Indictments coming tomorrow

October 25, 2005
Indictments Coming Tomorrow; Targets Received Letters Today

An uber-insider source has just reported the following to TWN:

1. 1-5 indictments are being issued. The source feels that it will be towards the higher end.
2. The targets of indictment have already received their letters.

3. The indictments will be sealed indictments and "filed" tomorrow.

4. A press conference is being scheduled for Thursday.

thewashingtonnote.com

Thanks Skinner. I will learn.

:)

:hi:

I'll wait for the Perp Walk

We will know when they tell us. You can crap in one hand and wish in another. See which one gets filled first.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5144582&mesg_id=5144582

It's my republican husband's birthday tomorrow. Thought this would be a nice present

}(

:rofl::rofl: Timing is everything! Happy B-Day Mr. DesertedRose! ENJOY! :)

it's been rough for me.

My dad is still a republican but George Bush made my mom an independent! She told me though she's voting straight democratic next year. Hurray! She did vote for Kerry last year though. Only thing is she voted for the republican congressman guy cause she at that point still liked him. The Terri Schavio nonsense is what I think got her to not vote for him anymore. My dad is a fan of the "Daily show" though and he has said he liked(likes) Clinton.

I'd be divorced or actually, I don't think I could have ever married a repub! I'm too liberal...it would be constant warring!

You guys got my sympathy. I hope they're good to you in every other way.

I wouldn't have gotten past a first date with a Rethug.

:puke: :thumbsdown:

:hi:

Funny thing is, he doesn't talk politics much anymore. :shrug:

or Kerry anymore. I don't bring up the subject at all. He can stew in his own juices when it comes to politics.

Otherwise, he's a real sweetheart.

well, it would be just about a year ago exactly.

now, i need not say a word. just like you, lol!

what a nice present :)

You're mean. :P

he's pretty apolitical, but I'll sure have more to celebrate if it happens tomorrow!!

I was going for Noon-5 EDT today.

My fingernails are gone. My toenails are next.

I wonder if that is why Rush and others are focused on the perjury charges? I suppose they probably wouldn't have known early enough to slip it into their broadcasts.

Rush was a hoot today, explaining why getting Clinton on perjury and getting Rove on perjury are two totally different matters. Apparently it's cause with Rove it's clear that it was just a mistake.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Big Contest at blog - To potentially win a subscription to Salon Magazine, visit this post --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com/2005/10/contest.html

What idiots! And they say we're the one's who are messed up and not in reality? LOL! Oh brother.

"Perjury - ahh that's just nitpicking!"

These RW blabber mouths are in a real tizzy over this.

WHERE IS CHENEY?

that they got the letters.

he'd be proud as hell to be indicted. He'd pose for pictures, sign autographs. Just because he's a asshole mind you. :shrug:

wasn't it Huffingpost that had that? fit Delay to a 't' Will be interesting to see Cheney's mug shot!

What is up with that?

We'll probably know who is charged, but not the charges.

One of the comments on the washingtonnote thing links to this explanation of implications of sealed indictments

http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2005/10/sealed_indictme.php

<snip>

"Two words we should think about: sealed indictments." That was said to me by a trustworthy Washington reporter who has been covering the Plame/CIA leak case. He wasn't making a prediction; he was raising a possibility. It could be that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald might choose to file sealed indictments before the grand jury expires at the end of next week. That would mean that the names of the indicted would be unknown to the public--unless the information leaked.

Why would Fitzgerald do this? Perhaps he has not finished investigating. It could be that recent developments--Judy Miller's testimony, Karl Rove's return to the grand jury, the Daily News story that indicates Rove and George W. Bush discussed the leak (and Rove's involvement in the matter) two years ago--have provided him additional leads to chase down. (The Daily News story--see the items below--does raise important questions.) In such a case, Fitzgerald might want to bank several indictments, impanel a new grand jury, and keep digging. This is--needless to say--speculation. But anyone waiting anxiously for indictments should keep this scenario in mind.

<snip>

before the week is over with?

... and the prosecutor does not wish the defendant(s) to be alerted before charges are filed.

is it's so they can tell their families first and nobody else will know before hand. :shrug: Only thing I can think of.

:hi:

The whole administration are criminals

per the definition of indictment in the Federal Grand Juror's Handbook:

http://www.moed.uscourts.gov/Jury/FederalHandbookForGrandJurors.pdf

Indictment:
The written formal charge of a crime by the grand jury, returned when 12 or more grand jurors vote in favor of it.

... defendents can be named per indictment as, for instance, the recent "AIPAC/Franklin" indictment demonstrates.


Peace.

http://www.uscourts.gov/journalistguide/district_criminal.html

"The indictment lists the crimes the defendant allegedly committed and describes the facts the government believes support those allegations. It is a roadmap to what the prosecution intends to prove at trial."

So five indictments may mean five fish to fry.

We don't know what exactly the source meant.

The AIPAC/Franklin indictment hafd five charges with three defendents.

Look at it this way. Outting Plame is a crime, so three charges are brough to two people (the outters), Espionage, IIPA, and conspiracy.

Then covering up the outting is another crime with three charges and a dozen defendents (this is where Rove, Libby, Cheney, et. al. get theirs).

That's two indictments.

To get to five, he may be doing some forgery charges on the Niger document and the other charges that would center around that crime. That could take out the entire WHIG and would only be the third indictment.

That's why five indictments would be HUGE!

So will anybody be left or just Bush by himself?

First, I always dig your posts. When I first saw 1-5 I was disappointed but now you give me more hope.

doing with these charges!

:woohoo::applause::rofl: Lots & lots of people can be charged under the same indictment, so 5 indictments is a GOOD thing!! :applause::woohoo::bounce:

:kick:

:bounce: :bounce: :toast: :toast: :wow: :wow: :popcorn: :popcorn: :rofl: :rofl: :patriot: :patriot:

That sounds more like it!

in a single indictment for 22 defendents.

The possibilities are dizzying!

:crazy:

Do you realize how insane that is?

They can't be tired.

In any case, there's no rule about attacking the credibility and veracity of a public news source, so you damn skippy I will continue to critique bullshit when I see it.

i'LL continue to attack your tired attacks as weLL then.

I look forward to it.

I don't think Larry Johnson knows the first thing about what's going on in Fitz's office.

Why you do is a mystery.

much more credibility, because of his background, than you obviously do. Does this mean he is 100% correct, no questions asked? Of course not! His background simply provides a higher, much higher, weight to the potential that he may be on target.

Now, whether you are convinced by this or not, I frankly could care less. It's just a point that there are 22 files that Fitz is looking at, according to a leak to Larry Johnson.

Larry Johnson is some supreme authority, despite the fact that no leaks have come out of Fitzgerald's office, full stop.

Yer hanging on to a dream, kid.

YEAH!

Yup, I've been zapped.

:P

We will know when we know.

NAILED! :rofl:

J/K

Tired of this speculation. No one knows dick. Period. Wait for Fitz and shut the hell up.

bunch to go down!

!

And if they're "sealed" will we not know what they are unless fitz tells us?

But it will be leaked and then the bitching will begin about whether the leaker is correct and "nobody knows." I know all roads lead to Cheney and I know these crooks are rotten and I don't need someone to tell me they are not because we have no proof or it's not in the MSM.

Which reminds me: Don't tell me it's raining when the sun is in my eyes. (my little mantra to the nattering nabobs)

IMO, all roads lead to Bush. NOBODY with his temper (and temperament), his psychopathy, his delusions of grandeur, would allow himself to be, as they say, out of the loop.
BUSH KNEW.

is unless someone leaks it?

:hi:

Am I reading this right?

That's hardly the 20-21 that was expected. :wtf:

Yes, I know... no guarantees!

An indictment is issued for each crime, not each defendent.

Five indictments would be HUGE!

How many defendents? Is there any correlation?

a single indictment.

Just going by stuff I have read in the past on different crimes but isn't there "x count indictment" where the "x" is a number.

"Multiple count indictment" phrase found on Googling the definition of indictment---- one example found was "7 count federal indictment against 25 people"...note it says indictment and not indictments.

So is there still hope in getting a bunch of the chimpass crooks and not just a handful of them???

Like Espionage, the IIPA, and conspiracy could all be charges for a single indictment over outting Plame (the underlying crime).

Then obstruction, conspiracy, and perjury could be three charges against multiple defendents for the coverup (another crime).

:)

Sealed indictments is Christmas and New Years in one. It means Fitz could take it all the way to Italy and back. It could be the beginning of more which is a brand new day.

SCOTTY, YOUR REPORTER FRIENDS ARE WAITING. A White House correspondent who says he likes White House press secretary Scott McClellan, recently shared this observation with me: "It's sad about Scott. He doesn't know that one day--maybe soon--he is going to have to come out and say to the press corps about the Plame story, 'I was lied to, I was deceived, and, thus, I deceived you. I'm sorry.' Scott doesn't know this. Everybody else knows this. But he's loyal. He doesn't understand that such a day is coming."

I think Ari was more involved than Scott. You can tell that all Scott does is the talking points.

Ari was the new kid, the front man. Scotty was with the Monkey when he was GOVERNOR.

I think Ari may have spilled a few beans, and I think Ari got the hell out of there because he KNEW there was some bad shit going on.

Ari's the one with the diehard Dem mother...

how many indictments?

Looks like something wicked this way comes for bushco.

Sealed indictments? I don't understand.

Is he going ahead with an broader inquiry into the WMD deception and the false pretexts for war?

What????

We can only hope.:D :evilgrin: :bounce: :beer: :applause:

It's finally coming to a head, now we'll see where the cow chips fall. Come on Fitz, the nation needs you. Get these bastards!

All of this is speculation, all of it. We will know when Fitzgerald wants us to know, no sooner "uber" sources aside.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001031.html

October 25, 2005
Indictments Coming Tomorrow; Targets Received Letters Today

An uber-insider source has just reported the following to TWN:

1. 1-5 indictments are being issued. The source feels that it will be towards the higher end.
2. The targets of indictment have already received their letters.

3. The indictments will be sealed indictments and "filed" tomorrow.

4. A press conference is being scheduled for Thursday.


The shoe is dropping.

More soon

his scheduled news conference?

SHEEZUS I'm getting tired of all this waiting!

I might as well just forget about it all

:P

I question the Washington Note's source for this reason:

If the source knows that target letters have been sent, he should correspondingly know the precise number of indictments.

Instead, he speaks of a range of a "range" of 1-5.

Buford Pusser

... for instance. See Walt Starr's comment # 23.


Peace.

who thought it could also mean one person could have multiple indictments as well, but wasn't certain. Fingers (and toes )crossed!

Interesting.

I'm hoping for just one indictment -- violation of 18 USC 793 -- with several "counts" and several defendents. I'll take more, but that's the one I really hope sticks.


Peace.

:-(

:hi:

public.

It would be great to see Cheney and Bush in handcuffs!

had Larry Johnson on today and I believe Ed asked him if there was going to be another grand jury seated because this investigation had led to crimes other than the original outing of Valerie Plame. I think Larry Johnson said that's what he believes will happen.

So, if that's true, and each indictment is for a crime, rather than a person, it could be the reason why some of the indictments would be sealed. Maybe that's the reason for the press conference. If Fitzgerald just found other crimes, such as involvement in the forged Niger documents, he probably couldn't deal with that right now.

That's what the sign at the local bar reads.

Kinda reminds me of the indictments . . .

Is that for real at your bar, or is it just a marketing ploy? :)

I'd be all over that like a fly on poo. :evilgrin:

Free beer tomorrow.
The sign will read the same tomorrow.

for Thursday, then we should know pretty soon whether this is legit or not (I'm always skeptical). I'm assuming the networks will alert us ASAP if/when something is scheduled.

("I'd call it quite a fair description.") strongly implies that he knows who the uber-source is.

... and the investigation(s) will continue. My prediction for this week: Rove and Hadley, Bolton, and either Scooter or Richard Bruce Cheney, but probably not both. My money (space$) is on Cheney going down... Libby is a pretty slick character, and well versed in the law. Somehow I don't see him going to the Federal Pen to protect this group of traitorous bastards. I further believe that if Fitz has Cheney, Cheney will roll on Bushie2.

A Flash Salute to three (gawd puhleeze!) soon-to-be indictees at

http://www.bruindesign.com

Peace

I don't think any of the Bush admin will get them.

I think Judy Miller might actually face an indictment for lying to the GJ. I'm just wondering why everyone still thinks Plame was a covert CIA agent. The CIA came out about Plames status and said that she was not covert at all and that no crime was committed.

with the Attorney General.

Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.

:hi:

Very interesting reading upthread about the possible significance of "sealed indictments." Not going to be quick and shallow, he's going to keep pushing! Our curiosity will torture us, but it's for such a good cause...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5167395
thread title: Al Franken on as Olbermann's guest tonight-show will include Cheney & leak

I'll post a link to any video clips that become available in that thread. Keith will lay all this out clearly, and he and Al will make it especially memoroable.

bLah bLah bLah bLah bLah bLah bLah bLah

Suppose Libby is charged with four different crimes by the grand jury. Would that be four counts within a single indictment, or four different indictments?

BREAKING: CBS To Report Fitzgerald Will Make His Decision Known Tomorrow
From the CBS Evening News, to air at 6:30PM:

CBS’ JOHN ROBERTS: Lawyers familiar with the case think Wednesday is when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will make known his decision, and that there will be indictments. Supporters say Rove and the vice president’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby, are in legal jeopardy. But they insisted today the two are secondary players, that it was an unidentified Mr. X who actually gave the name of CIA agent V alerie Plame to reporters. Fitzgerald knows who Mr. X is, they say, and if he isn’t indicted, there’s no way Rove or Libby should be. But charges may not focus on the leak at all. Obstruction of justice or perjury are real possibilities. Did Rove or Libby change statements made under oath? Did they deliberately leave critical facts out of their testimony or did they honestly forget? Some Republicans urged Rove to step down if indicted. Not a happy prospect for president Bush.

Any guesses on the identity of Mr. X?

UPDATE: This bit from the CBS segment is also interesting –

SCHIEFFER: John, I am very interested in Mr. X. Is there any clue or hint as to whether he be - maybe someone who outranks Libby and Rove or would he be a lower-ranking official?

ROBERTS: The best guess is that Mr. X, even though his name is not known and some people are just speculating on who he might be or she might be, is somebody who is actually outside the White House, and in that case would be of a lower rank that both Rove and Libby.


http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/25/decision-tommorow/

I guess Roberts is technically right in saying that Cheney's "actually outside the White House", but how would he conclude the rank is below Rove and Libby?

Twas the night before Fitzmas
and all through the blogs
not a creature was sleeping
for the marching of frogs.

I at my laptop
and Dick in his bed
dreaming of prisons
and cakes baked with lead

The indictments were drawn up
with such secrecy, such care
as grand juries belabored
we hoped, do we dare?

When out on the steps
a commotion appeared
republicans were quaking
this is what they all feared

Out strode Fiztgerald
indictments in hand
the frogs began dancing
celebration at hand

On Cheney, On Libby,
On Hadley, On Rove,
Their names were all there
into the bunker they dove.

But truth did win out
on that Fitzmasy day
when the treasonous liars
were all hauled away.

I heard Cheney shout
as they marched out of sight,
Clinton lied too!
That makes it alright!!!

Merry Fitzmas to all and to all a good night!

Helllo0oo wasn't there a recent NY Times article that told us who the first person to leak her name was? IDIOTS. GOSH....

:does generic napolean dynamite run:

Just wonderin'.

All they said was that Fitzgerald has sent out the target letters. Nothing on how many, or any mention of "Mr. X." Once again the sites trying to scoop are wrong.

Sigh.

Unless they indict the big *, he will just use his powers of presidential clemency to let his bestest buddies walk to the lecture circuit. He will then appoint a new set of bestest buddies. Nobody's going to jail. :banghead:

If anybody's indicted, I doubt it'll be anybody worth a shit to indict.

Please let Cheney and Bush be 2 of those indictments. Oh yeah and Condi,Rummy,Rove,Wolfiwitz,Perle,Hadley,Hughes and Libby as well.

Dang,that's too many..oh well,you gots to have your dreams.

Will the truth finally come out? The rationale for the Iraq war is intimately associated in this invertigation.

How will the people react when they realize that 2,000 of the bravest American's died for a lie and a conspriacy? This admin is the most corrupt and evil in history.

Does anyone have a definitive answer on this? If the indictments are sealed, when will we know the identities of the perps?

Would their identities not be known until the cases go to trial? I'm thinking that it will be years, and in the meantime, the cabal will just go merrily along. No one will get fired etc. As long as it's not public who's indicted, they'll just pretend nothing is happening. Help me out on this..

(4) Sealed Indictment. The magistrate judge to whom an indictment is returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. The clerk must then seal the indictment, and no person may disclose the indictment's existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons.

http://www.law.ku.edu/research/frcriIII.htm

So it sounds like "Sealed Indictments" Wednesday, defendants arrested (and released??), then a full news conference Thursday.

I love the smell of justice in the morning.

I have waited so long. Plese don't let this news break while I am sitting in a dumb ass staff development meeting with a motivational speaker tomorrow afternoon. :-( I want to be able to savor the moment.

I'm about to go crazy here! If my foot wasn't sprung I'd run around the house since I'm so psyched.

Well yeah, repugnican politics the last several years HAS BEEN criminal.
What was that holy mewling we heard during 8 long years of phony, leaky investigations into the Clintons?
- Rule of Law
- Moral Character
- Perjury is a terrible crime
Exposing an entire covert network focused on WMDs after 9-11 for vindictive political purposes against a truth telling whistleblower is just about the shittiest thing imaginable. I hope these reptile people in the White House get put away for a LONG TIME. Once again, what's the penalty for treason during wartime?

... happened to catch a couple minutes of Fox Noise and saw fred barnes reach for an equivalent to karl rove's role in the WH. The comparison he came up with was Robert Kennedy!(WTF??)
Anybody who's still voting repugnican after all that's happened the last 25 years, and especially the last 5 years, is either stupid or evil.

sounds so official. :eyes:

I'll believe it when it actually happens. Especially since ABSOLUTELY NOTHING is leaking from Fitzgerald's investigation. He runs a tight ship and won't tolerate that bullshit.

They're all fond of citing "attorneys involved in the case" - B.S.

The only attorneys talking to the press are Rove's and Libby's attorneys and they don't know squat. It's nothing but spin, folks.

Ignore everything until Fitzgerald makes it official.

These rumors aren't "scoops". More like "pooper-scoopers".

BREAKING: CBS To Report Fitzgerald Will Make His Decision Known Tomorrow
From the CBS Evening News, to air at 6:30PM:

CBS’ JOHN ROBERTS: Lawyers familiar with the case think Wednesday is when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will make known his decision, and that there will be indictments. Supporters say Rove and the vice president’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby, are in legal jeopardy. But they insisted today the two are secondary players, that it was an unidentified Mr. X who actually gave the name of CIA agent V alerie Plame to reporters. Fitzgerald knows who Mr. X is, they say, and if he isn’t indicted, there’s no way Rove or Libby should be. But charges may not focus on the leak at all. Obstruction of justice or perjury are real possibilities. Did Rove or Libby change statements made under oath? Did they deliberately leave critical facts out of their testimony or did they honestly forget? Some Republicans urged Rove to step down if indicted. Not a happy prospect for president Bush.

Any guesses on the identity of Mr. X?

UPDATE: This bit from the CBS segment is also interesting –

SCHIEFFER: John, I am very interested in Mr. X. Is there any clue or hint as to whether he be - maybe someone who outranks Libby and Rove or would he be a lower-ranking official?

ROBERTS: The best guess is that Mr. X, even though his name is not known and some people are just speculating on who he might be or she might be, is somebody who is actually outside the White House, and in that case would be of a lower rank that both Rove and Libby.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/25/decision-tommorow/

I've been checking the TVs at work for the past couple of days, waiting for some indictment news. I'll be watching tomorrow, when everything is supposed to go down. Hooray!:party:

Tammy

and it's going to have quite an impact

I want to save it up for the actual event!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

MONDAY's Indictments-come-tomorrow thread, and kpete here had TUESDAY's Indictments-come-tomrrow thread: who gets to start TODAY's Indictments-come-tomorrow thread? Whoever gets it has a 50% chance at glory! The indictments have to come on Thursday or on Friday, there's no other chances!

Although I think if TODAY's ICT thread turns out to become "inoperative," I think we should invite Skinner to do the honors and start THURSDAY's thread!