Jonathan Turley just suggested that Fitzgerald's investigation wasn't that aggressive.....

[marmar]

.... especially of Rove and Cheney. (He's on Countdown with Keith right now). I know Patrick Fitzgerald is celebrated by many DUers, but I've never felt that he went after this with full vigor. Am I the only one?

[Itchinjim]

1. Nope, I felt that Fitzgerald was pulling his punches.

And that the "Fitzmas" silliness here on DU was just that, silliness.

[madfloridian]

2. Everyone is protecting Little Boots.

The media, the Democrats, the lawyers, the judges. No one is going to say he has no clothes.

[Cha]

4. Except the

bloggers! That's why The Bloggers get the Medal Of Freedom By Truth!

[annabanana]

10. yeah.. those D.F.H!

[Cha]

11. I googled it and

Got It! :hippie: :toast: :smoke:

[Jane Austin]

3. There are quite a few pretty savvy law types I know

who thought that from the beginning.

They also think that the case never could have been broad enough to do what it needed to do because Fitzgerald, as a US Atty, had only a limited path he could tread. And that's exactly why he was appointed.

They also don't think Comey and Goldsmith are such heroes, either. They turned a blind eye to a lot of bad stuff in the bush administration before they finally saw they ship sinking.

[kelligesq]

5. I agree with Turley. Fitz could have come up with more, but when seeing

your fellow Justice Dept attorneys removed from their positions for not being right wing gung ho enough...and wanting a career... I wouldnt be surprised if Fitz had blinkers on.

Turley is a constitutional expert.

[JackRiddler]

6. The only indictment to come out of all that war crime and crime against humanity and mobsterism...

was against one guy... not for starting a war of aggression... but for exposing the identity of a single CIA agent whose husband got in the way?

After a THREE YEAR investigation?

The message in that is clear. Expose a CIA agent, that's bad. Kill millions, it's okay if they're in the wrong countries.

[H2O Man]

7. I have a lot of respect

for Mr. Fitzgerald, both as a prosecutor and a person. But he should have indicted several others, including Rove and Cheney.

[goclark]

8. I have to agree with you ~

[Missy Vixen]

9. Okay, H2OMan, I'll dance

Here's a question: How was he to indict either of them when Libby was obstructing his entire case? Also, neither case would have ever seen the inside of a courtroom due to graymail issues. I have to believe that there was a damn good reason for not filing indictments on Rove, and I don't think it was because PJF was protecting Bush and Cheney.

I'm curious to know what your thoughts are on the above.

Julie

[H2O Man]

15. Good questions.

First, I do not think there is any evidence to suggest that Libby obstructed Mr. Fitzgerald's view of Karl Rove's activities. His decision not to indict Karl reportedly had to do with information that involved a Time reporter, Ms. Novak, which was reported on "Hubris" on pages 401-3.

Mr. Fitzgerald made a judgement call regarding if he could likely convict Rove for some of the questionable things he testified to. I have never heard anyone make a rational argument that his failure to indict Rove had anything to do with protecting Bush or Cheney, and my earlier post clearly does not suggest that.

There was a lot of speculation when Rove again testified to the grand jury the next spring. At that time, I was certainly among the people who believed Rove was going to be indicted. He wasn't, and the reason could be because Mr. Fitzgerald concluded the chances for conviction were limited, or there may have been another reason.

I think that there was enough circumstantial evidence of VP Cheney's calling the shots in the operation to damage the Wilsons, that he could have been charged. In his grand jury testimony, Libby did say that Cheney may have told him to share Plame's employment with reporters, but that he could not remember for sure. Along with the hand-written notes and other evidence in the Libby trial, it seemed that Cheney could have been charged, and there was no grey-mail issue relating to that evidence.

Certainly Mr. Fitzgerald's closing statement about the cloud over the OVP indicates he believed there were abuses of power which might not reach the level needed for criminal prosecution, but are still things that Congress can and should investigate.

I think highly of Patrick Fitzgerald. Because I disagree with some decisions he has made in this case doesn't in any way suggest otherwise. I do recognize that he had more information than I have -- obviously! -- and he may well have made the correct decision.

[Me.]

23. Was The Novak Business Really A 'CurveBall'?

I've wondered at the last minute coincidence of it

[deminks]

12. Congress, too, could see what Fitz has. He as much as offered at

the end of the trial. I blame Congress as much as Fitz for the lack of follow through. There is an obstruction in the Congress, too. I am curious to know what that is. I think that the leaders at the very least are being threatened on both sides of the aisle. Fitz, too. We know how compromised the DOJ is.

