I'm sorry. After Friday I'm not optimistic about the investigation anymore

[garybeck]

Although I remain hopeful that something bigger will evolve, I am disappointed that only Libby was indicted, and not hopeful about others being indicted.

I know that there are all kinds of things you can "read into" Fitzgerald's comments. But that goes both ways. He seems like a straight shooter and I think we should take him for his word. A few key things stick out in my mind...

He clearly said that the major work in the case is complete. he said it is very routine to finish a few things after the GJ is completed. He even said he wanted people to "use caution" in reading into the fact that he's not completely done. That was for US. He was telling us there's not a huge new issue he needs to investigate, like the Niger docs, or the entire WHIG.

It seems to me, if there were more people he's considering indicting, and an expanding investigation, he wouldn't downplay it. He would want them to be shaking in their boots. He would mention several times that the investigation is continuing, so that the targets get worried. But he downplayed the continuance and said he is just about done, which sends the message to the possible targets that they're just about clear.

Another thing that bothers me is that there were all these leaks about there being "22" indictments, possibly Cheney himself and bunch of others. (by the way, where did those leaks come from? Sometimes I wonder if Rove is leaking false info he knows will end up at Huff Post and Raw story). These other indictments seem almost impossible now, since we know that "Mr. A" is probably the only other person he's considering. As many have noted, Fitzgerald has done this before where a possible future target is not named. Since there is only one Mr. A (Rove), and virutally all the other players have been named directly I think we can infer that those people are not going to be indicted.

And, since we know that the judge in Libby's trial is a lifelong Bush appointee (also served BushI and Reagan), I don't have a lot of faith in the outcome of the trial. I hate to be pessimistic but the realistic side of me sees a Bush cronie sitting at the bench. If that weren't the case, I would place some hope in the trial. Maybe the trial would force Cheney and others to testify and others would be implicated in the discovery phase of the trial, but with a Bushite sitting at the bench, I can't be overly hopeful about it.

This leaves me hanging on to one thread of hope. It all comes down to Mr. A, who it seems everyone agrees is Karl Rove. I've dropped my hopes of seeing Cheney indicted and a bunch of others. It's nice that Libby got shafted but I for one will be disappointed if Rove walks. That's my barometer for this entire investigation now - if Rove gets indicted I'll be happy. If he walks, I will be bummed.

I'm sure many of you will call me overly pessimistic and cite all these reasons why Fitgerald is still holding all his cards and is going to pounce on the whole regime at some point. I will read your replies and I hope they are right. I hope it all happens and the house of cards comes tumbling down. It just doesn't smell like that anymore to me. I am going to have to read all the stories about "22 indictments" with a spoonful of salt, not just a grain... I'm sorry.

[SidDithers]

1. Maybe you'd feel more optimistic...

if you didn't keep starting threads about how pessimistic you are.

Sid

[progressivebydesign]

30. Yeah, no kidding. How many of these threads will we see today? n/t

[CatWoman]

33. oh, dear!!! oh, my!!!

[SoCalDemocrat]

73. Right wing judge to preside over Libby case

How's this for pessimism?

US District Judge for DC Reggie Walton has been assigned the Lewis Libby case. It is noteworthy to point out Walton's past and current links to the Republican Right and to elements in the Bush administration who have covered up important details about 911.

Walton was appointed to the DC Superior Court in 1981 by Ronald Reagan. In 1989, he was appointed by George H. W. Bush as the deputy drug czar under Bill Bennett. Walton was reappointed to the DC Superior Court by the senior Bush. George W. Bush nominated Walton to the US District Court for DC in 2001.

Walton was the judge who, under pressure from the Justice Department, placed a gag order on former FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds and cleared his courtroom of the public and media in Edmonds' hearing in her case against the FBI. Edmonds brought to light important information about how the FBI failed to translate important wiretap intercepts before and after 911.

...

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[goodboy]

3. Fitz doesn't want to tip his hand at all. Gary, I love ya, but I'm gonna

really gloat all day long when more indictments come down!

[writes2000]

4. The best predictor of future action is past action

I'm basing my belief in Fitzgerald on his past actions. He is thorough. He is patient. And he believes in upholding the law.

I believe his investigation is almost complete because he has gathered the facts to charge a whole host of crimes...BUT...he needs to prove motive to know whether it was just leaking classified info or if it was conspiracy or breaking the espionage act.

Fitzgerald doesn't seem the type to let a crime go just because someone has lied to him.

You don't have to apologize for your pov. I do think your openness to there being more to come will be appreciated.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Then refocus

on something else.

Got issues with the new nomination? Start getting informed and take action with it.

