once appointed. He could have been appointed to look into fish market corruption in Los Angeles and instead go after sock smugglers in Maine. There is no limit and there are no boundaries for a “special prosecutor”.
Don’t anybody lose track of the fact that Conesomething and Jerry are both commenting on this thread and they are both Ken. so you can safely disregard anything they say.
What makes anyone think Tim Russert does not have a dog in this fight? If I’m not mistaken Russert like many other pundits and anchors in MSM today served in Democrat administrations – Russert worked for years for NY Governor Cuomo. I wouldn’t be surprised if he shaded the truth in favor of the Dems – he does it enough in Meet The Press.
Wow, we’re not discussing Reggie Walton!
He seems to be a very cool judge. You can’t read him through angry outbursts, because he’s had none.
Yet, the judge got such bullshit from Fitzgerald, you just wonder IF THIS CASE WERE GOING ON IN LAW SCHOOL (as a set up). What would the professor DO to the kid who just outright thought LYING TO THE JUDGE was gonna work out for ya at trial.
As I’ve said. IF Reggie Walton were a football player, HE HAS NOT FUMBLED. (I guess this comes, when you learn how to hold the football. Because I’ve watched footballs games. And, in amazement WATCHED as men with the football are not only running zigzag. There are refrigerator sized men flying at them. And, THEY DON’T LOSE THE BALL!)
It takes great skills not to give away the store with facial expressions.
While we just wait.
There are people, who on automatic pilot, say: The prosecutor has to lose the case, for the defense to win the jury.
That’s not true!
Just from what I do know. That prosecutors rarely rise to the courtroom skills of the best “Perry Mason’s.” The best litigators.
And, even when it comes to cameras in the courtroom, haven’t people noticed Walton is way ahead of Ito?
He seems in total control.
(Though, yes, for America’s sake, he should have thrown Fitzgerald’s case out the window. He chose to let the trial go forward.)
And, there must be at least one good judge in DC? Or, otherwise, how would Thedore Wells gain a reputation as the greatest? You can’t do this with stink-o opponents, inside the fixed courts of the “Old South.”
The media created this storm.
But Rove never got frog marched, either.
So a lot of the hype turned to junk.
And, OJ’s trial? The jury went out to lunch. But to get to that terrible result you’d have had to have noticed Marsha Clark got outclassed.
And, who outclassed her? The champ was a black attorney.
Split all the hairs you want; OJ is a free man because the prosecution was INCOMPETENT.
Libby may be a free man soon enough, because his legal talent has been picked to WIN.
You might see the same sort of commitment to “go all the way” … with Nifong’s junk. Against KIDS. But the Lacrosse players didn’t fold their cards, and beg a plea.
Again. Most of us haven’t gone to law school. But we haven’t gone to medical school, either. And, we’d know the difference between a good doc and a bad one, just because the bad ones make things worse.
Besides. Nobody forced Fitzgerald to do his “presser.”
That he doesn’t let you know he did something stupid?
Beldar said there are lawyers who “know they’ve lost the jury,” but they don’t signal this. They are like poker players with dueces. Who keep hoping “the other side” breaks.
And, that’s the case. Fitzgerald. The out-of-towner. With a blonde “victim” who may set off alarm bells among those who sit on the jury. And, seeth at the money this dame got out of a government job!
Otherwise? I no longer recognize the way jealousies can drive people. When you sit there thinking the Blacks in DC “just want to hurt Bush.”
I can’t wait till Walton begins swinging his gavel. Some of Fitzgerald’s “tricks” might not pass GO. And, then Fitzgerald sweats.
Before Libby sweats.
Are people assuming the judge, Reggie Walton, won’t gavel Fitzgerald in the courtroom, should Fitzgerald try tricks and fakes? Do you really think Fitzgerald would get so much leeway?
Let alone, Theodore Wells, not holding Walton to the LAW, by “objecting” to all the bullshit that you’ve seen already flying through the dishonest paperwork Fitzgerald’s presented to the judge.
I WANT TO SEE PAYDAY.
The original mandate given to Fitzgerald did not include the wider scope. Check it out. Get the facts. What is posted on his site is the larger mandate…NOT the original, is it not?
And my questions are still unanswered….but cone, we know how much you hate the actual facts…just drama and repeating of the Huffington Post and Kos for you.
You have not been here long enough and should probably read the archives on this subject. We have discussed it in depth here for over a year… we like finding out the facts whatever they may be…
Again: This whole affair is about the undermining of a sitting President during war…by rogue elements in the CIA..oh, and Armitage…THAT IS THE REAL CRIME…
with a shabby cover-up.
Conesplif did not get the message. He is now outta of here AND all his comments have been deleted. Maybe this time he will take his childishness back where it belongs
AJStrata
Whine and moan all you want, the facts remain unchanged. Is Wilson under indictment?
I s Bush under indictment? Is Hillery Clinton under indictment? Oh..I forgot..it\’s Rove. Rove was indicted…oh..wait..no..it was top/secret, double down, indictment that nobody has seen.
Is Fitzgerald under indictment?
Is Honey West under indictment? Is M. Jackson under indictment?
Is Nancy Pelosi under indictment? How about Rove? Is he under indictment? Is Dick Chenney under indictment?? Are you under indictment? AND…………
Did either of them lie to a federal grand jury?
Did Libby lie to a grand jury? I thought that\’s what this trial was supposed to be about? The grandjury is only to say there is enough evidence for the trial..but it\’s not a trial. Nor has Libby been convicted. He may have…I don\’t know. But..then..you don\’t either …do you bub?
Perhaps…any number of people who have testified in the \”Grand jury\” ..might come back now to testify and have some descrepancy in their testimony that will end up with THEM facing such a charge. You never know.
Did the CIA file a criminal complaint against Wilson or Fitzgerald?
Did the CIA file a criminal \”complaint\” against Libby???
Did the Department of Justice – headed by John Ashcroft – and then Alberto Gonzales – authorize prosecutors to investigate their behavior?
Did they authorize prosecutors to investigate anybody else\’s behavior???? It was the CIA who requested the investigation. And they didn\’t name \”Libby\”. Nor has Libby been charged in the CIA\’s initial complaint that started the entire investigation to start with. Nobody has been charged with that…..not even the \”real\” …\”leaker\”…(the State Dept: Armitage).
AJ,
re: Wilson lied.
Ok..if you say so. I just make the distinction..between…a person actually comprehending that they are misleading people…and people like Wilson and Gore, who have narssisitic dellusions.
To me, that’s a distinction of difference. Maybe not to some people. So be it.
Further, I would add..that if you want to look at what you are talking about (a conspiricy) …his wife…would be the better place to start. She’s the one who actually would have had access to such information…not Wilson.
If I could be so bold Strata…you should check out the timeline of the history of those “forged documents” before you decide that nobody in the CIA knew what was contained in them before they were actually in our possesion (right before Powells UN speech).
The fact is…US intelligence knew the subject, the dates and the names on it…long before they actually had the document in their hands. There are some who suggest we actually had copies of it…long before then. The issue more was..the yellowcake wasn’t even remotely a major factor in their assement.
All of that somehow gets lost in this. But, the truth is..my friend…that NONE of it was material as to why the CIA thought Saddam had a nuclear program (Iraq already had yellowcake).
I don’t know. Do any of you actually read any of this stuff? HERE:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/press_release/2003/pr08112003.htm
The CIA was HELL bent that the alum tubes were “it”. The smoking gun. The yellow cake wasn’t even a factor in it. The entire thing is a red-herring in regards to intelligence estimates on WMD.
I would add for Ko’s kids that visit who have trouble discerining between facts and campaign t-shirt slogans….the statements from the link above by G Tenent, directorate of intelligence, was in direct response to a lot of the flak that was generated by MSM by Wilson’s media claims…and is also factually backed up by the Iraqi intelligence committee findings.
Are there any efforts, other than Clarice’s letter and those following her suit, in pushing the Department of Justice and our government in pursuing the potential ethics issues against Fitz and the Libby case?
Has anyone heard from the Department of Justice regarding Clarice’s letter?
“Jerry,
Fitz was told about Armitage when he took over – or did you forget that?????”
Armitage didn’t use Plame/Flame in describing Mrs. Wilson to Woodward and Novak, and didn’t know that she was covert, though he did know that she was an analyst at the CIA.
So I’d say Armitage isn’t a target of this investigation for good reason, surely Novak was asked by Fitz and the FBI about this conversation with Armitage and whether Plame and her covert role came up.
The conversation with Woodward was hidden, by Woodward and Armitage, from Fitzgerald (not by Fitzgerald!). But the facts of this conversation are consistent with Novak’s in that Plame as a covert agent wasn’t discussed.
You want to look at CIA inspired conspiracies?
Well, you could look at what Castro says. But then you’d have to go to Cuba. And, I think we have evidence right here, at home.
I think John F. Kennedy was murdered by PLOT. Not a single bullet theory. And, probably not from Oswald’s gun, either.
I think LBJ knew more, but took that information to his grave.
I know Gerald Ford was on the Warren Commission. A terrible piece of American fiction. But that when he died people no longer mentioned that an idiot could be “sold” on the one-bullet theory. That Ford then “sold this” to Americans? I bet to differ. And, yes, the first time he ran for President, he LOST. All he really got was a gift from Nixon.
But people hate conspiracy stories.
Nixon, though. Was taken out by a very big conspiracy! Designed between the Washington Post, and the head guy at the FBI. Why did Nixon NOT survive? He picked terrible people to represent his office. Erlichman and Haldemann looked like nazi con guys. And, when Rosemary Woods died, Mark Steyn wrote her obituary. He said Nixon really went down because Woods (who heard what Nixon was saying), did a “secretarial clean up job,” and stuck in “expletives deleted, for “god damn” … While everyone thought he was dirtier in his speech than Lenny Bruce. And, all those “deletes” were to the word that begins with the letter “F.” (Which wasn’t true!) Steyn adds that if she wasn’t the “perfect secretary,” but instead kept all the “ums, and repeats, and speech confusions, nobody would have read the tapes and gotten a clear picture of what “her boss meant.” But Rosemary decided not to allow a single curse word to appear. She typed the tapes into a “reality” designed to pass muster with Nixon’s mother: Hannah.
So, Nixon not only went down because of poor reporting. And, slanted reporting. But Vietnam, too, saw its liars emerge victorious. Or you don’t understand the pullout from Vietnam. And, that today the vietnamese, have learned the hard way that it was the CHINESE who were not their friends! And, living under the thumb of communism isn’t idelic. Can’t put genies back in bottles, though!
While at the current rate of things, our “elites” are gonna go the way of the old British aristocracy. (They went kurplunck.)
Do you know why? There are more of us, than there are of them. And, they can hoist and foist the likes of hillary; but she ain’t gonna “sell da movie.” (Drudge used to announce on his radio show, that the hollywood moguls flew off the tracks. Because the insiders were giving Jennifer Annison star power. When she couldn’t “open a movie” to save her life.)
But people with lots of money also have habits of throwing this money away. All you have to do is look at the HOUSE OF SAUD and scratch your heads. You’d have used the wealth they got from the West, to try and destroy the West? I think all those lazy tent dwellers are dumber than dirt. And, in no way does “lots of money” add brain cells. Even bright men, who marry dumb blondes, if they’d live to see the progeny they get grow, would find their ugly looks prevail. But their offspring’s brains are on par with the dumb blonde’s.
Barbara Tuchman said for European aristocrats, it’s all gone within seven generations. (Only Winston Churchill stands out as proving what happens to most aristocrats, wrong in one particular instance.) Well, it’s not a science.
Since none of us have any idea how the judge will handle this trial, we can at least assume that WOODWARD threw a monkey wrench into the works; BECAUSE he is NOT GOING ALONG with the rest of the media.
Woodward’s already dropped the bombshell that leads to Armitage.
And, Theodore Wells has all the advantages (that only the judge can remove). When it comes to telling the jury about what Fitzgerald did with the truth. (He hid it!)
And, if nothing else?
One thing this attempt has done is put Woodward on notice that his own Watergate investigation was AGAINST THE LAW. And, also against what most Americans would consider FAIR PLAY.
In other words? Woodward knows NOW, that history won’t look kindly on the “take out of Nixon” through media scams. And, ploys.
So no matter what else happens, Woodward is gonna be tempted to CLEAN UP HIS OWN IMAGE!
How can Woodward do this?
Well?
Have you noticed that when he writes books you hear about them?
You really think Libby goes down the toilet. Based on a what I believe could be a mistaken belief that “all blacks are moronic camp followers.” Just as I don’t believe hillary would be hot among black voters, either. But the media only works at fooling people.
You bet, if Walton screws up, Woodward will blast out the TRUTH at full volume.
Why would Reggie Walton want a reputation that he got his job through affirmative action. But even his gavel-swinging is on par with Kofi Anan’s leadership of the UN?
Sometimes, in life, you need a better tailor. And, sometimes in life, when you want to consider a whole bunch of people “losers” because they’re black; you should sit back. And, count to 10.
Carol, you’re fascinating…tell me about companies, what do you think will be news in 2007?