Head of Leak Probe Called Relentless

Expectations High as U.S. Attorney Takes Over

If Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the man chosen to investigate the leak of a CIA operative's identity to a prominent Washington journalist, is everything people say he is, there should be a nervous leaker out there today.

Colleagues, classmates and more neutral observers say the Chicago-based U.S. attorney is fiercely independent, relentless, tireless, fearless. He has sent al Qaeda terrorists, mob hit men and drug dealers to jail; last month he indicted the former governor of Illinois. American Lawyer magazine has written of his "almost frightening brilliance." Author Daniel Benjamin, having studied Fitzgerald's work in prosecuting terrorists in New York, calls him "an awesome public servant."

"Anybody who has done something wrong in connection with should not be heartened by Patrick Fitzgerald's appointment," says former deputy attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. "That's an incredible understatement."

On the other hand, Fitzgerald's personal friendship with No. 2 Department of Justice official James B. Comey Jr. -- he is the godfather of one of Comey's children -- leaves some critics complaining that top administration officials still have too much control over an investigation that is centered on the White House.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46146-2003Dec31.html

...scrutinizing Fitzgerald and/or his work? I hope that he's good and that he'll remain independent of any individual or entity who might try to influence his investigation. But the Post's attempt to paint him as a people's folk hero makes me a bit uneasy.

...written by a 27-year veteran of the CIA:

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1231-15.htm

"....then there is the fact that Plame was identified to no fewer than six journalists. It appears likely that at least one of them may decide to come forward..."

I hope, I hope, I hope. Because it appears this is our only hope.

doesn't end up suicided or have a bad accident...

Since */Ashcroft hired a tough guy, a blogger has come up with two possible scenarios...


1. The leaker has been discovered , but either the leak was not a crime or is too trivial to warrant prosecution. In this case, an honest prosecutor would come out saying that the Democrats were right in what they claimed occurred, but that it does not warrant prosecution. This, indeed, is what all the evidence so far is suggesting. The Democrats would make political hay of an official statement that Mr. X leaked the information but there would be no prosecution, saying that Ashcroft was just protecting his political allies. This is a little harder to do if someone other than an official Justice Department spokesman makes and defends the announcement.

2. The investigation has uncovered misbehavior, but by people in the CIA-- perhaps Plame herself-- who are opposed to the Bush Administration.
It is clear there was misbehavior in the CIA in selecting Wilson to go to Niger, since it was clear he would use the opportunity to embarass the Administration without collecting any real information. Someone ought to be fired for that. It may be that an actual crime has been committed, too--- say, misuse of government money for political purposes by civil servants, or violation of a confidentiality agreement (by Wilson), or violation of a nepotism rule (by Plame), or something we don't know about. If Ashcroft goes after the malefactors, he will be accused of trying to punish the victim or trying to punish whistleblowers. It is better to let a special prosecutor take the heat.

http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/03.12.31c.htm

TIt is clear there was misbehavior in the CIA in selecting Wilson to go to Niger, since it was clear he would use the opportunity to embarass the Administration without collecting any real information. Someone ought to be fired for that.

Da wha? Well, this blogger shows considerable evidence of listening to reichpundits without engaging brain. The yellowcake documents are unequivocally bogus in themselves. Wilson has a stellar record of service to Republican administrations, and has the relevant experience to be sent on the mission and to make the judgment he made. Further, he did NOT instantly go around trying to "embarrass" the WH with his findings. In fact, he didn't publish anything on them until it was clear that they had been disastrously ignored--Wilson at first assumed the *admin had other information justifying what the Chimp said in the SOTU speech, and only published when it became clear that it was the same story he had debunked.

Thus this whole second scenario is based on a premise that doesn't bear any closer scrutiny than the original yellowcake documents themselves.

Pfffaggh.

appointee? Yep, sure is..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1048806/posts?page=59#59

the day Fitzgerald was appointed that he had spoken with Wilson and Wilson was satisfied with Fitzgerald. These weren't exactly Pitt's words, but that's what I took away from Pitt's post.

So if Wilson's ok with Fitzgerald, I, of course, feel a lot better with the appointment. If everything about Fitzgerald's independence and tenacity are true, Bush & Rove may be feeeling uneasy not knowing exactly what this guy will do and that it may not matter if he has marching orders or not.