If the indictment is dated Friday, how did Fitzgerald get a meeting?

[theboss]

I know we have a plethora of posts on this. But here is a question:

Are we sure the grand jury met on Friday? If they didn't, we got issues.

What time was the indictment handed down? Because Fitzgerald needed time to go from the Court House to the attorneys' office, arrange a meeting, get Rove and his Secret Service Detail, shut down the building, and then have his 15 hour meeting.

On a Friday.

Say it happened at 9:30 AM. Three hours seems like a rush to get high-paid attorneys, a Presidential advisor, and a federal prosecutor together but let's do it. The meeting begins at 12:30 PM. It lasts until 3:30 AM.

At no point around 9 PM, did someone say, "You know we are all billing at $400 an hour for this, and I have a tee time at Congressional at 8:00 AM. No one is going to jail tonight. Let's pick this up Monday morning."

[Sammy Pepys]

1. The "15 hour meeting" is very problematic timewise......

Hopefully that will be sorted out soon.

[theboss]

4. I really don't have an issue with the "Rove is indicted" aspect

Though it seems like they keep moving the goalposts on that one.

I just can't believe any attorneys met for 15 hours on a Friday in May in DC.

[onenote]

25. fwiw, last friday was beautiful here in DC

I couldn't reach anyone after 4:30 that day...everyone was playing hooky. Of course, they all might have been locked up over at Patton Boggs...

[Missy Vixen]

13. Just throwing this one out here

Not all "meetings" are in person. The meeting could also have been over a 15 hour period, but not continuously.

Julie

[theboss]

15. Direct quote from article:

"Sources said Fitzgerald was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Luskin for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Rove."

The story posted Saturday. So, they could have met from 12 to 7 and then, say, 8 to 5, I guess.

If so, it's a sloppy sentence and awesome reporting to get it out a few hours later.

Of course, if the story posted at noon on Saturday, your theory can't work out.

[BR_Parkway]

16. five lawyers billing 3 hours each would be 15 hours of meeting also

[SPKrazy]

21. Or 15 Billing One

or 3 billing 5

or two billing 7 and one billing 1 at different times

or 3 billing 3 and 3 billing 2 (at different times)

or 30 billing 15 minutes

or 6 billing 2 and then later one billing 3

okay

who the heck knows

I think that 15 hours was probably over a non-continuous time period

[Sammy Pepys]

42. The problem is.....

No normal person would ever come away with that from reading the article. Lawyers don't even use that kind of terminology.

This whole billable hours thing is, I'm afraid to say, nonsense.

[Stinky The Clown]

23. It was 15 business hours

or was that 15 daze?

[HereSince1628]

2. Why do you think the indictment was handed down on Friday?

Can you point me to where Leopold said that? With corrections printed and corrections given on the radio, with Leopold making corrections and other folks from TO making chages it's hard to keep what Leopold's story is straight.

[theboss]

6. Will says it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1217129&mesg_id=1218383

[HereSince1628]

10. Ok, but did Leopold? It was HIS story.

All these ancillary support postings needed to keep Leopold's story afloat may very well do that but they also underscore the short-comings of the original articles.

[Opening_Day]

3. It was "business" hours

And they are much more lengthy than ordinary google-type hours.

[RagAss]

5. there are several questions about the story....

I believe the "time of it's time" has come and gone....let's get ready to get pelted by Freeper dung real soon...... and folks, if this taught us one thing, maybe it's time to stop the hero worship for certain DU members.....our strength is in the open forum we give to all of our members. Give it some thought.....

[Loge23]

7. The whole sad affair

Your scenario makes perfect sense. It's entirely logical as you have described it.
What is not logical or sensible is the blind allegiance of so many to the TO story.
Hope it is true? Fine. I do too.
But comments like "I always knew you were right" are, frankly, sad.
That is the same blind allegiance that has propelled the administration all of these years.
Think!! Ask questions! Do the math!
No one is going to be tar & feathered or banished if they were wrong. But for crying out loud, please stop canonizing people who are only trying to do their jobs.

[theboss]

8. I want Rove indicted

Just because I think the entire administration is corrupt from top to bottom. If it takes an "Al Capone on tax evasion" approach to get them, I'm fine with it.

But the story is just so strange.

I have a law degree, though I don't practice. I live in DC. I have friends in these high-powered firms. And none of them are in the office on a Friday in May, since it's the only time until October you can go outside in DC without a HazMat suit on.

[Loge23]

9. Hopefully, this will end the speculation

Let's all let Mr. Fitzgerald work. Whatever happens, happens.
good post!

[catnhatnh]

11. Let's parse Luskin's statement-'cuz we know he wouldn't lie...

1.He stands by his statement of 4/26. Of course he does-Karl was NOT indicted on 4/26,which is just what he stated.
2.There was no meeting in his office,he took the day off.Yep,if he was off for the day there is no way they used his office.
3.I did not meet with Fitzgerald. Couldn't from home-but there certainly ARE conference calls in case of surprise indictments.
4.As far as I know Fitzgerald is in Chicago.Yep,you're on the phone,he could be too....just don't ask (is he in the office?) and you won't have to tell.

I started this thread while thinking how one could parse the words so no one could pin down a definite lie and I think this could cover it.Investigating Patton-Boggs I was hoping to find a Chicago office to cover the "Fitz in Chicago" thing but was disappointed-there is however an office identified only as located in "Northern Virginia".That might cover any statements that "Fitz isn't in" or "didn't meet with" anybody" in DC....Yeah it is wiggle words but I expected no less....

[No Exit]

43. First of all, I demand that Luskin produce the CAT!

If indeed he does produce a cat, I want that cat examined by a panel of independent veterinary experts to determine if it has recently been sick.

I agree with you that Luskin is certainly not to be taken on faith!

[Spazito]

12. I don't know if others have been involved in intense contract

negotiations or not, but having been in such marathon negotiation sessions, 15 hours is not unheard of and the 'negotiations' surrounding a possible plea agreement to reduce charges in exchange for cooperating with the Plame investigation for someone like Karl Rove would classify, imo, as intense negotiations.

[theboss]

14. They indeed happen

But the same day as the indictment? Wouldn't you want the weekend to review the charges? Sleep on it? Not do anything rash?

Has any major political figure ever copped a plea within 24 hours of a grand jury indictment?

[Spazito]

17. Yes, that is certainly possible, if under a strict timeline to accept

an offer or it is off the table. A sealed indictment could have been filed with the court and the negotiations be about additional charges about to be levied unless the target agrees to cooperate with the investigation.

[Jersey Devil]

18. Yes, but with the meetings you always go to the money

Anybody holding the cards has the meeting at his own office in the lawbiz. No prosecutor is going to go spend 15 hours in strange territory while negotiating from strength. You get the defense lawyer in your office, which has no fancy, comfy furniture, no one to even fetch coffee, and make him sweat.

[Spazito]

19. The article doesn't say Fitzpatrick was at Patton Boggs for the

15 hours, what it does say is:

"Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.

Sources said Fitzgerald was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Luskin for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Rove"

Reading these two paragraphs, it certainly could be that Luskin was in Fitzgerald's office for a good part of that 15 hours whereas Fitzgerald was at Patton Boggs for more than half a day which simply means, imo, more than 4 hours.

[Jersey Devil]

20. I just don't see that ever happening

As a lawyer myself, I know how much lawyers hate meetings and how they are so impatient with businessmen who have endless meetings that almost never seem to accomplish anything. Meetings between lawyers, no matter how important the issues, tend to be short and to the point. In over 30 years of practicing law I have never heard of a meeting going on for 15 hours. The lawyers would shoot themselves first.

[Spazito]

22. I respect your opinion, I do have one question

Have you been involved in as high profile a case as this with such high stakes? I ask that because the stakes could NOT be higher in this case as seen by the Fitzgerald filing of Cheney's annotated notes and underscoring of the Op-Ed by Wilson in the Libby case so the normal way things are done may not necessarily apply here.

As in all things, the substance of the article will either be validated or not and it will be in Fitzgerald's time line only, not Rove's defense team and certainly not by those on an online forum.

[Jersey Devil]

29. My take

I think bits of the article may be correct or at least reflect part of what really happened. There may have been a meeting(s), but no one in their right mind would have a 15 hour meeting. Perhaps they met for an hour or so and then Rove's lawyers huddled while Fitz went back to his office and then they met later for another hour or so at Fitz's office, discussing, I would assume, the charges that Fitz might seek from the GJ if Rove did not immediately spill his guts (which would be the only reason for a meeting to begin with) right there and then (over the next few days) under oath and admit he was lying up to that point.

