Posted on 09/22/2006 9:48:13 AM PDT by Impeach98
...
Has Times editor gotten away with murder?
Posted: September 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
If you blinked you would have missed it.
I'm speaking of the news coverage about who really leaked Valerie Plame's identity as a non-covert CIA agent.
The leaker, former Colin Powell aide Richard Armitage, was a vocal critic of the war in Iraq. Perhaps the media "overlooked" Armitage and his role in this scandal precisely because he shared their disdain for the war in Iraq.
Did you happen to notice that Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby didn't receive that same consideration even though they were innocent?
Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars for an investigation into something that didn't matter. Plame was not a covert agent her identity was known to many and a CIA report indicates there were no plans to send her overseas for future missions requiring her identity to be concealed.
As former chief counsel for the Senate Intelligence Committee and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Victoria Toensing noted in a column for OpinionJournal, Patrick Fitzgerald "knew from the day he took office that the facts did not support a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act; therefore, there was no crime to investigate."
But what if there were a case of important top-secret classified information that was being deliberately leaked, and what if we knew that it had already hurt national security? Wouldn't that be something that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should investigate?
REST OF COLUMN CONTINUES... CLICK HERE
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Liberals seem to good for two things. Wasting money, and getting wasted.
It's just that they always want to waste OUR money that's so problematic.
It is absolutely ridiculous that millions of dollars were wasted in an investigation where they already knew that Armitage was the source of the leak.
This is the horrendous dangers of Independent Counsels. They are free to pursue their own agendas without much restraint.
Fitzgerald has an obligation to defend an investigation that was a waste of money, time and energy -- especially the wrongfully forcing innocent people to spend their own money defending themselves for nothing.
I hope the judge in the case throws the case against Libby out the door and imposes some sanctions on Fitzgerald for malicious prosecution.
I don't think Fitzgerald has the authority to initiate an investigation of something other than the "CIA leak."
He is the Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice. He's the man:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html
Bump!
More like tens of millions of dollars.
Silly piece in part. That is not something Fitz is tasked to do or should do. It is for the regular DoJ staff to do. If they aren't--and I believe they are--she'd have a point.
Doing a search on mentions of an investigation into the New York Times in Lexis-Nexis and Google News reveals a big empty void.
As I read those documents, his authority is limited to the "CIA leak."
Macsmind says there's one going on. Unlike the Frog March boogies, you can't expect the media to be highlighting it.
No, she doesn't address my point. She is off the mark in suggesting the NYT behavior on the leaks in other matters is or should be in Fitz' portfolio. It is very carelessly written.
Macsmind says there's one going on. Unlike the Frog March boogies, you can't expect the media to be highlighting it.
No, she doesn't address my point. She is off the mark in suggesting the NYT behavior on the leaks in other matters is or should be in Fitz' portfolio. It is very carelessly written.
Gonzales is unlikely to initiate this on his own. It would be the Administration launching what would be seen as a self-serving war against a newspaper.
Well then we're just going to have to disagree if you think she made her point carelessly. I work with her often and maybe that's why I "get it" more cogently. So, I'm biased, but I think you're just being unnecessarily critical.
I think the idea of a special prosecutor is inimicable to our legal system. The present system works far better. If she's calling for the AG to investigate, fine, though I think the FBI already is investigating.
Personally, I think anyone who--after the Plame fiasco--suggests the appointment of ANY sp, esp THIS one--deserves to be pummeled.
Then pummel away. I had the pleasure to meet Kenneth Starr when he was Solicitor General and then see him operate as a Special Prosecutor. I thought he conducted himself rather well.
I don't think Fitzgerald has the authority to initiate an investigation of something other than the "CIA leak."
They won't touch Richard Armitage with a ten-foot pole. Remember the warnings about him from Perot, ridiculed by the press? They know not to go there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.