And it Begins.

totalcommand

Platinum Member
Apr 21, 2004
2,487
0
0
http://newsmax.com/scripts/printer_frie...om/archives/ic/2005/10/22/142646.shtml

Saturday, Oct. 22, 2005 2:19 p.m. EDT

Patrick Fitzgerald Nixed Harkin Investigation

A little more than a year before he was tapped to head the special counsel probe into allegations that the Bush administration "outed" CIA employee Valerie Plame, then-U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald abruptly dropped a wiretapping probe into Sen. Tom Harkin's campaign, saying no laws had been broken.

On Sept. 3, 2002, Harkin operatives arranged to secretly tape a strategy meeting by his then-Republican opponent, Rep. Greg Ganske.

Brian Conley, a former aide to the Iowa Democrat, made a digital recording while attending the meeting at the request of Harkin staff member Rafael Ruthchild, according to the Des Moines Register. Conley then returned the recorder to Ruthchild, who provided a copy of the recording and a transcript to a reporter.

The Ganske campaign immediately cried foul and demanded that Polk County Attorney John Sarcone launch a criminal probe. Patrick Fitzgerald, who headed up the U.S. attorney's office in Chicago, also launched an investigation.

Meanwhile, the key players in the case gave every indication they believed they were in legal jeopardy.

Conley and Ruthchild refused to speak to investigators on the advice of their attorneys, with Ruthchild resigning from her job.

Sen. Harkin staunchly denied he had any prior knowledge of the possibly criminal tape plot, though prosecutor Sarcone declined to interrogate him - an indulgence Mr. Fitzgerald apparently also granted.

After a brief two week probe, Sarcone - a Democrat whose sister worked for then-Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle in Washington, D.C. - declared that the Harkin campaign had broken no laws.

After a separate but equally brief investigation, U.S. Attorney Fitzgerald announced that there was no violation of federal law by Harkin's team.

Fitzgerald's reluctance to pursue the Harkin Tapegate scandal stands in marked contrast to his conduct of the Leakgate investigation, where he's earned a reputation as an aggressive and creative prosecutor who has pushed the envelope and left no stone unturned.

However, the two investigations are not completely dissimilar.

As with Tapegate, Fitzgerald decided "almost from the start" [according to the New York Times] not to pursue allegations that Plame's outing was illegal, probably because she isn't covered by the federal law in question, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

Instead, Fitzgerald has reportedly made conflicting accounts offered to his grand jury the focus of his two-year probe, issues the Times described Friday as "peripheral" to his initial investigation.

While no one has so far ascribed partisan motives to Fitzgerald for pressing his case long after determining that Plame's outing wasn't illegal, reports that he is a Republican turn out not to be true.

Born of working class immigrant parents and raised in heavily Democratic Brooklyn, New York, Fitzgerald was educated in liberal bastions like Amherst College and Harvard University.

Asked in 2001 if he had any political affiliation, the Leakgate prosecutor told the Chicago Tribune: "I'm an independent."

This is just the beginning guys. If there are any indictments, prepare to see more stuff like this coming out of the conservative press.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Being from Iowa, I can say Harkin is a crook. I really could care less about it, though, because it is just water under the bridge. I just can't figure out why he keeps getting re-elected.
 

NJDevil

Senior member
Jun 10, 2002
952
0
0
hahaha, "liberal bastions like Amherst College and Harvard University."

I guess smart conservatives should avoid the top ranking schools in the country since they're such "liberal bastions." I don't get how these people managed to convince others that going to a top school could be a bad thing. I'm a bit insulted by this.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Low Expercturations! Big John's Jr. College of Plano, TX is a fine american academic institution!

Harvard or Princeton, bah!
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
This is an excellent example of partisan spin-

"While no one has so far ascribed partisan motives to Fitzgerald for pressing his case long after determining that Plame's outing wasn't illegal, reports that he is a Republican turn out not to be true. "

When did Fitzgerald say that the outing of Plame wasn't illegal? He never did, but the newsmax article quotes the NYT as saying he did... even though the orginal NYT article was merely a speculative opinion piece...

And this bit in conjunction-

"Instead, Fitzgerald has reportedly made conflicting accounts offered to his grand jury the focus of his two-year probe, issues the Times described Friday as "peripheral" to his initial investigation. "

He's been trying to establish who actually leaked the information in the first place, remember? Conflicting accounts only serve to obfuscate that... which is why there are conflicting accounts in the first place... It's called "perjury", something frowned upon by prosecutors.

Can't wait for the indictments... might even have one for the Prez...
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: Jhhnn


Can't wait for the indictments... might even have one for the Prez...

Heh, the whole freakin crew here has a round of drinks on me, gonna party like it's 1984 w00t!

*yes, I know they always get away with it though* :|

iran/contra was worse imo and they had reagan and bush sr's ass nailed, and for some reason the media blinked..wtf?
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Fitzgerald is so squeaky clean that any attempt to smear him will blow up in the face of Rove and his creeps.

A bit of counterpoint to the OP...

Leak Prosecutor Is Called Exacting and Apolitical

By SCOTT SHANE and DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: October 22, 2005

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 - In 13 years prosecuting mobsters and terrorists in New York, Patrick J. Fitzgerald earned a public reputation for meticulous preparation, a flawless memory and an easy eloquence. Only his colleagues knew that these orderly achievements emerged from the near-total anarchy of his office, where the relentless Mr. Fitzgerald often slept during big cases.

"You'd open a drawer, looking for a pen or Post-it notes, and it would be full of dirty socks," recalled Karen Patton Seymour, a former assistant United States attorney who tried a major case with him. "He was a mess. Food here, clothes there, papers everywhere. But behind all that was a totally organized mind."

That mind, which has taken on Al Qaeda and the Gambino crime family, is now focused on the most politically volatile case of Mr. Fitzgerald's career. As the special prosecutor who has directed the C.I.A. leak investigation, he is expected to decide within days who, if anyone, will be charged with a crime.

To seek indictments against the White House officials caught up in the inquiry would deliver a devastating blow to the Bush administration. To simply walk away after two years of investigation, which included the jailing of a reporter for 85 days for refusing to testify, would invite cries of cover-up and waste.

Yet Mr. Fitzgerald's past courtroom allies and adversaries say that consideration of political consequences will play no role in his decision.

"I don't think the prospect of a firestorm would deter him," said J. Gilmore Childers, who worked with Mr. Fitzgerald on high-profile terrorism prosecutions in New York during the 1990s. "His only calculus is to do the right thing as he sees it."

Stanley L. Cohen, a New York lawyer who has defended those accused of terrorism in a half-dozen cases prosecuted by Mr. Fitzgerald, said he never detected the slightest political leanings, only a single-minded dedication to the law.

"There's no doubt in my mind that if he's found something, he won't be swayed one way or the other by the politics of it," Mr. Cohen said. "For Pat, there's no such thing as a little crime you can ignore."

Mr. Fitzgerald, 44, whose regular job is as the United States attorney in Chicago, is a hard man to pigeonhole. The son of Irish immigrants - his father, Patrick Sr., was a Manhattan doorman - he graduated from Amherst College and Harvard Law School. Though he is a workaholic who sends e-mail messages to subordinates at 2 a.m. and has never married, friends say the man they call Fitzie is a hilarious raconteur and great company for beer and baseball. Ruthless in his pursuit of criminals, he once went to considerable trouble to adopt a cat.

"He's a prankster and a practical joker," said Ms. Seymour, who now practices law in New York, recalling when Mr. Fitzgerald drafted a fake judge's opinion denying a key motion and had it delivered to a colleague. "But he's also brilliant. When he's trying a complicated case, there's no detail he can't recall."

Mr. Fitzgerald was appointed in December 2003 by James B. Comey, then the deputy attorney general and an old friend, to investigate the disclosure in a column by Robert Novak of the identity of an undercover operative for the Central Intelligence Agency, Valerie Wilson, also referred to by her maiden name, Valerie Plame. Her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former diplomat who had traveled to Niger on behalf of the C.I.A. to check on reports that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium there, had publicly accused the White House of twisting the evidence to justify war against Iraq.

Lawyers involved in the case say Mr. Fitzgerald appears to be examining whether high-level officials who spoke to reporters about the Wilsons sought to mislead prosecutors about their discussions. Those under scrutiny include Karl Rove, the top political adviser to President Bush, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

In grand jury sessions, Mr. Fitzgerald has struck witnesses as polite and exacting. Matthew Cooper, a Time magazine reporter who wrote about his two and half hours of testimony, said that the prosecutor's questions were asked "in microscopic, excruciating detail."

Before he testified, Mr. Cooper recalled that Mr. Fitzgerald counseled him to say what he remembered and no more. "If I show you a picture of your kindergarten teacher and it really refreshes your memory say so," Mr. Cooper wrote, quoting Mr. Fitzgerald. "If it doesn't, don't say yes just because I show you a photo of you and her sitting together."

Judith Miller, the New York Times reporter who wrote about her two grand jury appearances, said that Mr. Fitzgerald asked questions that reflected a deep knowledge of the leak case as he led her through her dealings with Mr. Libby.

Mr. Fitzgerald has drawn criticism from press advocates for his aggressive pursuit of journalists he believes may have been told about the secret C.I.A. employment of Ms. Wilson. Ms. Miller served nearly three months in jail this summer before agreeing to testify. In pursuing leads that have made him a threat to the White House, Mr. Fitzgerald is following a pattern set by previous special prosecutors. Some allies of the White House complain privately that he has taken on some of the worst traits of his predecessors. Republicans criticized Lawrence E. Walsh for his handling of the Iran-Contra scandal in the Reagan administration, while Democrats attacked Kenneth W. Starr's performance in the Whitewater probe and Monica Lewinsky sex scandal under President Clinton. The two prosecutors operated under the independent counsel law, which both parties let die in 1999.

Katy J. Harriger, a political scientist at Wake Forest University who has studied special prosecutors, said that Mr. Fitzgerald had some advantages over his predecessors. He has essentially all the powers of the attorney general to chase evidence, question witnesses and seek charges. Unlike Mr. Walsh and Mr. Starr, both former judges, Mr. Fitzgerald is a career prosecutor. And as a Bush administration appointee, he is less vulnerable to attack from the White House.

"It will be much harder than it was with Starr to say this is a partisan prosecution," Ms. Harriger said.

Some attorneys who admire Mr. Fitzgerald detect a hint of zealotry or inflexibility in his approach and wonder whether what works with terrorism translates to an inside-the-Beltway case involving White House officials and their multilayered relationships with journalists.

In Mr. Fitzgerald's world, a former colleague recalled, it was pretty clear who had black hats and who had white hats, there was not a lot of gray.

But Mr. Cohen, whose defense work on behalf of Hamas and other groups has provoked controversy, says he has always found Mr. Fitzgerald willing to listen, and to distinguish between militant rhetoric and genuine terrorist plotting. "If I need a straight answer from a federal prosecutor, I call Pat," Mr. Cohen said.

Mr. Fitzgerald's moral grounding began at Our Lady Help of Christians school in his native Brooklyn. He attended Regis High School, a Jesuit institution in Manhattan for gifted students, all of whom attend on scholarship. At Amherst, where he majored in math and economics, he was an unassuming kid with a New York accent who was a stellar student, one others frequently turned to for help, recalled Walter Nicholson, an economics professor.

At Amherst, he worked part time as a custodian; in the summers during college and law school, his father helped him find work as a doorman.

After three years in private practice, he joined the United States attorney's office for the southern district of New York and quickly distinguished himself.

"I've tried a lot of cases, and he's probably the toughest adversary I've ever seen," said Roger L. Stavis, a New York defense lawyer who faced Mr. Fitzgerald during the 1995 terrorism trial of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. Mr. Stavis prided himself on knowing the web of Muslim extremists but was surprised when Mr. Fitzgerald asked a witness about Osama bin Laden, then an obscure figure.

"I thought, 'I don't know who Osama bin Laden is, but he's in Pat Fitzgerald's crosshairs,' " Mr. Stavis said. In 2001, Mr. Fitzgerald led the team that convicted four men in the 1998 bombings of two American embassies in East Africa.

During his time in New York, Mr. Fitzgerald's hapless bachelor ways became legendary. For months he did not bother to have the gas connected to the stove in his Brooklyn apartment. Once, in a fit of domesticity, he baked two pans of lasagna, recalled Amy E. Millard, a New York colleague. Distracted by work, he left them uneaten in the oven for three months before he discovered them, Ms. Millard said. When he tried to adopt a cat, she remembered, he was turned down because of his work habits and only later acquired a pet when a friend in Florida had to give up her cat and had it flown to him to New York.

Some of the cases Mr. Fitzgerald handled after moving to Chicago in 2001 have expanded his experience into the sensitive and murky arena of political corruption. He indicted a former governor of Illinois, George Ryan, in a scandal involving the Illinois secretary of state's office, as well as two aides to Mayor Richard Daley on mail-fraud charges.

But those cases bear little resemblance to the C.I.A. leak investigation, with its potential implications for national politics. Samuel W. Seymour, another former New York prosecutor and Karen's husband, said it is easy to politically "triangulate" most government lawyers, noting which were mentored by Democrats or promoted by Republicans. But not Mr. Fitzgerald.

"Some people may feel he's independent to a fault, because his independence makes him unpredictable," Mr. Seymour said. "I think it makes him the perfect person for this job."
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
And instead of the same of pull-the-wool-over-your-eyes bait and switch, let's concentrate on the real issues at hand -- such as:

Asked on CBS's "Face the Nation" about the column, Gonzales said the Justice Department had informed his office around 8 p.m. and that White House lawyers said he could wait until the next morning before notifying the staff. He did not say why he called Card.

"I specifically had our lawyers go back to the Department of Justice lawyers and ask them, 'Do you want us to notify the staff now, immediately, or would it be okay to notify the staff early in the morning?' And we were advised, go ahead and notify the staff early in the morning, that would be okay." He said most of the staff had left by the time the Justice Department called and that "no one knew about the investigation."

But he acknowledged telling one person: "the chief of staff. And immediately the next morning, I told the president. And shortly thereafter, there was notification sent out to all the members of the White House staff," Gonzales said.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), appearing on the same program, questioned why Gonzales would not have notified the staff immediately by e-mail and suggested that Fitzgerald pursue whether Card may have given anyone in the White House advance notice of the criminal investigation.

"The real question now is, who did the chief of staff speak to? Did the chief of staff pick up the phone and call Karl Rove? Did the chief of staff pick up the phone and call anybody else?" Biden asked.

LINK

 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: PsharkJF
Fitzgerald, man, I love the guy solely for cleaning out chicago (a little bit.)

Cleaning Chicago even a little bit is like cleaning anywhere else alot.

:laugh:

 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
What else would you expect from a flinky tin foil beany source like Newsmax? :roll:
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Being from Iowa, I can say Harkin is a crook. I really could care less about it, though, because it is just water under the bridge. I just can't figure out why he keeps getting re-elected.
Being from Iowa, I can say you continue to remain totally clueless. Harkin has his warts to be sure, but to call him a "crook" is just your usual mindless partisan hackery.


Re. the OP, Newsmax continues to demonstrate its complete lack of journalistic integrity. Contrary to their opening paragraph, this was not a wiretapping incident at all. An overzealous Harkin supporter attended a Ganske campaign meeting in person and taped it. There was no wiretap involved. This is not illegal, as both Fitzgerald and the County Attorney independently concluded. Harkin found it unethical, however, and dismissed the staffer who suggested or supported it (don't remember all the details). In short, it was dirty politics, and Harkin wouldn't stand for it.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

The top Democrat said that regardless of whether Fitzgerald brings any indictments, it's clear the White House engaged in a cover-up

"The evidence is very clear [that] half the stuff the president told us about Iraq - the weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that stuff - we know that's not true," Dean said.

"What got [Karl] Rove and [Lewis] Libby in trouble is that they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes and disagrees with them."

Dean said it is "a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."


I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.

Guilty by default according to the Democrats.
 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

The top Democrat said that regardless of whether Fitzgerald brings any indictments, it's clear the White House engaged in a cover-up

"The evidence is very clear [that] half the stuff the president told us about Iraq - the weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that stuff - we know that's not true," Dean said.

"What got [Karl] Rove and [Lewis] Libby in trouble is that they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes and disagrees with them."

Dean said it is "a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."


I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.

Guilty by default according to the Democrats.

So how in that article is Dean pressuring Fitzgerald? Oh that's right, he's not.
 

NJDevil

Senior member
Jun 10, 2002
952
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

The top Democrat said that regardless of whether Fitzgerald brings any indictments, it's clear the White House engaged in a cover-up

"The evidence is very clear [that] half the stuff the president told us about Iraq - the weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that stuff - we know that's not true," Dean said.

"What got [Karl] Rove and [Lewis] Libby in trouble is that they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes and disagrees with them."

Dean said it is "a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."


I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.

Guilty by default according to the Democrats.

Where do you get vigilante justice from? He's making a hypothetical claim, yes, but no where in that article does it mention that is pressuring Fitzgerald at all. The first sentence:

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

is misleading. It is stating that Dean is urging Patrick, but what he's relaly doing is saying he won't accept a non-indictment result. Nowhere is there any evidence of him actually "urging, forcing, coercing" etc.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
So, uhh, now you're describing the efforts of the special prosecutor as "vigilante justice", zendari? Quite a leap, particularly since he has all the legal authority required to investigate and to prosecute as he sees fit...

Howard Dean has the right to his opinion, and to express it, as well, particularly when others have asked to hear it.

Fitzgerald has rights, too, and more importantly, obligations to the American people. He has apparently ruled out issuing a report, and he obviously won't just let the grand jury end with a whimper, so there's really only one thing left- indictments. The lies and obfuscations apparently haven't worked, meaning there will likely be indictments for that as well as for the original acts of outing a CIA agent... which is as it should be. There's nothing quite so satisfying as seeing some high flying hypocrites hoisted from their own petard, in this case, National Security.

So all the Admin fanbois probably need to hold onto their butts, because this week is likely to be a very wild ride, and not a pleasant one, either... You'll all be able to find out about it here, at the new website of the special prosecutor's office-

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html

Doesn't seem to me that they'd have gone to the trouble if it were all going to end on Friday- quite to the contrary.

 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: zendari
I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.
You mean like unilaterally deciding to invade Iraq for "violating U.N. resolutions" ... even though the U.N. itself did not authorize our attack?

(By the way, vigilanteism requires taking the law into one's own hands. Dean just expressed his opinion. We still allow that here in America, in spite of the caterwauling of BushCo and its minions. BushCo, on the other hand, appointed itself judge, jury, and excutioner of tens of thousands of innocent people. Just thought that might help put your lame troll in perspective.)


Guilty by default according to the Democrats.
Guilty by default according to the Bush flock.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: zendari
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean
Howard Dean can't pressure Fitzgerald anymore than you or I can. Dean is chairman of the DNC. He has no legal say about what crimes a Federal prosecutor can prosecute.

Fitzgerald's job is to present evidence of whatever crimes he believes have been committed to the grand jury. The grand jury's job is to evaluate that evidence and either issue indictments or dismiss the charges.

zendari -- I hope newmax included the flashing blue LED's on you tinfoil beany with your subscription. Do they send you extras for pimping their garbage? :roll:
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
So how in that article is Dean pressuring Fitzgerald? Oh that's right, he's not.
LOL, I watched the show and I can say that that Newsmax article is complete spin.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: NJDevil
Originally posted by: zendari
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

The top Democrat said that regardless of whether Fitzgerald brings any indictments, it's clear the White House engaged in a cover-up

"The evidence is very clear [that] half the stuff the president told us about Iraq - the weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that stuff - we know that's not true," Dean said.

"What got [Karl] Rove and [Lewis] Libby in trouble is that they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes and disagrees with them."

Dean said it is "a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."


I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.

Guilty by default according to the Democrats.

Where do you get vigilante justice from? He's making a hypothetical claim, yes, but no where in that article does it mention that is pressuring Fitzgerald at all. The first sentence:

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

is misleading. It is stating that Dean is urging Patrick, but what he's relaly doing is saying he won't accept a non-indictment result. Nowhere is there any evidence of him actually "urging, forcing, coercing" etc.


So Dean doesn't believe in proper justice from a grand jury?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
From zendari-

"So Dean doesn't believe in proper justice from a grand jury?"

Uhh, grand juries don't dispense justice- they can, however, issue indictments so that a trial jury can determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented at that time. Failure to indict from a grand jury doesn't mean it's over, either, like a not guilty verdict from a trial jury- prosecutors can return to any case they choose within the statute of limitations, seek indictments again on whatever basis they choose- usually new evidence. Which is all academic, anyway, given that Fitzgerald will very likely issue a whole slew of indictments this week... Given Fitzgerald's successes in the past, once that happens, resistance is pretty well futile...
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
I would have a lot more respect from the Republicans here if they didn't try and smear EVERYONE who is doing something they don't like. Let it go once in a while, admit that somebody is just doing their job and you guys are just on the wrong end of things this time. This whole "vast left-wing conspiracy" would be a lot more believable if it didn't include every single person who is doing someting the Republicans don't like.

The article starts out with Fitzgerald saying no laws had been broken. Was he wrong? Maybe I'm asking an obvious question here, but all noise about Howard Dean (wtf?) and anyone else aside, this smear seems to be based on innuendo instead of, you know, facts. I'm all for having a someone in the job who doesn't play favorites, but if he was following the law, I don't care if Harkin is a Democrat, a Republican, or a Nazi Communist...this story is over.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: NJDevil
Originally posted by: zendari
Fitzgerald pressured by Howard Dean

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

Dean was asked Sunday by ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

The top Democrat said that regardless of whether Fitzgerald brings any indictments, it's clear the White House engaged in a cover-up

"The evidence is very clear [that] half the stuff the president told us about Iraq - the weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that stuff - we know that's not true," Dean said.

"What got [Karl] Rove and [Lewis] Libby in trouble is that they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes and disagrees with them."

Dean said it is "a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."


I'm glad Mr. Howard Dean believes in his fantasy world of vigilante justice instead of the proper rule of law.

Guilty by default according to the Democrats.

Where do you get vigilante justice from? He's making a hypothetical claim, yes, but no where in that article does it mention that is pressuring Fitzgerald at all. The first sentence:

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean is urging Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to bring indictments in the Valerie Plame Leakgate case, saying he won't accept any other result.

is misleading. It is stating that Dean is urging Patrick, but what he's relaly doing is saying he won't accept a non-indictment result. Nowhere is there any evidence of him actually "urging, forcing, coercing" etc.


So Dean doesn't believe in proper justice from a grand jury?

If that's true, I suppose we're lucky Dean has nothing to do with resolving this issue. That would be why we have a legal system, no?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
You're asleep at the switch, rainsford. the article starts out saying that the NYT times said that Fitzgerald said there was no crime... a whole chain based on conjecture from the NYT in the first place. Fitzgerald has said no such thing. Don't get chumped. You're hip to the rest of it, however- just keep in mind that the whole deal is about muddying the waters, protecting the identities of the leakers and of deflecting blame from those who've lied to the grand jury on behalf of those leakers...
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
From zendari-

"So Dean doesn't believe in proper justice from a grand jury?"

Uhh, grand juries don't dispense justice- they can, however, issue indictments so that a trial jury can determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented at that time. Failure to indict from a grand jury doesn't mean it's over, either, like a not guilty verdict from a trial jury- prosecutors can return to any case they choose within the statute of limitations, seek indictments again on whatever basis they choose- usually new evidence. Which is all academic, anyway, given that Fitzgerald will very likely issue a whole slew of indictments this week... Given Fitzgerald's successes in the past, once that happens, resistance is pretty well futile...

The country is well aware of this, after watching earle mow through grand jury after grand jury to try and finally get his indictment.