The problem is that Leopold wrote a very sloppy article. He said Rove had been indicted as a fait accompli, which obviously was wrong. He said they met for 15 hours when that is just a wild guess on his part. He should have said they had meetings during a 15 hour period. Hell, I'm not a writer but I can figure that out. He got the timing all screwed up - 24 hrs, then 3 business days, etc.

Look, there is probably a good reason why this writer is not with a major media outlet. He just is not a very good writer and based on what I've seen probably not a very good investigator either.

[Spazito]

31. Your take and mine, while admitting it is all speculation on both

our parts, is in tandem in some ways and diverges in other ways. I am prepared to wait for the definitive authority, Fitzgerald, to do what he does so well and then, and only then, imo, will we know the substance of his case against "Official A", Karl Rove.

The one thing I do know, it is a fascinating roller coaster ride with immense implications in reference to the investigation in total.

[karlrschneider]

34. I like the way you think, journalistically as well as legally

and you properly note that the original Leopold piece was a HORRIBLE piece of writing regardless of the truth or fiction of the claims. Not to mention the clumsy attempt at damage control later on.
:toast:

[Missy Vixen]

46. Interestingly enough

>No prosecutor is going to go spend 15 hours in strange territory while negotiating from strength.<

There were several news articles a few months back noting that oddly enough, Patrick Fitzgerald was meeting with defense attorneys at their offices all over Washington, DC. The reason why this was noted in the first place was because there is evidently a saying in the US Attorneys' offices -- "the eagle doesn't fly". I'm sure we're all wondering over the past few weeks if he did this because of possible wiretapping at his offices, but I do remember reading the detail.

I realize I'm a little biased, but I'm sure he could negotiate from a "position of strength" in the neighborhood Starbucks, let alone Patton Boggs.

Julie

[karlrschneider]

27. There's nothing to negotiate. Either the GJ has a true bill or not.

Leopold said flat-out it was a done deal. There's no gray in that. So either he was right and Fitz decided not to mention it to anybody except him or he dreamed the whole stinking (incredibly badly-written) miasma.

[Spazito]

28. The negotiations may be about additional charges over and

above those the Grand Jury had handed down to date. For example, the GJ could have handed down a single charge of perjury and the negotiations are about possible additional charges of obstruction of justice, etc.

[karlrschneider]

30. I don't think so...the lawyers don't get to decide that, the GJ does.

...

[Spazito]

32. It's not quite that simple as per this GJ guide

http://jctmac.tripod.com/fgj.html#PROCEDURE

The powers and functions of the federal grand jury differ from those of the federal trial jury, which is called the petit jury. The petit jury listens to the evidence offered by the prosecution and the defense (if it chooses to offer any) during a criminal trial and returns a verdict of guilty or not guilty. The grand jury, on the other hand, does not determine guilt or innocence, but only whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that a specific person or persons committed it. If the grand jury finds probable cause to exist, then it will return a written statement of the charges called an "indictment." After that, the accused will go to trial.

The grand jury normally hears only that evidence presented by an attorney for the government which tends to show the commission of a crime. The grand jury must determine from this evidence, and usually without hearing evidence for the defense, whether a person should be tried for a serious federal crime, referred to in the Bill of Rights as an "infamous crime." An infamous crime is one which may be punished by imprisonment for more than one year. As a general rule, no one can be prosecuted for a serious crime unless the grand jury decides that the evidence it has heard so requires. In this way, the grand jury operates both as a "sword," authorizing the government's prosecution of suspected criminals, and also as a "shield," protecting citizens from unwarranted or inappropriate prosecutions. A person may, however, waive grand jury proceedings and agree to be prosecuted by a written charge of crime called an information.

The grand jury is not completely free to compel a trial of anyone it chooses. The United States Attorney must sign the indictment before one may be prosecuted. Thus, the government and the grand jury act as checks upon each other. This assures that neither may arbitrarily wield the awesome power to indict a person of a crime.

[karlrschneider]

33. Ah, okay...I didn't realize the prosecution was required to assent

for it to be valid. Which opens up a couple of interesting possibilities...he presumably could go -back- to the jury and request either more or fewer charges????

Hmmmmmmmm

So there might actually be 2 different 'sets' of negotiations....yikes my head hurts now.
;-)

[Spazito]

35. LOL, my bottle of aspirin is emptier than it was before Friday as

well and, no, this time at least, my usage was not wine induced, tempting as it was to imbibe!

[Snivi Yllom]

24. The biggest unbelievable angle to all of this: Rove is still at the WH

Rove has not been indicted, he would have resigned instantly.

[theboss]

36. Rove's behavior in reality and the story are both strange

Has any public figure cut a deal within minutes of an indictment? No.

This is Rove's life and Bush's presidency. If Rove cuts a deal within 15 minutes of the indictment, his career is over and Bush's presidency is in tatters. Look at the way Delay behaved.

Rove would not be on tv on Monday and on the Hill on Wednesday. He would have either resigned to spend time with his family or in full-fledged attack mode.

We are still seeing the status quo which would certainly not be the case with indictments even coming, let alone already brought down.

[No Exit]

41. I see your point, but what about his recent step-down as policy advisor?

We at least know for sure that his position in the Bush Rogues' Gallery changed within the last month. Remember the big announcement about how Rove was no longer domestic policy advisor, but was instead going to "concentrate on the upcoming election"?

There has to have been a reason for that. I can't see a creature like Rove letting go of any amount of power that easily, unless there were a hidden reason.

I have high hopes that the fat scum WILL be indicted.

[DancingBear]

26. I'm not trying to be trite about this,

but you may want to try and find out exactly where Fitzgerald was on Friday.

It will answer a lot of your questions, I think.

P.S. Before people go accusing me of being unhelpful, I'd kind of like to second what Leftie said sometime today. In order for you to form your own opinions, and to convince yourself, it really is most helpful to do the leg work on your own. Lately, there has been a lot of folks saying "I think this" or "I think that", and I think this issue is so polarizing that myself (or anyone) saying "x" is just going to get someone else saying "y" with just as much conviction.

Now go do your homework. :)

[DoYouEverWonder]

37. What happened to the story about Rove?

Oh we're all arguing about the distraction instead.

[theboss]

38. There is no story about Rove

That's the problem. 24 hours/24 business hours/three days/whatever are up.

And there are only crickets chirping.

[DoYouEverWonder]

39. Then how come everyone isn't screaming about Chris Matthews?

Who went on Imus last Friday morning and said that Rove would be indicted that day.

Then MSNBC ran teasers all day about Tweety and the Plame Investigation, which got pulled sometime Friday afternoon.

It's okay for Chris Matthews but not okay for anyone else to be 'wrong' about this story?

[theboss]

40. Matthews didn't say he had already been indicted

Matthews said something was going to happen soon in the case, which probably IS the case:

"Well, it could be today. It could be next week. Everybody is buzzing about when or if. It’s a big if, big when. There is a lot of talk because he is still being interviewing by the special prosecutor. He keeps being hauled before the grand jury. So something is going on here with the special prosecutor. We don’t know whether he is going to clear him or nail him."

Leopold said it already happened on Friday.

[symbolman]

44. Good Job

Been watching your logic and it's sound.

The Leopold Apologists will be out in full force through Monday, pulling the BIZ hours like Taffy into NEXT WEEK, called "FUZZY MATH", for some reason if you create confusion you can claim what you like later, move the goalposts whenever, someone else does cleanup so neither gets Blamed.

These articles became more OPEN ENDED as they were fired into the blogosphere, yet the MSM has been saying that Rove Will Probably be Indicted during the whole period, about a Month now.. more than two weeks ago, they were predicting "ten days to two weeks"..

Tweety, Captain Spittle used words like "IF".. Not "ROVE INDICTED" no gray area there.

Next we'll be hearing that Pitt or TO was "LeoPoled" and it's not THEIR fault. Uh.. THEY reported it. They need to take responsibility for it.

YOU BREAK IT, YOU BUY IT.

But for those interested in facts we still have Friday, tho I've heard nothing about a GJ meeting then, hell, even firedoglake couldn't confirm the GJ meeting for Wed..

