Waxman to Fitz-"Were Any Federal Criminal Statutes Violated by White House Officials?"

HENRY A. WAXMAN, CALIFORNIA
CHAIRMAN
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:

I commend you on your professional and thorough investigation into the disclosure of
Valerie Plame'Wilson's identity as a covert CIA agent. It is apparent that you followed the facts
where they led and served the interests of justice and the American people.

By necessity, your investigation had a narrow legal focus: 'Were any federal criminal
statutes violated by White House officials? Your investigation, however, has raised broader
questions of national significance. I am writing to invite you to meet to discuss how the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which is the principal oversight committee in
the U.S. House of Representatives, can become informed of your views about these broader
issues.

The identity of undercover CIA operatives is supposed to be one of the most closely
guarded national security secrets. There are a host of adminishative requirements designed to
safeguard this type of information from disclosure. Yet the trial proceedings raise questions
about whether senior White House officials, including the Vice President and Senior Advisor to
the President Karl Rove, complied with the requirements governing the handling of classified
information. They also raise questions about whether the White House took appropriate
remedial action following the leak and whether the existing requirements are sufficient to protect
against future leaks. Your perspective on these matters is important.

After the verdict was announced yesterday, one juror expressed the view that former
Chief of Staff to the Vice President Lewis "Scooter" Libby was only a"fall gtly." This juror's
views encapsulated questions that many in Congress and the public have about whether the
ultimate responsibility for the outing of Ms. V/ilson rests with more senior officials in the White
House. This is another area where you have a unique perspective.

I recognize that as a federal prosecutor, you are constrained by the rules of grand jury
secrecy. But you undoubtedly recognize that Congress has a responsibility to examine the policy
and accountability questions that your investigation has raised. As a result of your investigation,
you have a singular understanding of the facts and their implications that bear directly on the
issues before Congress.

I respectfully request that you meet with me and the Committee's Ranking Member, Tom
Davis, to discuss the possibility of testifying before the Committee and other means by which
you can inform the Committee about your views and the insights you obtained during the course
of your investigation.

I look forward to the opportunity to speak with you.
Sincerely,



Henry A. Waxman
Chairman
cc: Tom Davis
Ranking Minority Member

http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070308134201-02108.pdf

Fitz is one who would notice sloppy typing....:eyes:

I noticed the typos immediately. Surely our rep's staff have spellcheck?!!

Still, here's a K&R.

Check out the link--it's a pdf file of the actual letter, and you'll notice there are no typos. I suspect that what is pasted into the OP aren't actually typos, but glitches resulting from text conversion done while copying/pasting the pdf.

Geez, folks. Look a little closer before you start bemoaning how stupid Waxman and/or his staff are. :eyes:

edited, ironically, for typos. ;-)

For example the above text capture has:

only a "fall gtly".

when the actual memo says: Only a "Fall guy".

Can you hear that clock ticking? Something tells me somebody in Washington ain't gonna finish their "elected" term.

Maybe more than one somebody.

a bad position? Shouldn't he be asking for facts instead? and subpoening him so that Fitz is covered?

Chances are he already has had a talk with Fitzgerald.

Don

.

I've been wondering for sometime if there may be some quiet conversations going on.

I said a couple years ago, " the Plame affair, would blow this administration out of the water and possibly put some folks in jail...not only for the treasonous leak , but other crimes that are intertwined with it."

Looks like the time has come.....

Okay, this is the first hope I've felt since November 2nd, 2004. DAMMIT LET JUSTICE PREVAIL

he took talk about some of the info he collected for the trial that he didn't present? I'm thinking what he might have had that he would ask Cheney or Rove about if they had been called by Libby's side.

Also wonder if folks who testify before a GJ can give "waivers" to allow their testimony to be presented to a member of congress. If a waiver worked for the Press couldn't it work if one testified before GJ and felt their testimony might be valuable to a case of National importance?

:shrug:

:kick:

to discuss and answer questions if he were invited to do so? I swear I remember reading that. It sounded to me as if he were signaling members of congress to call him up for questioning. I don't know, but I have an idea that he has always had a method in mind to reveal pertinent information to the right people at the right time and doing it within his legal limitations.

explanation that now they want to broaden the scope and request his assistance in doing so.

This is a crime syndicate we are talking about here.

:patriot: Yessssssssssssssssss!