Before Fitz can indict anyone else, he has to prove Libby lied!

[johnaries]

Comparing the investigation to baseball, Fitz said that Libby's obstruction "threw sand in the umpire's eyes". Therefore, Libby's lies frustrated the investigation. Before Fitz can go any further, it has to be determined if Libby lied and what he lied about. No matter what other evidence Fitz has, this has to be determined first before the rest of the evidence can be put in perspective.

This, of course, doesn't mean that Fitz plans to indict others if Libby is found guilty - but it doesn't mean he won't, either.

[Tennessee Gal]

1. I don't think so at all.

Fitz may have evidence of perjury, obstruction, and making false statements against others involved. He just may not be ready yet to indict.

[thinkingwoman]

2. Um, no he doesn't. nt.

[rzemanfl]

3. Not true. If others tell the truth, he doesn't need Libby. n/t

[hlthe2b]

4. NO... if this were the case we'd never have any concurrent

charges for related crimes...

[Lancer]

5. I think Libby will be very helpful

in giving Fitz all he needs to move forward. The prospect of 30 years in the slammer tends to act as a truth serum.

[hiaasenrocks]

6. Not necessarily.

Fitz was using that analogy to explain why Libby's lies were serious. But that doesn't mean that Fitz doesn't have independent evidence that others were involved, either in the original crime he was investigating or the ensuing cover-up.

Libby's crimes (obstruction, false statements, and perjury) were the most obvious and easiest to indict at this time. Remember, Rove gave something to Fitz. That's another line of inquiry to pursue. Not to mention the information given by all the other witnesses.

Libby's trial is important and may unlock a lot of this, but Fitz doesn't have to wait for that.

[FreedomAngel82]

11. Yes

I agree and I also think that Fitzgerald probably has all his plans laid out and for all we know he could have other indictments ready to use at any time notices. Part of Libby's indictment is lying to the jury.

[johnaries]

7. OK, maybe he doesn't HAVE to, but it would make his case

much stronger!

[shugh514]

8. Fitzgerald said

that he needed the truth to complete his job and Libby prevented him from learning the truth. I took this to mean that Libby would have to be dealt with before Fitzgerald could continue the investigation.

[johnaries]

9. Thank you! that's what I got, also.

Fitz is obviously a very careful prosecutor who likes all the details taken care of.

[jsamuel]

12. yep, he also alluded to INTENT in his analogy too

whether purposefully or not, he said he couldn't tell whether the pitcher MEANT to hit him in the head, MEANT to hit him in the back, or just slipped

because the umpire has dirt thrown in his eyes

[goodhue]

10. delete