Keep Moving the goalposts and eventually you'll be OUTSIDE the Stadium :)

Oh yeah, and Karl Rove TRICKED T/O Specifically, since nobody else was willing to get HOOKED.

Will someone on the YAY TEAM GO TEAM GO please ADMIT the damn Phoney ass 24 Business Hours is OVER? Unless they're talking about Blockbuster VIDEO in which case you get to keep the video for a Week or more without paying extra.

One more thing. So Fitz can STILL perhaps get the GJ to Vote for Indictment on Friday AND give a press conference? I guess he can do anything, like Superman he can be in two places at once or appear so, like Chicago and DC on the same day.

Thanks Boss!

[theboss]

45. I think something is coming down

There is going to be a story here soon; that I believe wholeheartedly.

Matthews - who I think is probably a little more connected that Leopold - believes it. So do others.

I think something along these lines happened: Rove has been informed that he is now a specific subject of the grand jury and was asked to testify again. There were probably some intense negotiations about the how/when/if aspect of that

As a result of this, Rove may actually be indicted within the next few weeks.

And when the real story breaks, Will Pitt will immediately post a massive screed explaining everything away and will take some sort of stand akin to "Tis better to be righteous than right."

80 percent of his fans will praise him in response. There will be a trickling of criticism that will be attacked.

And Will will post a half-true article in 2007 about Bush committing perjury that will generate 549 responses.

[symbolman]

47. AHHHHHH!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

I tried to bet with the guy for a DU donation of 1000 dollars if there was NO Target Letter delivered on April 26th as stated as FACT by LeoPoled, but Will told me to stick things in my butt...

I cried for days, he's really dangerous with a can of ChefBoyRDee too so be careful.

Gotta love these kids, never had to fight a war like I was drafted into, so there's lots of tough talk. Anyone who's ever seen someone torn to pieces doesn't talk like that. And I've personally made it a RULE to not talk tough to Vietnam era veterans, they can get pretty weird and come all unhinged, and quickly, that's if you say rude things to their face, tap tap tap on a keyboard is real tough..

"Tis better to be righteous than right." You know he hasn't "released the Hounds of Hell" in a long time, about time to recycle that one for the newbies..


Thanks you NAILED IT :)

[Missy Vixen]

48. October's press conference

wasn't announced until earlier that same Friday. There was the benefit that the grand jury's time was running out.

>So Fitz can STILL perhaps get the GJ to Vote for Indictment on Friday AND give a press conference?<

Perhaps. I guess we'll wait and see.

>like Chicago and DC on the same day<

The flight between Chicago and DC is ninety minutes.

Julie

[yodermon]

49. good lord.

1) The grand jury meets every Wed. and Fri. It is a Regular GJ, not a Special GJ. So all the "oh did they meet? did they meet?" questions are silly. Yes, they met. They will meet every Wed & Fri. until their term expires. See http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/untying-few-legal-knots.html

2) No one has suggested that the GJ returned indictments for Rove on a particular date. The assertion is that, by Friday May 12, indictments had been acquired from the GJ by Fitz. Perhaps they were acquired on Wed. May 17th, or even the prior week. Leopolds article(s) makes no assertion as to this point.

ON EDIT: Ok I see Will Pitt is asserting dates of May 12th on the indictment documents which blows my point #2 out of the water.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1217129&mesg_id=1217212

[theboss]

50. Will says May 12th unequivocably

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1217129&mesg_id=1217212

He has stuck his neck out as far as it can go on this one.

[yodermon]

51. yeah

I saw that post & updated mine just before i saw your reply.

What i don't understand is why Joseph Wilson and Larry Johnson are sticking by this whole thing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1183131&mesg_id=1183804

Does their word count for nothing here?

[robbedvoter]

52. I worked until 3 AM on a mere closing of a coop sale -

it HAD to be finished and that was that. Correction: I went home at 3 PM - the others stayed. I got reprimanded.

Considering the stakes no one would intrerrupt this (but Fitz)
When your star client is negotiating a plea/indictment you pray to God the prosecutor doesn't leave the table. You keep bringing him coffee and good snacks and keep going - because that's why you get paid th $400/hour.

[Skinner]

53. Locking

Continue discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1224473