Fitzgerald's Eight Pages - Let's unseal the reason he put Miss Run Amok in jail

OpinionJournal.com ^ | November 4, 2005 | Unattributed

[gpapa]

Friday, November 4, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

Apart from Scooter Libby, the biggest loser by far in the Patrick Fitzgerald probe has been the press. The "leak" investigation that every liberal editorial board demanded has already sent one reporter to jail, and the damage is only going to get worse.

Thanks to the disastrous New York Times legal strategy, the D.C. Circuit of Appeals dealt a major blow to a reporter's ability to protect his sources. Prosecutors everywhere will now be more inclined to call reporters to testify, under threat of prison time. And if Mr. Libby's case goes to trial, at least three reporters will be called as witnesses for the prosecution. Just wait until defense counsel starts examining their memories and reporting habits, not to mention the dominant political leanings in the newsrooms of NBC, Time magazine and the New York Times. "Meet the Press," indeed.

[p23185]

The "leak" investigation that every liberal editorial board demanded has already sent one reporter to jail, and the damage is only going to get worse.

And the next leaker needs to be identified and a GJ convened for whomever leaked the CIA Black prisons in the Washington Post today.

[gpapa]

Dow Jones & Co., this newspaper's parent company, filed a motion late Wednesday requesting that the federal district court unseal eight pages of redacted information that Mr. Fitzgerald used to justify throwing Judith Miller of the New York Times in the slammer.

[Mike Darancette]

I hope Libby gets out of this OK. That said, this should be great sport.

[demkicker]

I hope Libby gets out of this OK. That said, this should be great sport.

Check out THIS post. You may change your mind. I'm very troubled that Libby was even allowed to serve in the Bush administration, period.

[msnimje]

Defense lawyers generally represent people with whom they disagree and even find repulsive.

This is not unique to Libby.

[demkicker]

Obviously, you didn't read the entire thread and watch the video.

[Kryptonite]

I think you're the FReeper that's made some cogent points about Libby being a media leak tool, and that Republicans shouldn't worry about his fate or that of the media.

This article concludes that Libby and the media are the two biggest losers. It supports your theory, IMO.

[Kryptonite]

My deductive logical reasoning makes me believe strongly that Fitzgerald made all sorts of assertions about national security interests trumping Miller's right to keep her mouth shut over her sources.

Fitzgerald even started his speech on the day of the indictment by referring to national security interests. Then, with the only charges about Libby having nothing to do with national security, he revealed that he was trying to pull another fast one.

He went to the well one time too often, and that will be shown IF the sealed papers become unsealed. If not, I'm not so sure I ought to give a hoot.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Ditto on your summation.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

If one should ever get into dire legal problems, one will be wanting the best lawyer available, irrespective of ones political leanings.

[Spaulding]

There is much more to this than we are seeing. I've seen no one note that Judith Miller was Laurie Mylroie's co-author of "Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf." Mylroie, briefly, Clinton's (well chosen) expert on middle eastern affairs, was the one who wrote the book "A Study in Revenge", which anticipated 9/11. She has brilliantly described the battle we are now seeing between Bush and CIA/State in a brilliant book you can probably find on remainder stands called "Bush vs. the Beltway." Anyone who is a trusted friend of Mylroie is probably a friend of "ours". I suspect her silence was to protect others in the administration.

Mylroie, who taught at the Naval War College as well as Harvard, has probably devastated too many media "pundits" with the depth of her knowledge and merciless honesty to get much air time. Her analysis, in my opinion, provide rare glimpses of clarity about the middle east. Too bad Bush didn't engage Mylroie to explain The Middle East. He may have tried. CIA probably has a few other employees with which to set up critics, and would probably have made short work of Mylroie, given that the depth of her knowledge about the region probably includes much which they have classified (I will never forget having had my Scientific American confiscated by an Army G2 officer because of a klystron tube ad which we happened to use.)

I'm guessing that Miller was, at times, a Mylroie surrogate, providing real insight to NYT readers. I'm sure there were many who hated her for it. I'm guessing she wouldn't go along with providing the "unimpeachable" Fitzgerald the ammunition to go after someone else. She obviously can't talk about it, but the evidence is there. Her testimony did not contribute to the the Libby indictment, and she is probably protecting someone else who, like Libby, is doing a good job.

[msnimje]

Obviously, you didn't read the entire thread and watch the video.

Actually, I did.

But I know that I do not know much about this situation. If what he did was so bad why did Cheney make him his chief of Staff? If he did something unethical, why did the president let him work in the White House. If he did something against the law, why did he pass his FBI check and get a very high security clearance.

[jwpjr]

re: I'm very troubled that Libby was even allowed to serve in the Bush administration

I am beginning to have the same disturbing questions.

[Grampa Dave]

[popdonnelly]

By all means, let's kick out every lawyer who once had an evil client. Then who would we have left?

[hgro]

By all means, let's kick out every lawyer who once had an evil client. Then who would we have left?

A better option, lets kick out all evil lawyers.

[popdonnelly]

Sorry, I don't buy the notion that Libby's a bad guy because he once had Marc Rich as a client. Libby also once worked for Dick Cheney.

[the Real fifi]

Give it up. I have. A number of posters with little knowledge of law/lawyers/and civility have decided that Libby who gave up millions of dollars of income to work his ass off is somehow not worthy of our concern. They are entitled to their opinion, but I find it remarkably unpersuasive and their motives for attacking him now peculiar.

[balch3]

Is it really true that Libby wrote some sexually perverse novel a few years ago? I've seen some quotes, but anything can be taken out of context, knowing the MSM. I wouldn't even put it past them to make it up entirely, like the supposed Scanlon email that's going around.