FITZGERALD DOCUMENTS RELEASED

US Dept. of Justice | oct. 28, 2005 | Patrick Fitzgerald

[blogblogginaway]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1028051plame1.html

[Shermy]

Looks like Libby was not Novak's source no. 1.

[LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget]

I was suggesting Fitzgerald has spent 2 years posting on DU.

[Shermy]

Some of the allegations rely on Cooper having a perfect memory.

that will fail.

[Julliardsux]

will be corroborated by other conversations of similar type w/ Miller and Russert that are also subject of the charges.

You think he's getting a fair jury?

[fantom]

this will fall apart in court . fitz is in over his head. but at least he is the new hero of the left. the damage is done. remember bush agreed to this farce. more new tone crap. the left will demand hearings on lies for war. bush will fold.

[conserv13]

I agree.

[Minus_The_Bear]

You think Fitzgerald is evenhanded? Then does his paperwork claim Plame was covert and not know outside of intelligence circles? The guy is either a hack or a complete moron.

[goldstategop]

The end of the indictment states that its only charges and the defendant enjoys the presumption of innocent and the government has the burden of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")

[Dems_R_Losers]

Looks to me like Fitz "thinks" that Libby deliberately lied to the investigators and the GJ and made up his story specifically to ensure he could not be charged with the leak. Note that Fitz asked Libby whether he said what he said because he knew of the law against disclosing a covert operative's identity. Libby said, no, I said it because that's what happened.

I really cannot believe that Libby would so blatantly lie to an investigator and to a grand jury while under oath, unless he really thought all the reporters he talked to would refuse to testify forever. And if he did, why would he give them a waiver to testify? Either Libby lied or Cooper and Russert lied.

[Shermy]

I'm reading it...some of it sounds like he lied to Cooper.

So what? Legally I mean.

And who is Novak's source no. 1???

[agere_contra]

As GoldstateGop's post just reminded me: the other difference with Clinton's case is that there were one or more actual crimes being hidden/obstructed by Clinton's perjury.

This charge however concerns obstruction of justice in a case where there exists no corpus delicti, no evidence that a crime has actually occurred. If WE do not stand up and fight about this process crime, then the Libs will have criminalised Conservatism for another three decades.

[maranatha]

I guess he may not be a criminal attorney, but, oh, I love Barry Richard.

[dirtboy]

Check out #32a starting at the bottom of page 11. Correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the charges is based on Libby acting surprised when Russert told him about Wilson's wife working for the CIA!

Cripes, now TV Interviews, where Libby said NOTHING about Plame, are now a ground for indictment!

[atomicweeder]

Fitz knows it's bogus. That's why he uses the characterization that "her affiliation with the agency was classified." It's a much broader, vaguer term. Notice that NO WHERE in the indictment is there any allegation that Libby violated either the 1917 or 1982 laws. Only that he lied about talking about Plame. If you read between the lines, Fitz is admitting that her status is ambiguous. No mention of "covert status".

[Julliardsux]

And let's all make sure we are being consistent with what we wanted for Martha Stewart. She did the same thing. Lied to investigators because she believed (mistakenly as it turned out) that she had committed a crime.

And Fitz is not a hack or a moron - that paragraph is supported by some evidence. That's all it needs for the indictment.

[pierrem15]

It's amazing that Fitzgerald's docs repeat part of the classified info released by Wilson to Kristof to the NY Slimes, but Wilson is not indicted.

[PhilipFreneau]

Libby was charged with perjury (2 counts), obstruction of justice (two counts), and making a false statement (1 count).

Libby was NOT charged with the crimes Joe Wilson and his allies in the MSM were claiming. There was no disclosure of covert intelligence personnel, nor was there any improper disclosure of national defense information.

(Note, in recent times, the only public disclosures of classified information, that I am aware of, have been by Patrick Leahy and John Kerry).

It does appear that this is just another of those "Martha Stewart Crimes", where there was no crime until there was a witch hunt (er, an 'investigation').

We also understand, now, why the DEMONcrats have been going out of their way to praise Fitzgerald in the past week or so. They were leaked info on this indictment.

And, finally, we now know for certain that none of this would have happened in the first place if the CIA had not performed acts that, for all practical purposes, were intended to undermine the war effort and embarass the President.

[Lurking in Kansas]

Was Wilson or Plame ever questioned under oath about this as to their actions regaring this whole matter?

No, but they should be the 1st and 2nd witnesses at Libby's trial, and it will be fun watching them be nailed on the stand. :-)

[Rummyfan]

But it's still all 'he said, she said'. I think the whole thing is bad farce. Two years - Two Years? - and this is what Fitzgerald came up with?

[goldstategop]

Exactly. There's no mention of "covert" anywhere in the press release or the indictment and neither the 1982 or 1917 laws are applicable to the case. There's no underlying crime. Its all smoke and mirrors.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")