Where was Patrick Fitzgerald on Friday May 12th?

[Coexist]

Okay - I cannot figure this out - someone please help. I have been researching where Fitz was on Friday - was he in a DC court filing documents, or was he at his trial in Chicago?

Help!

http://www.adelphia.net/news/read.php?id=12799937&ps=whiteHouse%2Ccongress%2Celections%2Cgovernment&lang=en

In the latest court filing late Friday, Fitzgerald said he intends to introduce at Libby's trial in January a copy of Wilson's op-ed article in The New York Times "bearing handwritten notations by the vice president." The article was published on July 6, 2003, eight days before Plame's identity was exposed by conservative columnist Bob Novak.


http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114774060320053665-yW4EYDFzYadmGaqpnXr0ZlqmEF0_20070515.html?mod=blogs
The Rove attorney says he spent part of that day at the vet with his cat and that Mr. Fitzgerald was in Chicago. A spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald declined to comment

[BurtWorm]

1. Fitzgerald didn't have to be in DC to file a document in the case.

He has people in DC who can do that for him.

But Rove's attorney isn't the best witness either.

[Coexist]

6. How do I find out if he was in Chicago?

this is frustrating.

[BurtWorm]

9. You could call his office in Chicago and ask.

But they might not answer.

[Coexist]

10. LOL! Their offices are currently closed.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/aboutus/index.html#Chicago

Phone: [phone]

[Inland]

2. As much as it pains me to even see this thread, I CAN'T RESIST!

The first article talks about a court "filing" by Fitz in the Libby trial court on friday, which wouldn't be done in person. So he could be in Chicago. Or not. He wasn't with me, I can promise you that.

[Coexist]

3. This document is dated May 15th

http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=129292

Does that mean he was in Chicago on the 15th?

I hate to ask the question, too. But another thread kept saying "just look it up and see where he was on Friday" so I had to.

[Inland]

4. Doesn't mean anything.

I wouldn't be surprised if Fitz didn't personally sign the agreement, but one of his assistant US attorneys signed it for him. Or signed it after.

And dates on documents don't mean when they are signed.

And filing dates don't mean when they are signed.

And I'm not even sure that Fitz would have to sit in on a fifteen hour session with Rove anyway. Who knows who is running what for what purpose?

Nobody except Fitz, who isn't talking, and maybe the defense attorneys, who have an incentive to lie.

So.....there you go.

Here. Keep your eye on this space.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/

[Coexist]

8. Okay - now I am even more confused.

But thanks.

[Che_Nuevara]

5. Out of curiosity ...

... does it matter?

[Coexist]

7. Well, I am in the "I will believe the indictment until proven false" camp

and there was a thread where it was brought up several times that Fitz did not meet with Rove's attorneys Friday. Posters were told to "look up where he was on Friday". So I am trying to do that - and I am having trouble. I am just looking for help.

[eallen]

11. Do you feel the same way about vampires and the Loch Ness monster?

Just curious. I have every hope that Rove is indicted. His character and power gives me expectation that he has committed crimes that deserve indictment. But believing what you want until it has been disproven? That's the stuff irrationality is made of.

[Che_Nuevara]

12. Much harder to prove a negative than a positive ;)

[Coexist]

13. I believe a 'sourced' article

I believe a lot of stuff I read in the paper. Some of it turns out to be false.

:P

[Stinky The Clown]

14. Fitz and my wife are old school chums .......

He was here on Friday ... ww did ribz out on the deck. It was a nice day. He uses toothpicks but not wipie-wipes. Just napkins.

I made the slaw. The fresh Vidalias added a nice zip.

[BurtWorm]

15. But are you in Chicago or Washington?

:crazy: