Personally, I think Fitzgerald's Independence is a Useful Myth...

I think it's taken as an article of faith that Comey's "Full power of the AG" letter is still in force. When Comey left, there was speculation the Fitz's independence went with him:



Now, there was some speculation over at Kos that Gonzales, through Paul McNulty, killed the Rove indictment:




Now, I want you to remember this is Gonzales we're talking about. The guy who said that the US doesn't need to obey International Law, the guy who said that the President doesn't need to obey US Law, and the guy who said that Administration leakers would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

the bullshit coming from Luskin, Rove and the Mediawhores.

Fitzgerald is still investigating.

Rove probably cooperated and can still screw himself when testifying.

Fitzmas is over and we are not saved.

it was all played for our benefit that he was a truely independent person

When this is over, look for a promotion for him, probably a judgeship

his independence, but failed.

I think Fitz is an honest man up against overwhelming odds.

Again, if the speculation is right, Fitz's only recourse is to face prison and leak.

Rove was warned by a reporter from TIME magazine, that he was under investigation, which is when he went to change his story

On what basis do you think Fitz is an honest man, because the MSM told us?

Imagine this:

Fitz: "I'm going to indict Karl Rove."

McNulty: "I think you're on thin ice. Call him back under oath and have him clarify his remarks."

Rinse. Repeat.

So, I agree with you "still_one".

>When this is over, look for a promotion for him, probably a judgeship<

Oh, yeah. He's been working most likely 80 hour weeks for the past 20 years for that one.

I'm going to say this one more time: There's nothing the Bush administration or his superiors at the DoJ can offer Patrick Fitzgerald that would make him turn his back on this investigation. NOTHING. He's not interested in political office; he's stated this multiple times. He's not interested in a cushy law firm, even though I'm sure right now it's starting to sound pretty good. (Those currently leaving the Southern District of New York's US Attorney's office, the office in which Patrick Fitzgerald worked for James Comey, are commanding salaries -- beginning salaries -- of $500,000 per year and up, according to the New York Observer.) He wanted to be a prosecutor badly enough to work for a law firm for three years at the beginning of his career to pay off his student loans, and he's worked for the government ever since. He said only last month to a group of law students that if he found himself with a trust fund, he'd still be doing the work he's doing right now.

I'm sure this is the reason why he scares the hell out of the Bushies, and rightly so. He is not their kind of guy. He won't sell out his principles to make his life easier. Let's face it, he makes a nice salary, but he also works two full-time jobs for that salary. He has very little personal life. He can't even receive mail at his house because of the fine folks he's prosecuted over his career. The right wing has SAVAGED him over the past several days, and he's a two-time Bush appointee. I'm sure he wakes up every morning and thinks to himself, "Gosh, how can I make their lives easier today?"

There is a five-attorney team working on the CIA leak case, along with some FBI investigators. All five of these people have full-time jobs besides their work on this case. I can't even imagine the hours they must put in, and how frustrating it must be to them to watch someone like Karl Rove rub their noses in it.

Those who should know have unequivocably stated that the whole reason why Rove was NOT indicted is because he will be testifying at the Libby trial. A witness under indictment is not credible. Imagine the fun when Mr. Rove is put under oath and questioned. If he thought his last 3 1/2 hour stint in front of the grand jury was "hell", wait till he faces PJF in a courtroom.

In the meantime, let the man do his job. If there are those who think they can do better, I invite them to get themselves through 7 years of pre-law and law school, graduate with crushing student loan debt, and go to work for the US Attorney's office.

We need the help.
Julie

on our corrupt former governor, another republican, and pretty much put an anchor on the rest of that filthy rich man's life, I must say it will take a hell of a lot to convince me that Fitz would even consider stepping outside the straight and narrow or allow, unrestrained, any other of his bosses or associates any latitude in such matters.

He's the dead level incorruptible twit that we all wish we could be--if we desired a life of zero moral turpitude.

I am content to let Fitz be Fitz. He will do his job in this matter.

I remember him saying that he would read one day he was a republican hack, and the next day,

a democrat hack. He went on to say the only thing that occurred between those reports was that he slept. He said he was not registered with either party.

So why do people make stuff up?

... without any evidence being presented? So they try to hide that fact by blaming everyone else in sight.

The entire goal of such people: never blame yourself. Always blame someone else.

maybe...it is possible...that perhaps Fitz didn't have what he needed to make sure he could get an indictment.

Crazy, I know. :eyes:

:shrug:

I hope that Wilson goes on with his civil suit. I think it's too important and I believe that the Umpire has thrown so much sand at Fitzgerald that it will be a long time if ever before he can get anyone higher than Libby or anyone like Libby. Given all the document shredding and midnight planning sessions to get their stories all in order while Ashcroft dawdled with the Plame Outing before recusing himself...it would be hard to believe that most roads after Libby don't dead end with folks actually having woven such convincing lies that no one could possibly ferret out enough evidence to come up with another indictment.

Plus the Bushies have powerful legal minds and help on their side that goes beyond the Luskin's who are just mouthpieces. They have the whole Bush/Reagan empire of lawyers who have gotten the high and mighty powerful off the hook for decades. As good as Pat Fitzgerald is...it's an awfully large stable of lawyers for him with limited resources to be able to fully compete with.

Thanks for reminding me of that.

Fitz may still have something up his sleeve. I'll wait to see what.

Hope it's a smoking gun pointed directly at the guilty ones.

Poll: Did Gonzales Kill Rove Indictments

Yes 37%
No 14%
Yes, but Fitz will outfox them and eventually get a Rove indictment 48%

Votes: 2632

BTW: That's 85% Yes, 14% No. Must be a different crowd over at Kos, given the responses on this thread.

than Rove in the "fixing" of intel and the lies they used to go to war. Libby's the bigger fish both in regards to Iraq and the outing of Plame.

Comey designated David Margolis as Fitz's supervisor in regards to the Plame investigation, regardless of who took his position as DAG.

And the question remains: Now that Comey's gone, how many of his designations can be overridden?

Going to war on lies, evident to the media at the time and still now, has not been deemed by the media consensus as "fatal" to the Administration. The undermining of the Constitution, civil rights, law and separation of powers has not been "fatal" according the the media consensus. Rove has already long exceeded the requirements Bush previously set as a basis for being fired for involvement in the Plame matter, but didn't hear a lot of that yesterday when they proclaimed Rove was "cleared" by Fitzgerald, which wasn't the case. "Media consensus" isn't worth much, especially if it's the same media that propagates the lies of the Administration without demur.

as the prediction of FUSAG's landing at Calais...

we cannot interfere with the political process of elections with a little thing like 'high crimes and misdemeanors'.

The only 'fair' thing to do is put the investigation on the back-burner so as to not interfere with the election. Just like what was done in '04.

sources and information, if you recall. Most notably, Time and NYT/Cooper and Miller litigated that and that litigation wasn't resolved until summer 2005.

but it will be like getting confirmation of the true extent of Iran/Contra in 2006 - no one will care.

This place sounds like Free Republic.

REPEATEDLY. It's Gonzales and McNulty that I question. I specifically refer you to Post #4.

Now, many have used various dishonest techniques to attack this thread. How about someone addressing the main point: If you think Fitz still is independent, tell me why you believe that.

review his prosecution record, read his filings, assess his behavior and demeanor and known statements (f.i., in the press conference on the Libby indictment), and read the entrails. It is not unthinkable at all that ANYONE could be bought, undermined, blackmailed or threatened in other ways, in this most corrupt regime in the history of the world. It is certainly worth considering. I tend to think that Fitzgerald is a straight-arrow, up against one hell of a dangerous mob, but I could be wrong about my read on him, I admit that. And people can change--under pressure and under threat. I think we just don't know enough to make judgment. Truly, I don't know whether I'm going to wake up tomorrow to a press conference by Fitzgerald at the Hague, where he has sought asylum, and is finally revealing just how deep and how bad this Bush junta conspiracy is--or, wake up tomorrow and find Fitzgerald glad-handing Bush as his new V-P after Cheney "retires." (Actually...heh, heh...that might not be a bad Fitzgerald/Bush junta bargain, depending--but what I meant was, totally sold out.) It's quite a rollercoaster. So much obscured from our view.

But what is NOT obscured from our view--what is hidden in plain sight--is 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code in electronic voting systems controlled by Bushite corporations. Right there under our noses--the FACT of it discernible and provable--but blackholed by just about everybody, including most of the Dem leadership. I wonder a lot more about that (Dem silence on Bushite secret vote tabulation) than I do about whether Fitzgerald is honest or not. Time will tell on the latter. The former is more important --in truth, the fate of our democracy is at issue--and more actionable. And until we are able to restore transparent elections, it is reasonable to surmise that investigations of the Bush junta (what few there are) will get nowhere.

I am beginning to think that the Bush junta wants riots and civil disorder--that that is what they are angling for. They are so audacious and provocative. I hope that doesn't happen. It would play right into their hands, I think. A slow, long term, methodical, organized, relentless pressure campaign on state/local election officials, demanding transparent elections--trying to re-lay the brickwork of democracy--is what we should be doing; addressing the actual mechanism of power. This is what was done in South America, by the way--the work of various international and national clean election groups--and it is a critical component of the amazing, peaceful, democratic, leftist revolution that has swept South America over the last 4-5 years. If THEY can restore democracy--like a Phoenix from the ashes, after decades and centuries of brutal repression, and active US destruction of every democratic movement that arose there--so can we.

"I don't like your case against Rove, call him back."

0r

"I reviewed your case against Rove and I think you should let him go at this time"

all Fitz could do is try to get a judge to enforce Comey's original grant of authority. And if the judge sided with the administration, well, all indications are that Fitz plays by the rules. And we're told he doesn't play the leak game.

Now as for your strategy of working locally to try to restore democracy, I'm of two minds. I agree that it's probably the most responsible option at this point in time, but I've seen first hand how the Federal HAVA laws hamstring local efforts.

those who have been here through all this time might feel...that he could have been co-opted or blocked. But, his track record with other investigations would seem to show that we should have some faith in his abilities.

Plus...when Bush was asked about Rove at his Iraq Press Conference he had to "spit out" that Fitzgerald had conducted the investigation "thoroughly " (I don't have his exact quote) but he flubbed over it as if it was very hard for him to find a way to give Fitz a fair appraisal. He had one of his dark Chimp looks that he gets when he's caught in a lie. (Just my observation...for whatever it's worth) In other words I got the impression that Chimp couldn't bear to utter Fitz's name because it was so distasteful to him...

I think it would be just like these guys to hamstring his investigation and then swear him to secrecy.

If Rove was under SEALED indictment and decided to sing rather than do time, could he be freed up legally? Such a sequence would explain why a letter was sent to a party (Rove) explaining--at least in part--that it was unlikely that he would be prosecuted. Otherwise, why send letters to the (cough, cough) innocent? Why is just Rove getting a letter like this and not others?

And what is the broader context of the prase about not likely pursuing criminal charges? Lawyers are famous for misusing words to mislead but not lie directly.

some sort of sealed indictment (and is ratting out Cheney) than believe my theory: Rove has walked because Fitz was overruled from above.