I posted this in another thread, and a couple of folks seemed to find it somewhat helpful in putting AAR founder Sheldon Drobny's negative comments on Mike Malloy's 10/28 program and especially
in the editorial seen here in perspective. Drobny basically stated that Fitzgerald went easy on the administration, either through incompetent or (worse IMHO) purposeful negligence.
Quick disclaimer first: Drobny is the angel whose imagination and generosity founded Air America Radio. Under no circumstances are my comments intended to downplay this immense contribution to progressive causes. I am extremely grateful for all Drobny has done to provide us with a voice at long last!
That said, I was disappointed and depressed after listening to Drobny's remarks on Mike Malloy's program, a reaction that dissipated only after Mike offered some perspective afterwards -- and after I did a little research to learn more about Drobny's experience.
So here's a reprint of my post as requested. Segments in bold are direct quotes of Drobny's comments:
------------------------------------
Okay, bless him for funding AAR and all, but Drobny's beginning to piss me right off. First his comments on Mike Malloy's show last night -- comments that sent me into a minor depression before Mike cheered me up again -- now this. But let's parse his remarks.
"Besides my co-founding Air America Radio, I have another day job. I have helped prosecute and defend white collar crime offenses for 38 years including experience with Mr. Fitzgerald's office in my home town Chicago on current political prosecutions."Impressive! Sure sounds like he's an attorney, doesn't it? Except? Not so much. He's a former IRS dude turned venture capitalist. And that "experience with Mr. Fitzgerald's office" is also misleading. What he means is that Fitzgerald prosecuted a case against someone Drobny knew and advised.
"Those of us locally in the know here do not agree that Mr. Fitzgerald is as independent as the press has made him out to be. Let me explain."Wow, nice insinuation there, Mr. Drobny. What exactly is he implying by this? Despite the "let me explain," he never follows up on this remark.
"Essentially Fitzgerald indicted Libby for preventing his prosecutors from proving the underlying crimes he was investigating by using a baseball metaphor in that Libby "threw sand in the umpires eyes." That part is patently absurd."Nitpicky snarking on my part, but... Does he really mean to say that Libby prevented prosecutors from proving crimes by using a baseball metaphor? Man, never underestimate the power of good ol' poetic license! If I'm ever accused of a crime, I'll be sure to decimate the investigation by saying something like, "Sorry buddy, but three strikes and you're out!"
"In most conspiracy cases, one or more of the co-conspirators invariably lie to the FBI or the Grand Jury. That is something that prosecutors face all the time. The idea that Libby alone prevented Fitzgerald from proving the underlying crime is absurd. If Cheney told Libby about Valerie Plame, there obviously was a reason."Yeah, but how would Fitzgerald find out this reason? Whatever Cheney says, Libby's the only one who can corroborate or contradict it. If Libby lies, there goes Fitzgerald's ability to get any further in the investigation. It's not like there's physical evidence in a case like this: it's "who told what, to whom, and why?"
"The idea that Cheney, Libby, Rove and Bush did not talk to each other about the purpose of passing on this information to the press is simply not believable. And there were many ways that Fitzgerald could have proven the conspiracy in spite of Libby's lies."Were there? Such as? Funny how Drobny doesn't go on to describe any of these "many ways." If all four members of a conspiracy lie, how precisely is one to break up this circle? By doing exactly what Fitzgerald has done here (and on many other past cases) -- remove one of the (alleged) conspirators and stick his feet to the fire.
"The fact that Libby lied would normally embolden a prosecutor to prove the underlying crime. This was not the case for Fitzgerald."And you know this how, Mr. Drobny?
"Fitzgerald stated in his press conference that most of his work has been completed. While there is always a Grand Jury available to indict others in the event of an unlikely plea bargain for Libby, the investigative phase is really over for this prosecutor. His office will now focus on the trial of Libby."This is just prediction and speculation. Drobny's entitled to his opinion just like all of us here, but other than that, he's got nuttin'.
"Those of us who know about prosecutors and Grand Jury investigations ...."A rather ballsy, condescending comment coming from a non-lawyer.
"...would tell you that Fitzgerald, using a baseball metaphor, threw the Bush cabal a "softball." And using a football metaphor, he "fumbled the ball."Mmm. And I guess using a knitting metaphor, he "dropped a stitch." And using a cricket metaphor, he "scored an own goal." And using a Monopoly metaphor, he "picked up a card from the community chest and was told he had to pay the poor tax." One could continue these forever, but it doesn't make 'em true.
Frankly, using an Aesop metaphor, sounds to me like Drobny has "sour grapes."
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(899 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
