Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

John Dean on Fitz

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:31 PM
Original message
John Dean on Fitz
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051021.html

Waiting For The Valerie Plame Wilson Grand Jury: The Big Question Is Whether Dick Cheney Was a Target
By JOHN W. DEAN
----
Friday, Oct. 21, 2005

Washington is truly abuzz with rumors about what Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald may, or may not do, as his grand jury comes to the close of its almost two-year investigation of the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson's covert status at the CIA. As I write, it appears that Fitzgerald will act within the next few days.

Unidentified government officials, The New York Times reports, say that Fitzgerald "will not make up his mind about any charges until next week." With his grand jury expiring on October 28, 2005, he is down to only a few options:



First, he could close down his Washington office; return to his work in Chicago, where he serves as the U.S. Attorney; and simply issue a statement that his investigation has ended. (He has no authority to write a report, for the information he has obtained is subject to Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and thus is secret).

Second, he could extend the grand jury for whatever time he needs to complete his investigation. And third, he could issue one or more indictments.

Fitzgerald, and those who work for him, have acted throughout the investigation just as prosecutors should. Lips are zipped. Fitzgerald has held his information so close to his chest that, as one wag put it, he's got it in his underpants. Accordingly, Washington is filled with rumors.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Judging by the NYT scoop, there's no way he couldn't be
Edited on Mon Oct-24-05 08:35 PM by Greeby
Lock and load, Fitz :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The revelation that Cheney revealed the name may necessitate more time.
The vice president involved in treason is a matter so complex that Fitzgerald may request more time. In a way, I hope he does. The more time he has, the more he finds out. The more he finds out, the worse it gets for the bush administration.

Traitor Dick. It kind of has a ring to it, doesn't it, like Traitor Benedict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I would venture to guess that Fitz has known that
for a long time. It's just a surprise to the rest of the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. agreed - no doubt old news to fitz - BTW link to NYT article here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/politics/24cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1130212800&en=db7d02c93e5913ef&ei=5094&partner=homepage

<snip>

Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Notes Show

By DAVID JOHNSTON, RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
Published: October 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 — I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.


Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby’s testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.

The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.

<snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. I'm thinking more people might come forward to cooperate.
Fitzgerald knew, yes, more than likely. But, were people within the bush administration aware of what Cheney did?

Cheney is one scary-a** man, and without him bush is essentially emasculated. Without fear of retribution from those two, who knows what information might be offered to Fitzgerald by people who may seek to avoid being indicted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elfin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. Disappointed in John Dean's final assessment
I respect his opinion and fear we are in for a big letdown. But I still can hope and dream that this is the beginning of the end of this evil crowd and that they will spend their days and their (not our) dollars trying to stay out of jail where they so rightly belong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I'm surprised too
they better not get away with it. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-24-05 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. It seems this was written BEFORE Fitzgerald set up his NEW
website asking that all correspondence on this case be directed to his Washington office instead of Chicago, posted relevant documents pertaining to this case on there. Common sense alone says he would not be setting up a website dedicated to this case, ensuring all correspondence go to Washington if he were going to shut this down with no indictments.

I wonder if, knowing that now, if Dean's opinion has changed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 27th 2024, 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC