Is Patrick Fitzgerald finished? Is it time for him to shut it down?

Is there more work for him to do? Or is it time for him to close shop and go home? Is he investigating something else that needs more time? Why should he be given more time? Just asking...

Just wondering.

I'm going to anticipate you won't get much support for shutting it down.

Regardless of what many here may think, the Bush WH committed an egregious offense in revealing theidentity of a CIA agent for political revenge.

It not only helped Bush make the case for an illegal war in Iraq, it also destroyed much of the CIA's intelligence infrastructure overseas.

I respect your right to question whether that was a serious crime worth investigating, but I most certainly don't agree with it.

It all ties back to AQ Khan and the missing Russian weapons. This one is a lot better than Iran Contra, I suspect. We have all the old gang back, you know they are up to something similar.

a record. (Maybe not literally; I'm expressing scepticism.)

The Richardson investigation took a decade, and was wrapped up many years after he left the Clinton administration, and, indeed, many years after Clinton left office.

Then again, he doesn't need the gig.

to this dem-he hasn't really done jack shit IMO-he's been made out to be this hero and what has he really done?Libby?He'll be pardoned as soon as Bush is about to leave office.Rove?no indictment so now he'll have more time to focus on stealing another election and subverting the democratic process.Cheney?yea right I won't hold my breath on that one either.

in retrospect all this f***ing FITZMAS stuff was just so much hogwash

Perhaps Rove is cooperating with Fitzpatrick, giving him information about Cheney and Bush. We just don't know. The Bush/Cheney era is almost over, they really can't do much for the party right now, not as long as their poll numbers are so low.

We're entering a period of bad economic news in America, and it will continue into the Fall election period. Interest rates will rise, the dollar will fall, energy costs will go up, more outsourcing, more credit card default, more foreclosures, etc., all will take their toll.

I have to believe that Rove is a minor player in this whole mess, compared to the really big players. Rove may have orchestrated everything, but he's not the President or Vice President. Which will have the most devastating effect? Rove indicted or Cheney - or Bush - indicted?

Even if Fitzpatrick has his hand in the GOP pockets, their dirty deeds will eventually be their undoing. The forces of evil always come tumbling down, history has proven that to us. And it will happen again. Karma is more powerful than anything Karl Rove or the GOP can throw at us.

This was the kind of post I was hoping to see on these forums. I'll admit..I was dreadfully dissapointed when I first heard of this news. Which is why I came on to DU to read some opinions. Thankfully not all of them are all doom and gloom.

A 100 if you would have gotten his name (Fitzgerald) correct. :-)

guilty must be on my mind...sorry.

which is a crime within itself. To answer your question I would love to see Cheney indicted, Rove is just a piece of shit.

Karma's taking too long for this particular Dem. So long, in fact, that I cannot help but wonder if it's not even there anymore. Today, I feel as though karma itself has been coopted by the republi-CONS. Karma seems to be working for the bad guys these days - not us.

we don't bite, but how many do bite? Geez, when will those who are still asleep wake up???

..... to clear?

(Just joking out of disappointment)

James Laski (former Chicago City Clerk) has been sentenced to 24 months in jail today.

The corruption in chicago and downstate will keep him busy forever. I hate to say it but we need him here.

I am pissed at Fitz today. Many of us had hoped for Fitz to be independent and fight the massive amount of corruption being heaped on our country by Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al. Instead, we have a lousy perjury indictment against Scooter Libby. Fitz blinked and the country was screwed. For those of you holding on the the fairy tale that Rove or Libby will dump on Cheney -- wake up from your dream. These bastards are evil and will not roll over to prosecute higher ups.

Unless you are on the grand jury or know every bit of information they have, how can you possibly judge whether or not he is doing his job well? We don't know if Rove made a deal, we don't know what evidence he has, we don't know squat. So, perhaps we should all just chill out and wait for the end of the investigation to see what happens. These things don't happen overnight and if Fitz is perceived as beholden to the leftist blogosphere, how seriously would he be taken? It may turn out that there just isn't enough evidence to get anyone on. That's a sad fact of life sometimes, and I think we all know better than to underestimate the ability of the Bush admin to cover their tracks and destroy evidence.

I am not on the grand jury, but given the amount of time Fitz had to investigate this matter I expect more than a perjury indictment against Scooter Libby. Rove's dirty fingerprints were all over the Plame outing and it appears Fitz blinked when it came time to drop the hammer on Rove. It is a pretty sad day when felons like Rove can avoid justice because the prosecutor a whimp.

"work hard wonk."

He defintely isn't Ken Starr who had Unlimited Resources, Lawyers and POWER.

So, Fitz is a person of "limited resources" since the "Independent Counsel Statute..which gave "Independent MASSES OF LAWYERS AND MONEY BAGS, UNLIMITED" lapsed with Clinton. (very conveniently "some" might say) and so
Fitzgerald was a "last gasp attempt" by those in the Bush Justice Dept. (before they were fired) to try to HONOR OUR CONSTITUTION.

Pat Fitzgerald is a person with very "limited resources" trying to find a reason to INDICT "Crime Figures."

I wouldn't ever give up on him ...because so many DU'ers have vouched for him who know him in Chicago...but his "scope of investigation is very limited."

Those of us looking for Fitz to be Ken Starr will ALWAYS be disappointed. He doesn't have the "unlimited access that Janet Reno (that Deceiving Witch) gave to Ken Starr.

Fitz never could have done what we hoped he would do...he just wasn't given the resources. Not to say that he can't come up with a "Blockbuster" even on his limited resources but...just to say....those of us looking for what Ken Starr gave our Right Wingers should NOT look for a bonus from Fitzgerald on the "Left." :-( It's sad, unfair, gross and horrible...but it "IS WHAT IT IS."

We need to accept this and move on forward. Hope lies in the FUTURE...not in the PAST OR PRESENT....SADLY...and I wish with all my heart that this wasn't so...but reading of history and being alive on this planet for many years...I've learned that sadly..."IT IS SO!"

We need to learn to deal with it.....

in 2007. His directive was to discover whether or not anyone outed a CIA agent. Why would you think he isn't still on task? Libyy and Rover were obstructing the investigation, remember? He didn't set out to find obstruction. Besides, who knows what can happen between now and then? And then... the trial. Yummy!

In any criminal case the prosecution is required to prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, and this is a very tough burden of proof -- as it should be. If the available evidence is insufficient to prove Rove guilty of certain specific offenses (not just that he's a sleazy, corrupt bastard), then Fitzgerald can't legitimately proceed, because the grand jury won't return an indictment.

This, however, doesn't mean that Rove will never be charged -- only that as of this moment there is insufficient evidence to support charges against him. If, notwithstanding weak evidence, Fitzgerald were nevertheless able to pursuade the grand jury to indict, Rove almost certainly would have been acquitted at trial. Because of the double jeopardy rule, he could never be charged again, even if more evidence turned up later. It seems to me that it's much better to decline to charge on weak evidence (meaning charges could still be brought later if more evidence is developed), than to go to trial where there is a great risk of acquittal.

The problem with honest prosecutors is that they tend to go where the actual facts lead them, not where we'd like them to go. Rove is scum, but he's entitled to the same presumption of innocence as everybody else.