[madrchsod]

13. fitzgerald told the congress it`s up to them now

congressional committees can request the libby grand jury transcripts and all information relating to it. congress is the only body that has the authority to request and receive federal grand jury transcripts. one problem is the attorney general has to approve so now the two traitors affirming the attorney general becomes pretty dam important does`t it.

fitzgerald could go so far with what he had and with out a democratic house and senate that actually had courage he just could`t risk the underlining crimnal case.

[Generator]

14. Well duh-some of us noticed this awhile back

That's why I dub Fitzgerald the worthless boyscout.

[Disturbed]

18. I had the feeling that Fitz was afraid to call Cheney to the stand.

He can still do so if he really deemed that productive. The investigation was not closed.
He could call for another GJ.

[cureautismnow]

16. Why didn't/doesn't Fitz tell us what Bush/Cheney said in their interview?

Is there some law that prevents him from revealing the extent of their private testimony before him? :shrug:

[H2O Man]

17. Yes, there is.

He does not have the legal authority to release the information gathered in the grand jury investigation, unless it is used in evidence in a criminal trial.

[cureautismnow]

19. Can Congress compel him to tell them what Bush/Cheney said?

I'm quite surprised this information has not been entirely leaked by now. As I understand it, there were more than the 3 main players in that room. I even read something about 4 lawyers perusing a transcript of the interview and summarizing that Junior denied any foreknowledge of the outing.

[H2O Man]

20. No, they can't.

In fact, several good democrats in Congress have asked him if he could talk shop with them. He can't. They have asked the Department of Justice to release the FBI/grand jury investigation records, and the DoJ is unresponbsive.

Congress can access the records not made public in the Libby trial by going to a federal court and showing a need that justifies the court ordering the DoJ to turn the records over. The people in Congress know how to do this. It's called "impeachment."

[defendandprotect]

21. I did hope and trust . . .. now I'm not sure . . . ????

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/flashback-how-scooter-

and this was 2003 ....

http://www.thesmokinggun.com//archive/0406061libby1.html


Seemed like a lot of people had trust in Fitzpatrick but he didn't seem to worry
Cheney/Bush much . . . ???

I don't know . . . .
He is a Republican, isn't he ????

[H2O Man]

22. No.

He is not a republican.

[defendandprotect]

24. Fast check says he's registered as an "independent" ----

I don't know enough about him to judge that ---
has he been hanging out in Democratic circles ---

I thought he was appointed by Repugs --- ????

Didn't have time to check much further ---
maybe someone else has more info?

[Catherine Vincent]

25. He says he doesn't belong to any party.

His voting record is secret....if he votes at all.

[H2O Man]

30. He is a federal prosecutor.

Hence, he has been "hanging out" with people who are registered democrats and republicans. Because there has been a republican administration since January of 2001, he has -- like every federal prosecutor -- worked for a republican administration. My hope is that we have a democratic administration for many years to come, and that Patrick Fitzgerald serves as US Attorney General for a series of democratic presidents, until he retires.

[defendandprotect]

31. I think the original question stands: Was Fitz aggressive enough in the Plame case?

[lovuian]

26. Fitz gave us a conviction of a underling

never gave us the real criminals

He didn't fool us but then he did protect himself that he could open the trial at anytime

[DLnyc]

27. My impression was Fitz believed Congress should (and would) pursue

Cheney. Why they haven't I don't really understand myself. Maybe the time is coming?

[KharmaTrain]

28. It Took Him Years To Get George Ryan

This crook, now where he belongs in jail, had a strong patronage army and was selling drivers licenses to the highest bidder and pocketing the money. His people kept hush for a long time, but Fitz kept patient and was able to "squeeze up" to get the big fish.

Now if Scooter called Fitz and said "there's something I need to tell you"...that would restart the game, not Snotty's book...sadly.

Fitz was limited by what we're seeing thrown at Congressional investigators now. He had trouble accessing records and ran into "national security" and "immunity" landmines throughout the investigation. Fitz faced obstructions in many directions...and IMHO thought he could get Scooter first who would then give up the others.

[Quixote1818]

29. Has Fitz completely closed the door on the investigation yet?

I don't remember him ever saying it was over.

[lovuian]

32. It wasn't and its obvious

to hear from Scottie only shows Fitz up

Why wasn't Scottie brought on stand and asked this

cause Fitz didn't want to go there

Fitz gave them a fall guy Scooter

just like Abu Ghahib gave the underlings as fall guys

while Rumsfeld walked away unscathed

if this pattern continues it will undermine the whole government

because the underlings will realize they take the fall while the big guys walk

Noone wants to work under that

[grasswire]

33. Turley has said that from the get-go.

I don't know that he thinks Fitzgerald took a dive, but he has expressed this sentiment all along. Too easy.