Have a senator or representative coming up for election in 2006? Work on the Democratic candidate's campaign.

If you're disillusioned or whatever about it, then move on to something you can be productive about in advancing our causes.

We'll handle the scandal. :)

[jsamuel]

6. calm down, I think Fitz is just letting it play itself out

We just have to wait for his conclusions. I think he is going to get to conspiracy when he gets done with the perjury and obstruction. HE SAID HE CAN'T CHARGE A CRIME UNTIL THE DIRT IS OUT OF HIS EYES!

[KoKo]

7. It's possible he's waiting for the MSM to ferret out more info...It's

possible that he left enough clues for that and for pressure on Congress to open up investigations into areas he can't get into.

If it truly was a "conspiracy" he has to crack it. He just couldn't get all the i's dotted and t's crossed enough to make it "air-tight." At least according to some reports in articles written over the weekend.

I don't think we know enough to figure out where this is going to go, at this point. :shrug:

[Pithy Cherub]

8. blah blah blah

:boring:

[emulatorloo]

9. Will you reread Fitz's own statements? Please?

I will not end the investigation until I can look anyone in the eye and tell them that we have carried out our responsibility sufficiently to be sure that we've done what we could to make intelligent decisions about when to end the investigation. We hope to do that as soon as possible. I just hope that people will take a deep breath and just allow us to continue to do what we have to do.

I will get you a link in a minute

on edit here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

[garybeck]

15. yeah, I've read that a hundred times....

I think it could be read either way. I don't think we can take that one paragraph as our banner for why the entire regime is going down. To me it offers hope. It's better than hearing him say it's over. And that's OK... I've lived much of my life with nothing more than hope. But I guess with this thing I was beyond hope. I was actually feeling confident that this was "the big one," bigger than watergate, and they might all go down, including Bush. Now I'm back to hope. I hope Rove gets shafted, and I hope the truth comes out.

[emulatorloo]

22. gary he spends 1/3 of the time explaining why he must be circumspect

and not discuss his & grandjury activities as they are ongoing.

He says the only thing he can discuss are within the 4 corners of the indictment.

When asked if the investigation is over, he says it is not over.

And then he gets all cagey and circumspect when he is questioned about current activities.

Please put 2 and 2 together.

Now this is not to say that it is going to fulfill any grand expectations that you may have.

but he has said it is not over and when he says that it is not over I beleive him.

pretty much what happens next is dependent on how Libby and Rove respond to the tremendous pressure that is now on them. (which is why, IMHO, you can't read as much as you have into the "bulk of the investigation is complete" quote)

[Tower]

10. Don't hope for more indictments.

Focus on what *has* happened, because that's pretty damned big. A White House official has received a criminal indictment, and it's raising alot of public dialogue on how the Bush Administration got us into Iraq.

That's a fact, and it's big. Will there be further indictments? I have no idea. But Fitzgerald seems like a real professional, and he's not doing a whitewash. Whatever comes out of his investigation, I'll accept it.

For now I think we should be focussing on facts rather than speculation and wishful thinking. The current situation (Libby's indictment) is pretty damned damaging to the Bush Administration in itself.

[garybeck]

16. thanks for that. n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

69. I was watching Matt Cooper on ABC's Good Morning America today

and he stated unequivocally that Rove told him about Plame one day before Libby did. So it seems to me that it is beyond dispute that Rove called Cooper to out Valerie Plame.

Perhaps the question that Fitz is trying to clarify is whether, when Rove called Cooper, he knew that Plame's status as an agent was classified. If he didn't know that Plame's status was classified, he was not guilty of "knowingly" leaking classified information.

Now, that obviously begs the question that someone fed classified information into that incesutous White House cabal. But if the person who fed the classified info into the white house cabal isn't the person who then leaked it to the media, the potential crime gets a bit more murky. (For example, if Cheney informed both Rove and Libby that Plame was a CIA asset and they each turned around and informed the media of same, without knowing the information was classified at the time they leaked it, where's the crime? Cheney dispersed classified information to those with clearances to receive it -- no crime. Rove and Libby leaked to the media without realizing the received information was classified -- no crime.)

Don't mean to be pessimistic. Just trying to think the way a good defense lawyer might, and as I'm sure Fitz is thinking. I would describe myself as feeling there's a 50% chance of future indictments, based on Fitz' past record, but feeling there's a 50% chance of no future indicment because of the amibiguities in "knowingly" disclosing classified information.

(And sorry if I'm merely recapitulating what others have written.)

[alkaline9]

11. Fitz still holds ALL the cards...

...and now he will put pressure on Libby to flip. He knows that these indictments are rock solid against Libby. Libby doesn't want to think about the prospect of going away for any period of time longer than he has to. Even if shrub pardons him, his career is ruined after the trial. Assuming the worst case scenario, a shrub pre-emptive pardon, the American people would see this administration (finally) for what it REALLY is, corrupt. This is a win - win situation.

Would you feel better about the case if word came out that another grand jury was requested to hear more testimony? I feel that it's only a matter of time before that happens. Even if it doesn't happen anytime soon, Libby's trial will be gruesome! Undoubtedly more information will come out at that point.

Have hope.... its all we have left.

[rateyes]

18. My only fear is that Libby might still be on the payroll,

like Mike Brown and FEMA---Bribe? to remain silent?---"Golden Parachutes" are often great incentive to "resign."

[emulatorloo]

23. if he is, fitz will find out about it.

and will act accordingly.

[longship]

44. I imagine Mr. Fitz would love to get a hold of that info.

Libby has to be very, very careful to do nothing that might be construed as obstruction. If Fitz catches him with his fingers in the pie again, he might even ask that he be remanded.

No. Libby's lawyer is telling him to shut the fuck up and stay away from the WH.

[gratuitous]

12. Well, let's see . . .

He issued indictments only on Libby because everyone is lying. It's real tough to figure out the facts of a matter when you can't trust two statements from any single witness. Fitzgerald indicted Libby, it appears, on the strength of the fact that he got corroboration from more than one source (and it looks like three or four) that Libby was fudging the truth about what he knew about Valerie Plame and who he talked to about it.

Now, if Libby is content to be the only guy who goes to prison over what looks like a classic Karl Rove bit of ratfucking, more power to him. Fitzgerald will be stymied like any prosecuting attorney when nobody will snitch on anyone else.

I will make the concluding (for now) observation that there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of honor in this den of thieves. When the serious negotiations begin between Fitzgerald and Libby's attorneys, it's just possible that Scoooter might decide that a substantially reduced sentence is a good trade-off for putting the hat on the real villain of the piece.

[longship]

13. Please do not ignore the possiblity of "conspiracy"

One reporter asked Fitz about conspiracy charges. That was my question, too. This case is screaming conspiracy. Cheney's involvement (in Fitz's facts!!) and Official A, among others, speak for *something* more coming soon.

This is what I think. You are correct that Fitz will probably not be framing this as a "fix the intelligence to go to war" case. He may not even state that this is a WHIG case. He seems to be focussing on Cheney's office, and Rove. That will probably be the limit to his facts.

This is okay, though. We do not necessarily want Fitz biting off more than he can chew. A limited case is not bad here. Like William of Occam said, "do not multiply entities unnecessarily." By keeping the scope limited, Fitz has a stronger, simpler case. That's good. We want the charges to stick.

If I were to speculate, I'd say that the lack of conspiracy charges here is a tell. It very well might mean we're done with just Libby. But, in that case Fitz probably would not have Rove still dangling (which is also a tell). The facts in the indictment strongly suggest conspiracy. It also suggests a future indictment for Official A (Rove?).

I think Rove is a dead duck. I think a couple of staffers are going to go down, too. Regardless, if he takes down just Libby, that's good. If he gets Rove and a couple of others, that's even better. Crashcart is the crown jewel here. I think it unlikely, but the veep may be in big legal trouble, too.

You may be correct. But keep the faith. Let's see how things work out. Not this week, but sometime soon, Fitz may surprise us.

On edit: Don't forget the Congressional Dems (and even some moderate Repugs--Shays, Paul) are going to be asking for hearings on these matters. There are many who are not very happy with * and Co, including some Repugs. The rest of the case may come from Congress, just like it did in Watergate.

[Kralizec]

14. I completely and utterly disagree. This feeling has never come to my mind

until people on DU fathomed the notion from who knows where (trolls, MSM propaganda?).

Since Fitz gave his news conference, I've never once had any doubts, judging by what he said and what he wrote, that this investigation would not continue fully.

[rateyes]

17. I respectfully disagree...

Although this GJ has been in place for 2 years, having received a 6 month extension after the first 18 months...the reason for that extension is that the legal proceedings about the "journalists" took so much time. Without the journalist's testimony, there wasn't much that Fitz could do.

It hasn't been very long since Judy, Judy, Judy started to sing, and the GJ ran out of time. Fitz, IMHO, will keep investigating, using his powers to nail all the rats to the wall. One thing we do know, however, it's not over until Fitz says it's over.

[Bouncy Ball]

19. Why was a new grand jury empaneled?

[garybeck]

26. Fitzgerald said

it is common and routine for this to happen, and it is just to finish up some things. He gave no indication that the investigation was expanding or that there was something major he needed to follow up on. he said the major bulk of the work is done.

[zanne]

38. Thank you!

EXACTLY!

[ClassWarrior]

47. You're welcome!

But two legal sources intimately familiar with Fitzgerald's tactics in this inquiry said they believe Rove remains in significant danger. They described Fitzgerald as being relentlessly thorough but also conservative throughout this prosecution -- and his willingness to consider Rove's eleventh-hour pleading of a memory lapse is merely a sign of Fitzgerald's caution.

The two legal sources point to what they consider Fitzgerald's careful decision not to charge Libby with the leak of a covert agent's identity, given that the prosecutor had amassed considerable evidence that Libby gave classified information, which he knew from his job should not be made public, to reporters. Another prosecutor might have stretched to make a leak charge, on the theory that a jury would believe, based on other actions, that Libby acted with bad intentions.

Another warning sign for Rove was in the phrasing of Friday's indictment of Libby. Fitzgerald referred to Rove in those charging papers as a senior White House official and dubbed him "Official A." In prosecutorial parlance, this kind of awkward pseudonym is often used for individuals who have not been indicted in a case but still face a significant chance of being charged. No other official in the investigation carries such an identifier.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/30/AR2005103000348.html

NGU.

[longship]

46. Don't ignore misdirection.

Fitz said many things that don't exactly mesh together. I think he may be a master at misdirection. Don't forget, too much information helps the bad guys, too.

In the meantime, comfort yourself in the fact that Rove is still dangling. That's a very nice side effect of all this. He may have celebrated that there was no indictment Friday, but I do not think he maintained that demeanor when he next talked to his lawyer, who must be telling him that he dodged this bullet but there are likely more coming.

[emulatorloo]

54. see also my post #22 EOM

[gkhouston]

57. very true

saying the "bulk of the investigation is over" can be true whether or not you're done with indicting folks because they've probably sifted through a mountain of paper and talking to a bunch of witnesses, trying to figure out the boundaries of the case. Even if they talk to more witnesses now, that's probably going to be a small amount of investigation compared to what's come before. Fitzgerald said he wanted the case to be over, but he didn't say it was over, and he repeatedly declined to give even a rough estimate of when it might be over. The only concrete information he seemed to be inclined to give was related to Libby's indictments, which makes me think he's still got some cards up his sleeve.

[melting the beehive]

20. I'm afraid the whole investigation was a limited hangout and

Fitz is the uber whitewasher. Everything will be quietly swept under the rug, the big fish will escape and a pardon will eventually be issued for the fall guy. Time will tell.

[emulatorloo]

35. based on what?

read fitz's history. there is nothing in his history that allows you to label him "uber whitewasher"

if he can't find anything else it is because he can't find anything else.

start here w your research;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/23/AR2005102301028_pf.html



and oh, WELcOME TO DU!!!! :hi:

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zanne]

45. Why? What are you trying to say, ClassWarrior?

Methinks DU rules are really close to being broken.

[Bridget Burke]

49. Probably lack of imagination!

Even if someone wants to "hide" personal information, it's sad when they can't come up with some colorful responses.

[melting the beehive]

65. Red White and Blue

Such pretty colors :)

[Bouncy Ball]

77. ROFL! Yes indeed time will tell!

:rofl:

[European Socialist]

21. Remember Kerry--"Bush won fair and square" . What I thought Fitz was ...

saying on Friday-"Libby is all we can prove" I think both these men are risk adverse and afraid of looking foolish. So we need to take them at face value when they make public statements.

[emulatorloo]

25. take at face value Fitz statements that he cannot talk about the

activites of his office/grand jury as they are ongoing.

take at face value his statement that the investigation is not over.

[hiabrill]

28. DU has forced me to remain patient..

... there's a lot more to come ... Fitz is a master and he's going for the big fish...!

[mzmolly]

24. I don't care if anyone else is indicted so much as I will enjoy this to

the utmost regardless.

'HIGHEST WH OFFICIAL IN 135 YEARS ....' Yeah, that's a good thing.

More "good things" = the media questioning * FOR ONCE
PNAC agenda is in jeopardy due to the above.

Those are very meaningful things to celebrate.

[burythehatchet]

27. you seem to be another victim

of the "horse-race" line of thinking. Everything must either be a win or a loss. Good or evil. Right or wrong.

Its about the process. Patrick Fitzgerald knows that better than anyone I've ever seen in this type of role. ANY INDICTMENTS THAT ARE NOT AIR TIGHT CASES WILL NOT BE SOUGHT UNTIL THEY ARE AIRTIGHT CASES. He understands the nature of the machine that is arrayed against his seeking of justice. He said so much. His strategy is one based on patience and thoroughness. He screws down every word that is heard and he knows when sand is being thrown in his eyes. This is NOT a series of "We won-They won" battles. This is a friggin war, and he might be the only general we have.

[zanne]

32. Dissent will be ridiculed. nt

[CatWoman]

34. and common sense pissed on

[zanne]

39. SEE? nt

[CatWoman]

41. make a deal with you

I'll continue to be your Exhibit "A" if you continue to do the same for me.

Ok?

Fair is fair.

[burythehatchet]

43. curious comment. Not sure if I should try to find the

relationship to my post, but whatever...

[trekbiker]

79. I agree. His performance in last friday's press conference

was brilliant. He knows his adversary and the power they have. He was very careful and seemed to be trying to calm things down. I had the feeling watching him that he is the master chess player, a master of miss-direction. Lulling them into a false sense of having dodged the bullet. This admin is so good at believing its own bullshit that they just might hang themselves if he gives them enough rope.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Three words

Tea Pot Done

One word

Watergate

of course I could add cases Fitz has acutally worked on, such as... the Giancanna Gambino, family, Al Qaida and others. They have one thing in common, nail one, and then the rest

Patience grasshopper, patientce

Oh and in 1973 they also said it was going nowhere and was not that serious... they have trottted out the same bloody talking points

[Terran]

31. Maybe if you read the indictment

you'd see how obvious it is that the fat lady ain't sung yet. It's obvious that Rove is indictable based on the content of the document, so something more is going on. You're only looking at the surface of things.

[garybeck]

36. thanks, that is my hope :)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I used to feel confident this was going to bring down the house of cards. I spoke about it optimistically to my friends who don't follow the issue. now my confidence is diminished and I'm "hopeful." that's all.

[Terran]

61. Just remember Watergate

That took years to unfold. And Bush has over three years left. I can wait. Hang in there. :thumbsup:

[zanne]

37. What if someone reads the indictment thoroughly....

Like I did, and gets something different out of it? Why pounce on people just because they disagree with you? This is the Democratic Underground. We're supposed to discuss things here with other Democrats. Lately, I wonder just how democratic it is. I know we all feel very strongly about this subject, but the same people seem to get together on a thread and just attack the person or persons who sees it differently. If you want to see membership go down, that's the way to do it. Come on, people!

[emulatorloo]

52. zanne again "freedom of speech/dissent" does not mean that

"I can say whatever I want and nobody can challenge me"

If a DU'er feel another DU'er arguments are weak or unsupported, then they will refute or ask for clarification. That is just the way it is.

[Terran]

60. Jeez, you got all that out of what I wrote?

Why pounce on people just because they disagree with you? This is the Democratic Underground. We're supposed to discuss things here with other Democrats. Lately, I wonder just how democratic it is. I know we all feel very strongly about this subject, but the same people seem to get together on a thread and just attack the person or persons who sees it differently. If you want to see membership go down, that's the way to do it. Come on, people!

I thought that's what we were doing, "discussing". Are we all supposed to agree? No, highly doubtful. But some things are more objective than others. I hardly think my post counts as an "attack" on anyone. I'm just expressing my opinion, but in fact there are some objective things about the indictment that that are not open to interpretation. That, plus the fact that a new Grand Jury is being convened even as we speak makes it clear what's going on.

And good on you if you did read the indictment, as so many here apparently are not bothering to do before they vent their emotion-based reactions. But, I think it's crystal clear that other parties besides Libby referred to in the indictment commited violations of the law and WILL be prosecuted in the future. I really don't see how you can come away from reading it without that view. Fitzgerald objectively has the goods on "Official A".

[ClassWarrior]

40. And we should care WHY exactly??

:shrug:

NGU.

[Burning Water]

74. Out of curiosity

What does "NGU" stand for??

[incapsulated]

48. I agree and DU truly saddens me these days

I understand the desire to feel optimistic, to speculate on the events of Friday and come up with the most happy interpretation with the most satisfying outcome.

But those of us who speculate, and I would remind everyone that this is ALL SPECULATION, and come to a different conclusion, that do not see this investigation expanding greatly, and who would feel quite disappointed if Rove is not indicted, are just as entitled to our opinion as anyone else here.

This attempt that I see to marginalize, insult and shout down those who have an opinion that doesn't agree with the majority is a pathetic thing to see from so-called progressives. If your sensibilities are so very sensitive that logical argument, dissenting opinion or simply speculating a less than wonderful outcome puts you into a state of despair or makes you so angry that you need to insult and disparage those who disagree with you, then maybe you should get another interest aside from politics.

In case you hadn't noticed, we are on the same side. We just have a different opinion. Those of us that do see the situation more pessimistically, for the most part, would LOVE to be proven wrong. I was more than willing to make the most positive speculations about the investigation immediately after the Libby announcement. My feelings changed after the press conference and at this point I am more pessimistic but hopeful that my take is wrong, that Rove will get indicted and I will be satisfied that some real justice was done. Until then, all that is left to do is wait and see. I do not intend to spend my time here calling those who have a different view trolls and other childish insults, nor do I look to DU to fuel whatever fantasy outcome I may desire, without any dissent or feasible alternative viewpoint permitted.

[emulatorloo]

50. those who are "optimistic" look at fitz's history and MO as a prosecutor

and site those quantifiable facts (among other things)

those who are "pessimistic" mostly site their feelings of despair.

Everybody is of course entitled to thier "opinion" but if there is anything I have learned about DU is that you may be called upon to defend your opinion. Freedom of Speech or Dissent has never meant "I emulatorloo can say whatever I want and you can't call me on it if you have a good argument to the contrary."

Now that being said, of course it is all speculation. That is what we do on DU

Now that being said, Fitz repeatedly said the investigation is not over at the press conference. If a DU'er tells me the investigation is over, and Fitzgerald tells me it is not over, I am more likely to take Fitz's word for it,

Now THAT being said, who knows what will happen next. Not me. At any rate Scooter is facing up to 30 years in prison, and it seems like a damn airtight case.

[incapsulated]

51. No.

Those on both sides will present an argument for their opinion, mostly based on how they interpret certain facts, events, etc. I did so earlier, but I'm not willing to get my head bashed in here.

Beyond that, it is all what you chose to believe since NOBODY KNOWS what will happen.

Except that those who believe that little else will happen are being driven off of DU by a gang mentality of insults and hostility that is usually reserved for the real enemy. I don't think anyone other than a masochist wants to "discuss" the issue with that threat hanging over their heads. Note the thread here calling us trolls and the high-fives and insults that follow. Not exactly a welcoming atmosphere for "debate".

Fine. So long. Dissent will not be tolerated, I get it.

:hi:

[emulatorloo]

53. WHAT PART OF MY POST SAYS "DISSENT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED"?

A; none of it.

Again, I learned long ago that on DU you need to be prepared to defend your position. This is a fact of the lively discussion here.

Conflating the fact that people may question your opinion (and are free to do so) with DISSENT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED is silly.

[maximovich]

55. It's a Pre-emptive Cheap Shot of sorts

"DISSENT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED"

[incapsulated]

71. That was not directed at you.

It was clearly a continuance of my point about the attitude of many people on this forum, not you in particular.

[emulatorloo]

72. ok thnx for the clarification. . .

:hi:

[garybeck]

58. respectfully disagree with your interpretation

you said:

"those who are optimistic, site those quantifiable facts (among other things) "

"those who are pessimistic mostly site their feelings of despair."

I disagree. the quantifiable facts are that only Libby was indicted and Fitzgerald said that the major bulk of the investigation is complete.

obviously we each hvae our interpretation of the events. but I don't think it is right to assign one interpretation as based on fact and the other as based on feelings. I think they both have facts and feelings.

[Terran]

64. "quantifiable facts"

You missed a couple:

1. "Official A" as described in the indictment is objectively indictable for some of the same crimes as Libby. This can also be said for various other unnamed/undescribed officials within the administration. Ergo, Fitzgerald already has evidence of further crimes by other people besides Libby. Do you think he will just sit on that?

2. A second grand jury is being convened even as we speak. If the investigation were nearly over, why would this be happening?

I really think the peole who are all depressed about all this are the ones who haven't read the friggin' indictment.

[emulatorloo]

66. hey gary

"mostly' was a qualifier - certainly did not say based on emotion alone. Am willing to keep my eyes open, and I appreciated your original post. You are very much right about reading the rumor sites etc w a grain of salt --

OTOH Fitz's history and modus operandi in past cases are indeed quantifiable facts. Are they feelings? No.

That being said, Are they absolute proof of anything that is going on now? No.

Do they give us an idea of what he might be up to? Yes.

Does that mean that is what he is up to? No.

But it is real evidence of what he may be up to.

We just have to wait and see.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Now I GET TO SPECULATE!!!:

As to Libby indictment - Scooter is facing 30 years in prison. That must be a hell of a weight on his shoulders. Will Dick really protect him? Can Bush be trusted to follow thru?

As to Fitz statements at conferernce - I try to read them in context of the whole press conference. He spends a good third explaining why he couldnt comment on the investigation before the indictment. He is then very straightforward talking about investigation regarding the Libby indictment. When he gets questions beyond libby, he then reiterates that he can only talk about the investigation as it relates to the indictment of libby. And then he gets real cagey in his answers -- he wants to be done as soon as possible, the bulk of the investigation is over -- all things that are cagey and meaningless basically -- how is it significant that the bulk of the investigation is over? At face value that means they are done asking "the bulk" of the questions -- it does not mean they are done taking action. . .very cagey, very lawyerly.

______

QUESTION: What can you say about what you're still working on then?

FITZGERALD: I can't. I don't mean that fliply, but the grand jury doesn't give an announcement about what they're doing, what they're looking at, unless they charge an indictment.

--------------------

[GayCanuck]

56. I've scoured Fitz's website

and there is no mention of Rove. I think this thing will only affect Libby, dammit.

[garybeck]

59. I think that's good. he hasn't mentioned Rove because he's

still under investigation.

[emulatorloo]

63. "Official A" phrasing sign of legal jeopardy

washington post. . .will go grab link and add it in a sec

ok here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/30/AR2005103000348.html

<snip>

But two legal sources intimately familiar with Fitzgerald's tactics in this inquiry said they believe Rove remains in significant danger. They described Fitzgerald as being relentlessly thorough but also conservative throughout this prosecution -- and his willingness to consider Rove's eleventh-hour pleading of a memory lapse is merely a sign of Fitzgerald's caution.

The two legal sources point to what they consider Fitzgerald's careful decision not to charge Libby with the leak of a covert agent's identity, given that the prosecutor had amassed considerable evidence that Libby gave classified information, which he knew from his job should not be made public, to reporters. Another prosecutor might have stretched to make a leak charge, on the theory that a jury would believe, based on other actions, that Libby acted with bad intentions.

Another warning sign for Rove was in the phrasing of Friday's indictment of Libby. Fitzgerald referred to Rove in those charging papers as a senior White House official and dubbed him "Official A." In prosecutorial parlance, this kind of awkward pseudonym is often used for individuals who have not been indicted in a case but still face a significant chance of being charged. No other official in the investigation carries such an identifier.

<snip>

[kerry-is-my-prez]

62. Why did Fitz. make his announcement on "News-Dump Friday?"

That's the day that you do it on when you want the news to die....

[gkhouston]

67. Fitzgerald probably doesn't give a rat's ass about news cycles.

It was the day his grand jury's term expired. It was also, according to a friend of mine, the feast of St. Jude, patron saint of lost causes. I don't know whether she was pulling my leg or not, but she's a yellow-dog Dem. ;-)

[Garbo 2004]

68. IIRC, the "leaks" about "22" indictments was from sites like tomflocco.

If you believed the stories from such "sources" you're going to be disappointed that Tony Blair isn't under indictment by a "Chicago" grand jury and Bush wasn't dragged off Air Force One in cuffs.

I don't recall that any reputable sources or sites made claims of 22 or 24 indictments.

[JohnWxy]

70. Mr.Rove's Wonderful Adventure - or how to "out-Fox" the justice system

Well the indictments have been handed down and they don’t include Mr. Rove. Mr. Libby, Cheney's Right Hand Man and a top advisor to the president has been indicted for perjury and lying before the Grand Jury and with obstruction of justice. But there were no indictments for the "outing" of a covert agent of the CIA. So Mr. Rove has managed to elude the grasp of the legal justice system. Mr. Rove avoided indictment for revealing the identity of a covert CIA agent. But does the crafty Mr. Rove really think that his legalistic sleight-of-handiwork will change the simple, obvious fact that he did inform Matt Cooper that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA? Mr. Rove says he was "warning" the writer not to mention that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. (Does Mr. Rove really expect the American public to not see his "warning" was really INFORMING (as in "blowing her cover")? Mr. Rove, your gall is truly inspiring – of disgust.).

Mr. Rove would have us believe that he, the top politico in Washington, didn’t know Ms. Plame was a CIA undercover operative. He would have us believe that he, the man referred to as Bush's Brain, knew that Plame worked for the CIA but did NOT know she was an undercover agent for the CIA. And he would further have us believe that he, Bush's Brain, didn't think to check to make sure her assignment at the CIA was NOT classified information before informing several reporters of her connection to the CIA. Now, let's see, he DOES know the CIA is involved in covert intelligence gathering all over the globe, right? And he therefore could be expected to know that many people at the CIA ARE involved in covert activity and are therefore protected by the law against revealing the identity of a covert agent, right? Apparently not! Mr. Rove, your nerve is surpassed only by your vindictiveness, a vindictiveness which lead you, and others, to pursue your campaign to GET Joe Wilson by "outing" his wife.

