Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

[John Nichols] Patrick Fitzgerald: It's Not Over

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:27 PM
Original message
[John Nichols] Patrick Fitzgerald: It's Not Over



http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?mm=10&yr=2005

> Posted 10/28/2005 @ 3:26pm
> Patrick Fitzgerald: It's Not Over
>
> The most intriguing news with regard to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation of the apparent effort by the Bush-Cheney administration to punish former Ambassador Joe Wilson for revealing how the White House deceived the American people about the threat posed by Iraq is not the indictment of Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff.
..........
>
> But what matters most are the questions that the Libby indictment has raised with regard to Cheney's actions?
>
> Let's be clear: If the Libby indictment and resignation is all that comes of Fitzgerald's two-year-long investigation into a case that touches on fundamental questions of government accountability, abuse of power and the dubious "case" that was made for going to war in Iraq, then this whole matter will be no more that a footnote to the sorry history of the Bush-Cheney era.
........
>
> Fitzgerald was extremely cautious about what he meant by that statement. But he did confirm that he will be keeping the "(grand) jury open to consider other matters."
>
> But, while Fitzgerald made the predictable announcement that that the "substantial work" of the investigation was done, the fact that the grand jury remains empaneled makes it reasonable to suggest, or at the very least to hope, that we have reached the Churchillian moment when it can be said: "This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
>
>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hopefully, facing a potential 25-30 year sentence will make Libby Sing....
...like a little birdie and drag Darth Cheney and the whole corrupt Bush administration down...

We CAN hope can't we? ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. This is the only good thing to come out of this
it will be disappointing but not surprising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. Exactly!
This is just the BEGINNING of what is going to be a long, drawn out affair, and lots of s**t has yet to hit the fan. Don't forget that Fitz could have 'exonerated' Rover today -- HE DIDN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
movonne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. It may be just the beginning, but mean while we still have the SC and
cutting all the benefits to the poor...we just don't have time to wait...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mr_hat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. "The" grand jury does NOT remain empaneled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. "But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Nichols is saying Fitz should examine the use and misuse of Intel.

A review of the documents surrounding the Libby indictment leaves little doubt that there are still many questions to be answered, and that at least some of those questions should relate to the actions of the highest-ranking officials in the administration.

This is why 40 members of the U.S. House have urged Fitzgerald to expand the inquiry to examine whether Bush, Cheney and members of the White House's Iraq War Group conspired to deceive Congress into authorizing the war – thus committing the federal crime of lying to Congress. Of course, there will be those who argue that such an investigation would be too broad an extension of the special prosecutor's brief. But that's just the latest line from those who have always wanted to close down this inquiry.

The simple fact is that, if Patrick Fitzgerald wants to get to the truth about who was behind the attempt to discredit Wilson and Plame, he has to examine the reason why the White House cared so very much about what was said regarding the use and misuse of intelligence. That is the examination that Fitzgerald can and should now begin.




.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
speedoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-28-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. And Fitz said today that he is investigating the "why".
I'm sure he said that. It was what he used the baseball analogy to explain. I'll go back and read the transcript, but I'm sure he said that.

As I listened to Fitz today, that's what gave me the most hope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC