Dhalgren
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:06 AM
Original message |
I keep hearing how the Publicans are going to start smearing |
|
Fitzgerald. Has any started yet? It seems to me that trying to smear this "Eliot Ness"-like prosecutor would be suicidal - and I don't think that it would work. This isn't a political issue, it is a legal issue. You can trash the DA as much as you want, but if an indictment comes down, you're going to trial. There has been quite a bit of federal court oversight of Fitz's work already; with the various motions presented by various lawyers for various witnesses; and in every case the judge has sided with Fitz. That in itself is at least some proof that these charges are not frivolous or trumped-up. I just don't see what it gains the thugs to trash Fitz. I just don't see the advantage of doing so...
|
Tennessee Gal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:08 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Won't work this time.... |
|
Per Joe Conason: To anyone familiar with the most basic facts about Fitzgerald's prosecution, the quarreling with him and his methods simply sounds stupid. Do the Republican partisans who claim that he is running a "political" investigation realize that John Ashcroft's deputy appointed him? Do those same Republicans remember that the president endorsed his appointment and the purposes of the investigation? Do they know that the original demand for an investigation came from former CIA director George Tenet? http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2005/10/21/miller_times/
|
Hidden Stillness
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I agree. They have probably been having "framing sessions" night and day for months over this eventuality, and realized that if they could have thought up an even semi-convincing routine, (even one as stupid as "blame game," which was such a bust), they would all be using it by now. There is nothing to attack this Prosecutor or this process about, and the people support it and are turning more and more against Bush all the time, so there is no way to play it. This is not going to be fucked around with; it is, finally, a real thing in our country.
|
Me.
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:10 AM
Response to Original message |
|
B*** is already on record praising him.
|
HuckleB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:11 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Why would Pub keepers want to smear Fitzgerald? |
ComerPerro
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. Well, that's the smear. Bar Patrons for Truth |
|
According to them, they were in a bar with Fitzgerald, and he never took a single drink.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:12 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Many on the freeper site have been doing that for a while. |
|
It has increased in the last week and I'm sure will reach feaver pitch when he announces indictments.
I doubt that's anything new to Fitz, and it won't matter. It's going to be difficult for any PROMINENT Pubs to trash him though. Most of them, over the past 2 years, have praised him for being a brilliant professional prosecutor, and praised him for his ability to prevent leaks in a twon where that simply never happens!
|
B Calm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message |
6. The GOP has always been the party of nasty, vindictive, political |
|
smear mongers, so what else is news?
|
Smarmie Doofus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 10:30 AM
Response to Original message |
7. So far, the best they've come up with is "dirty socks'.... |
|
and 3-month old lasagna abandoned in the oven in his Bklyn apt ( today's NY Times). This shouldn't resonate with many beyond his former neighbors.
In any case, not exactly capital crimes. He's not married ( at age 44). They may try to work this.
Sounds like the Fitzter can handle whatever they throw at him, though.
|
peacetalksforall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 11:09 AM
Response to Original message |
8. Does anyone know how long the G Jury had to wait for the NYT? That |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 11:10 AM by higher class
stall should be subtracted from the two year figure if the right wing uses the two year time spread in a smear.
Then, look at Starr - opened an investigation into Watergate after the Resolution Trust investigation finished before Starr started up and had found the Clintons not culpable. He and the right wing wasted our money to conduct a character assassination.
|
ShrewdLiberal
(144 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |
10. I agree with Joe Conason |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 11:23 AM by ShrewdLiberal
Fitz is not a putz. He's been mum through the whole investigation. I've never even heard his voice! Ken Starr used to hold daily press conferences on his driveway. That asshole couldn't keep his disgusting mouth shut. The public knew what was up with the Whitewater investigation from day one.
The CIA leak investigation is a whole different ballgame. Fitz knew exactly what the possible crimes were going into it. Therefore, he investigated his way to the stark truth--interviewing, subpoenaing, flipping, pressuring, etc. He has the facts, which are damning. He has actual crimes, which can bring down a criminal administration.
The Pukes can smear Fitz all they want. He won't respond to them. He will drive head first toward the goal line like the fullback he is. He's a man of action, not words. He has first down and goal to go. He's on the five yard line against a crumbling defense. He's got the momentum to put the game out of reach. I think he knows exactly what this moment in American history is. I also think he knows he's got history by the balls--no pun intended. Does anyone actually believe that a man who has been dreaming of a moment like this since he was a boy is going to let it slip away? He has the crimes uncovered, he has the evidence, he has the unlimited power to indict criminals. He will do the right thing, and there isn't a damn thing the pukes can do to stop him. The American people are on Fitzgerald's side on this one. It would be suicide for the mainstream Pukes to smear an obviously honorable man.
|
alfredo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-22-05 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Starr didn't have a good case, so he had to |
|
try Clinton in the court of public opinion. He had to leak to justify his investigation and smear the Clintons.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 05:49 PM
Response to Original message |