(Question: IF Rove was NOT aware that she was a covert agent, why then would he feel the necessity to "warn" the columnist about mentioning that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA? Note also, the wording of Rove's statement. He said he told Cooper that Wilson's wife worked "AT the CIA". This shows this statement is an artifact. People don't say someone works "at" the CIA, FBI, etc. They say somebody works "FOR". Why did he change this "for" to "at"? .. To make it sound less informative, to make it SOUND AS IF he had no appreciation of her level of responsibility within the CIA and therefore he is less culpable (within the law) of outing her -- as if she was a window washer, or clerk as far as he knew. This is an obvious sly and subtle alteration of the wording which reveals craft and artifice was involved in his statement.)

Mr. Rove is trying to convey the notion that he didn’t intend to "out" Plame. Well, that’s interesting. I always thought if someone commits an act that the intention to commit is beyond debate! Perhaps he is contending he wasn’t aware of what he was saying when he informed reporters that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA (more than once)!!

Now, I have heard some conversations regarding what damage has been done by Mr. Rove's actions (and those of Libby, Dick Cheney's right hand man). Well, I can tell you about the damage that has been done. Our national security has been compromised. If we are ever going to win a war on terrorism (should we ever start a real one) WE MUST GET BETTER INTELLIGENCE FROM PEOPLE LIVING IN THE COUNTRIES WHERE THE TERRORISTS ARE ACTIVE. NOW, WHAT DO YOU THINK POTENTIAL SOURCES OF VALUABLE INFORMATION ARE GOING TO THINK ABOUT THIS OUTING OF A CIA COVERT AGENT? Mr. Rove, you may have "foxed" the legal system, but this doesn't change the reality of what you and others in this administration have done. FUTURE POSSIBLE SOURCES OF VALUABLE INTELLIGENCE WILL SIMPLY NOT TAKE A CHANCE OF POSSIBLY RISKING THEIR LIVES BY TALKING TO ANY AMERICAN WHO MIGHT LATER BE OUTED BY SOME REPUBLICAN 'POLITICAL HIT-MAN' EXACTING REVENGE UPON A CRITIC OR NON 'TRUE BELIEVER'. The loss of the intelligence will be impossible to gauge or quantify BUT IT WILL BE NONETHELESS REAL AND SIGNIFICANT. OUR NATIONAL SECURITY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

And what will this lead to? We will never know the exact number, but there will be many who will pay for Mr. Rove's treason (remember the agent was outed in a time of war – the war on Terrorism). How many soldiers and citizens will die (terrorist attacks can occur anywhere), because of intelligence we DIDNT get; because somebody was afraid to talk to an American for fear his contact would later be outed by a Republican politico exacting revenge for someone's lack of blind faith or for going against the 'party line' and revealing the truth to the American people. Again, the group who claims to be the party of a strong national defense has compromised our national security and put our soldiers and citizens in greater jeopardy - our national security sacrificed for political payback.

This administration which promised to restore honor and dignity to the White House has set new lows in morality in politics. This administration has shown once again, that it can be relied upon only for the arrogant abuse of power, vindictiveness and total lack of the values of simple honesty and decency.

[DearAbby]

75. Great points JohnWxy...Write that in a LTTE

Write that and send it to your local paper. People need to hear exactly what the damage was in outing Valerie Plame. People are busy trying to survive, they don't pay that much attention to news shows, (what news there is in those programs) They need it broken down just like in your above post.

We need to get this in letters all across the country. We also need to write and call our congress critters to make sure this is investigated. The American people were placed in jeopardy, by persons in this administration. This needs to be exposed.

[Garbo 2004]

76. Except the investigation isn't completed and none of us know whether

more indictments may be forthcoming. It's a bit early to conclude that Rover's escaped. He and his lawyers have been blowing up the media's skirts again and some of the media is engaging in stenography...again.

I don't suppose Fitz included all the info he did in the indictment just to pack up and catch the next plane to Chicago for good. "Official A" is not identified as Rove because Rove's still in play and he's still under investigation as even his lawyer noted on the record on Friday.

[merh]

78. Who the fuck cares?

Your optimism is not necessary for justice to be had.

Go get another hobby. :hi: