"Hurricane" Fitzgerald

[Ocean Breeze]

THE COMING HURRICANE FITZGERALD...
Wherein we submit our entry in the "guess how many indictments" pool.
by thepen


http://www.opednews.com

As always we feature the action link first, this one to call for the impeachment of George Bush

http://www.millionphonemarch.com/impeach.htm

There is a storm of historic proportions headed for the United States, one that will make Hurricane Wilma (also en route) look like a small splash in the pond by comparison. It's been building and gathering strength in the increasingly hot waters of the Special Counsel's office for almost two years, and in a matter of days it may lay waste to the entire political infrastructure of Washington, D.C., from one end to the other.

We start with the understanding that the crime of the century (so far) has taken place in Iraq. Lies and forged evidence duped the American people into waging preemptive war against a country that posed no threat to us -- all for the cynical and greedy purpose of enriching a handful of the Bush administration's closest cronies. In the process, over 100,000 people have been senselessly murdered and maimed, including many thousands of our own service people. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been looted from the treasuries of two countries, mostly our own. Even worse, many believe that the attack of 9/11 was not only foreseen by the inner circle of our government, but that orders for a deliberate "stand-down" allowed it to occur. Why? So that the horrific resulting tragedy would justify all that followed.

The magnitude of these crimes is so monumental that their perpetrators were obsessed with suppressing any evidence of it. They ruthlessly smeared all critics, purging and intimidating any dissenting voices. For them the treasonous acts of exposing (and thereby destroying) one of our most critical intelligence assets (a front company secretly working to prevent the spread of WMD), were just another day's collateral damage. Having lied successfully for so long, having corrupted their mainstream corporate media lap dogs, and having made eunuchs of many in the "opposition" party, they considered themselves unassailable. Such arrogance has seldom been equaled.

What they did not count on was Patrick Fitzgerald. The letter which appointed him as Special Counsel granted to him the "authority of the Attorney General . . . independent of the supervision or control of any officer of the Department." Careful to confirm the extent of his mandate, he further inquired and was advised that

"[It] is plenary and includes the authority to investigate and prosecute violations of any federal criminal laws related to the underlying alleged unauthorized disclosure, as well as federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, your investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted . . ."

"Plenary" means "absolute and unqualified." In a word, Fitzgerald has all the power of the attorney general, the top law enforcement officer of the federal government himself, to pursue the facts wherever they may lead. It therefore appears he now possesses his own authority, and cannot be legally removed from his position, even by Bush. He has his own operating budget too, direct from the GAO.

For the criminal purposes of the Bush administration, Patrick Fitzgerald is their worst nightmare come true. He is a career prosecutor with a reputation for being not only "frighteningly" brilliant but fearless, and with a driving passion for determining the truth, their most mortal enemy. Indeed, the fastest way to get Fitzgerald’s fur up is to try to lie to him as a witness. See, he's a workaholic already, and liars just make him work harder. And if you've committed a federal crime like maybe . . . oh gee, maybe like perjury . . . says an old attorney friend, "Pat Fitzgerald's gonna get ya." Oh, and did we mention that he always goes for the person at the top of the conspiracy?

For those who are still trying to get their minds around the possible indictment of Rove and Libby, now a near certainty, consider that no one in the Bush camp is capable of telling the truth under any circumstances. As for Bush himself, one of his Harvard Business School professors said that Dubya was "famous" in his class for being a "pathological" liar. Bush has known all along who the leakers were, and he's been lying all along. Fitzgerald interviewed Bush for over an hour, and it’s unlikely that he told the truth in any respect. Bad move, George. Fitzie don't play that.

But wait, you say; that interview wasn't under oath. Try telling that to Martha Stewart who just got out of prison from her conviction for deceiving an investigator. Likewise with Dick Cheney. Even if two of his bag men had not cut deals with Fitzgerald already. And as for those who did testify untruthfully to the grand jury under oath, ask Li'l Kim what heinous lie she told to keep her in federal prison for a year. All she did was deny that she knew somebody that she did, in fact, know.

So let's put it together. We have a president who seems unable to tell the truth. We have an independent prosecutor of immaculate integrity who will not tolerate a lie. The INESCAPABLE conclusion is that Bush will be indicted, along with each and every member of his administration who participated in this. There has been talk on the web of 22 indictments. Rove and Libby -- (that's two), add two for Hannah and Wurmser (already cooperating but not given immunity), plus Bush and Cheney -- that gets us up to six . . . why don't we just say conservatively for the purposes of the pool. . . that 12 people will be indicted.

Besides perjury (and false statements), Fitzgerald has conspiracy and obstruction of justice to pick from as well, and those are just a couple of the technical crimes. Remember that he has the authority to pursue this investigation wherever it leads, and he is driven to do just that. He was born for this. Among other things, he requested from the Italian authorities the files on the forging of the Niger documents themselves. That was what Joe Wilson’s trip was all about. And why they were so compelled to "out" his wife in the first place in their clumsy attempt to discredit him. What do you think the chances are that the most zealous prosecutor they could have appointed won't get to the bottom of that one, too? He may even expose what really happened on 9/11. Wouldn’t that be the "coup de grace"?

So what happens next? What happens if Bush tries to preemptively pardon everyone, INCLUDING himself? Even Nixon wasn't that shameless. But don't put it past Bush to trigger the greatest constitutional crisis of all time. There are a couple of wrinkles involved here, beyond even the public outroar that would result. The constitution states that the president has the power to pardon "except in Cases of Impeachment." That's why it is important that you act now to demand the impeachment of Bush for all the high crimes and misdemeanors that he has committed already. In the end it may be the only way to restrain him.

TAKE ACTION NOW AT http://www.millionphonemarch.com/impeach.htm

If Bush tries to pardon himself AND cling to power, expect winds of historic intensity for change. And in the center of it all there will be a vacuum of power. For those politicians who have shown no courage so far, this will be their last chance! Don't be surprised to see the conspirators running to Roberts, their latest crony appointment, to try to find a way out. And eternal shame on any member of the senate who lets that one slide without demanding each and every document that could help reveal the truth.

y'all have been alerted /warned. Gonna run for cover or stay and battle for the true America??? Or is the true america been hidden for too long??

 

[Ocean Breeze]

In Pursuit of Ideology, The Truth Has Fallen
by Anthony Wade


http://www.opednews.com

October 23, 2005

In the past this country had a media which believed in the truth. In pursuit of the truth, the media would be relentless at times to bring some accountability to the political nature of this country. Unfortunately in latter day America we see a media that begins their day in pursuit of an ideology, not the truth. The result is a skewing of the news to fit the pre-formed philosophy they are in pursuit of. The truth begins to be massaged, stretched, and outright changed to fit that ideology. Instead of having media that is looking out for our interests, we instead have a media determined to convince us that their ideology is what we should be supporting. It is there at that point, in the midst of the talking heads, fake exclusives and imaginary news, that the truth dies a horrible death.

The poster child for ideological fake news is of course the Fox News Channel. With absurd slogans like “fair and balanced” and “we report, you decide”, Fox has led the way for fake news and the pursuit of ideology over truth. Fox News starts each day with their ideology and seeks to frame the news around that ideology. They do it with a combination of fake news shows designed to mimic a debate between the left and the right in this country. The problem is the debate is fixed from the outset as conservatives dominate the show. Topics are chosen to highlight the conservative movement and trash the democrats in this country. When there is representation from the left in this country it is in the form of a moderate or a milquetoast, such as Alan Colmes. Colmes is a nice enough fellow but matching him up with the jaw-jutting pit bull that is Sean Hannity is not fair or balanced. It is indicative though of how this “news” organization operates. Over the past five years however, we have seen this fake news outlet evolve into a direct propaganda arm of the White House. Whenever there is a scandal or hot issue the White House cannot go to the people with the truth about, they inevitably will send someone to be interviewed by Sean Hannity in a Fox News “exclusive.” This is designed to give the impression that it is news, but the questions are not only softball, but they are undoubtedly scripted. What proceeds is a half hour love fest designed to prop up the administration, no difficult questions, no seeking of the truth.

What effect does this have? First, it distorts the truth. If a lie is repeated enough, eventually people will believe it. That is why a disproportionate amount of people who only watch Fox for their news actually still believe Iraq had something to do with 911. The real damage done by Fox however is not just their content because most educated people can easily see through the fake news. The real damage is that Fox makes other media appear moderate. A closer look though reveals that traditional “mainstream” media is also engaged in the pursuit of ideology. News shows begin to take an apologist format, covering for the administration. This is never so evident than in the coverage of the Iraq war from the beginning. Yes the administration sold us on this war based on lies, but it was the media that acted as their salespeople either by direct support or simply looking the other way when they should have been in pursuit of the truth.
Last week on MSNBC, Chris Matthews had an entire hour devoted to the impending indictments in the Plamegate case and how there have been rumblings that the Vice President may also be indicted. There was no pursuit of the truth; instead not one of the six guests explored the possibility that it may be true. What we saw were five guests, who were hard line supporters of the administration, assure us how Dick Cheney would never do anything illegal and the sixth guest was moderate at best. What we also saw though was the distortion of the truth go unchallenged. Andrea Mitchell flat out lied on multiple occasions and was never corrected.

The effect of this and most “news” is that a story of such vast importance is not being covered and in fact is being twisted to support the ideology of this administration. The facts are these:

1) In the run up to the war it was the office of the Vice President that inquired about the veracity of the Iraq-Niger yellowcake story.

2) In response to that, Joseph Wilson was sent to verify the story. He was not sent by his wife, who did not have that power.

3) He reported his findings which stated that the documents were forgeries and the story had no merit.

4) In the following State of the Union address, President Bush mentioned the story as fact, despite knowing it was untrue.

5) It was this lie, along with the other WMD lies that led this country into the Iraq War. It was the express reason given to Congress and the express reason Congress allowed the president to wage this war. Without these lies, there was no war.

6) At this same time Great Britain acknowledged that President Bush had decided to “fix the intelligence around his policy” of invasion.

7) At this time, Judy Miller was writing several pro-war articles trumping up the WMD lies. Essentially, she sold the war to the country through the New York Times. Her sources were all from the administration, or provided by the administration. Once again, pursuing an ideology, not the truth.

8) Joseph Wilson writes an op-ed piece to clarify that he did not find any such proof on his trip to Niger.

9) Wilson’s wife (Valerie Plame) had her identity as a CIA operative leaked to the press by several administration officials. This is treason against the country and a felony.

10) Plame’s status was a NOC (Non-official cover), the most secret of statuses.

The issue is not only the outing of Valerie Plame but of why there were any forged documents to begin with. Why someone would want to falsify such claims, which would only lead to war? If you remember, at the time, President Bush was swearing that war would be his last option. Instead what this implies is that a campaign was underway to deceive the American people to support a war based on lies. Those lies have cost this country billions of dollars and the lives of 2,000 American soldiers and it is time the truth was set free.

Recently, the New York Times editor has finally admitted that Judy Miller misled him. In response, the traitor Miller actually had the nerve to say that the criticism was “seriously inaccurate” and that she never intended to nor did she actually mislead. Considering the breadth of her inaccuracies in the lead up to the Iraq war if she did not intentionally mislead anyone then she is one of the worst reporters in our history. The fact is that it was her lies that have led to the deaths of those 2,000 American soldiers and she should be compelled to reveal who gave her each piece of information. It would seem that our national security would be far better served if we knew exactly who was behind the lies. Anything short of that is just cover for the fact that the media had capitulated and sold us those lies in concert with the administration. It is time for the truth to be set free.

This week indictments are likely to be handed down against senior members of this administration. In preparation for this we have already seen the media maneuver to downplay it. Richard Cohen had the gall to suggest that the prosecutor should go home if he cannot prosecute the larger violations, as if perjury and conspiracy are just minor laws. Anyone who sat through the Clinton impeachment debacle knows how important the rule of law was supposed to be to the republicans. Chris Matthews said this week that the prosecutor should “shut the hell up” if he cannot bring specific charges, trying to make Patrick Fitzgerald out to be the bad guy if he has the nerve to name someone like Cheney an un-indicted co-conspirator. Meanwhile the truth is out there screaming in captivity; the true victim.

Yes, Valerie Plame is a victim as is her husband who has seen his reputation tarnished simply for doing his job honestly. Certainly the 2,000 dead soldiers are victims. They are victims of an ideology that believes in a Machiavellian style of justice. This ideology says who cares if you lie to start a war? It says that whatever their preset end is, it always justifies the means. The media in this country were supposed to protect us from such ideology. They were supposed to stand up to the lies and defend the truth. Instead they have become the salespersons for the ideology, the pimps for it and thus the true victim becomes the very truth we have lost. It is like a bad MasterCard commercial.

Iraq War – cost? $203,000,000,000 (and counting).

Iraq War – cost? $2,000 American soldiers.

Iraq War – cost? The reputation of our country and our very soul as forfeit.

Manipulating the media to the point where even the New York Times sells your lies to go to war?

Priceless.


Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 37-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess.

............wondering what role the media (news) will play now. Will they ACTUALLY DO THEIR JOB???

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: "Hurricane" Fitzgeral

I doubt they'll do any more than they are forced to by public opinion, Ocean. There is an interesting dynamic forming up though. The Internet is playing a large role in getting the truth out. Reporters Without Borders is now offering a kit to bloggers. This is the personal account for the USA, by Jay Rosen. He started blogging because of what he has termed "pressthink".

 

[Ocean Breeze]

The Internet is playing a large role in getting the truth out.

Very true. If it were not for the internet (and the various quality news mailings I get , I would be hard pressed to be as informed as I am.......(which is not as good as it still can be)

there is no comparison between the media talking heads version and the online version.


the other advantage is that it kinda makes one READ more (interactive,pro-active ) as opposed to passively absorb what one is being told.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: "Hurricane" Fitzgeral

Rosen's account is pretty revealing though. He's a professor of journalism, not just some guy off the street, and for him to be talking about pressthink shows a lot of the failing of the US media.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Resignations May Follow Charges
Senators Discuss Leak Case

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 24, 2005; A03



Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) said yesterday that he expects White House officials will step down if they are indicted this week but stressed that speculation should cease until special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald announces the results of his investigation into the leak of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Asked yesterday about two figures who are considered central to Fitzgerald's inquiry -- Karl Rove, White House deputy chief of staff, and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff -- Allen said, "I think they will step down if they're indicted." But, he added during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," "Let's see what happens rather than get into all this speculation and so forth."

The investigation was triggered by a Robert D. Novak syndicated column on July 14, 2003, in which he identified Plame's CIA employment and linked her to her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. Wilson at that time was a vocal critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policy who had been sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to check on allegations that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had been seeking to buy uranium.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), appearing on the same program, said people should wait, but if there were an indictment, she hoped it would be for "a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime."

Hutchison described someone being tripped up "because they said something in the first grand jury and then maybe they found new information or they forgot something, and they tried to correct that in a second grand jury."

Rove, who recently appeared for the fourth time before the grand jury, is said to have been asked to explain new information about a conversation he had in July 2003 about Plame with Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who had pushed for a special counsel, praised Fitzgerald as a nonpolitical prosecutor and said on the NBC program, "I am willing to accept to accept his decision, and I have no idea what it will be."

When Fitzgerald was appointed special counsel on Dec. 30, 2003, he took over an ongoing Justice Department investigation into the alleged unauthorized disclosure of Plame's identity as a covert CIA officer. In February 2004, Fitzgerald asked for and received expanded authority from Justice to investigate crimes associated with his inquiry including perjury and obstruction of justice, according to a Justice letter disclosed Friday on Fitzgerald's Web site.

Former attorney general Richard Thornburgh, who once served as head of Justice's criminal division, said that he considered opening of the Fitzgerald Web site as "an ominous development" for those under investigation. "You don't open up a Web site if you're ready to shut down an investigation," he said on CNN's "Late Edition."

He also challenged the idea that an indictment for less than the original crime was not important. "If there is false testimony given or there's an attempt to corrupt any of the witnesses or evidence that is presented to the grand jury, that's a very serious offense because it undermines the integrity of the whole rule of law and investigatory process."

 

[Reverend Blair]

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), appearing on the same program, said people should wait, but if there were an indictment, she hoped it would be for "a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime."

Ahh, the spin begins. If somebody perjures themselves in front of a Grand Jury, it is because they were attempting to hide something. Perjury is not a technicality, it is the crime of lying to the court.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Weaponsgate is a Media Scandal
by Jeff Cohen

I admit it: I'm gleeful about the White House scandal, as indictments appear imminent. These last days have been some of the happiest since Team Bush seized power 57 months ago. It couldn't happen to a more reckless bunch of bullies-- who launched one of the most disastrous wars in history.

It's traditional in elite punditry to grouse about how such a scandal hurts our country or our image abroad. I take a different view: If the White House is demoralized and paralyzed, our country and world can breathe easier.

But there's a special reason this scandal is so personally satisfying to me as a media critic. It's because elite journalism is on trial. Powerful journalists are playing the role usually played in these scandals by besieged White House operatives. They're in the witness dock. It's a New York Times reporter who is failing to recall key facts...mysteriously locating misplaced documents...being leaned on to synchronize alibis.

Elite journalism is at the center of Weaponsgate, and it can't extricate itself from the scandal. Because, at its core, Weaponsgate (or, if you're in a hurry, "Wargate") is about how the White House and media institutions jointly sold a war based on deception -- and how the White House turned to these media institutions to neutralize a war critic who challenged the deception.

When the Nixon White House went after war critic Dan Ellsberg, it turned to former CIA guys, specialists in break-ins. When the Bush White House went after war critic Joe Wilson (and his wife), it turned to journalists like Bob Novak and Judy Miller.

Today, elite journalists can't pretend to be on the outside looking in at a scandal that doesn't involve them. This scandal is about them -- it's about White House-media cronyism, about journalists on the top rung of the phone trees of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, two of the dirtiest smear artists in Washington history. It's no accident Rove and Libby didn't turn to Helen Thomas or Seymour Hersh about Joe Wilson. They turned to journalists they could count on -- at news outlets that had dutifully promoted so many pre-war lies

In the past, elite journalists were up to their neck in scandals -- but they were deft about writing themselves out of the story. That can't happen in this scandal involving the origins of the Iraq War.

It did happen in the scandal at the origins of the Vietnam War: the Tonkin Gulf hoax. In pursuit of his long-held strategy, President Johnson went on national TV in August 1964 to announce a momentous escalation of the war: air strikes against North Vietnam in response to an "unprovoked attack" on a U.S. destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin.

But there'd been no such attack on the U.S. Johnson's ploy succeeded because major news media reported official lies as absolute truth. The next day's headline in the Washington Post spoke of North Vietnam's "New Aggression." The New York Times reported of U.S. "retaliatory action" and editorialized in support of Johnson and his "somber facts."

When the truth on Tonkin came out years later, blame focused on the White House, not the media. In 1998, my colleague Norman Solomon interviewed former Washington Post reporter Murrey Marder, who'd written much of the paper's credulous Tonkin coverage. He expressed deep regret. Asked if the Post ever retracted its Tonkin reporting, Marder said: "I can assure you that there was never any retraction." He added: "If you were making a retraction, you'd have to make a retraction of virtually everyone's entire coverage of the Vietnam War."

Around the same time as the Tonkin hoax, another national scandal was occurring: the FBI was waging a vicious campaign to "neutralize" Martin Luther King, Jr. In its efforts to Commie-bait King and expose his extramarital affairs, the Bureau sought the help of powerful journalists, who were shown photos, tapes and bedroom transcripts derived from FBI voyeurism. Dozens of reporters, editors and publishers knew the Bureau was tracking King day and night, but none blew the whistle. (To journalists, J. Edgar Hoover was apparently an even more imposing figure than Karl Rove.)

When the FBI's anti-King operation became public years later, journalists largely avoided scrutiny of their own role. But in the words of black novelist John A. Williams, they'd been the FBI's "silent partners."

Decades have passed since the scandals of Vietnam and J. Edgar Hoover. But the cozy relationships between the elites of media and government persist -- to the point where we can't tell today whether officials are journalists' sources, or vice versa. In the current scandal, thankfully, it's impossible for mainstream media to pretend the scandal doesn't involve them.

PS. Friday's Wall Street Journal reports that the special prosecutor may charge White House officials "with leaking garden-variety classified information" under the vaguely-worded, rarely-used 1917 Espionage Act prohibiting disclosure of "national defense" information. If so, glee may turn to gloom. Since too much is classified, such a prosecution would chill legitimate whistle-blowers, not the Roves and Libbys.

ok.........I admit that I am a tad "gleeful" at the emerging scandals. Maybe this will bring some law .order and sanity to the USREGIME...... and the world can heave a sigh of relief. This is being the most UNPLEASANT time in recent history. Be interesting to watch all those bozos try to lie their way out of things. Scruples??? NONE , they don't even know what scruples are... :evil:

 

[Ocean Breeze]

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ny22_hinchey/morenews/102505fitzgeraldinvestigation.html

calls for expansion ......in the investigation

 

[no1important]

RE: "Hurricane" Fitzgeral

Bush team sought to snuff CIA doubts
Differences over Iraq WMD latest attempt to override agency

Washington -- Whether or not Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald decides to bring indictments in the outing of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative -- and whether or not any crimes were actually committed -- one element of the case is central to an understanding of what happened and why: At the time of the leak, administration supporters of the Iraq war were determined to neutralize the CIA's doubts about the White House case that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, most notably nuclear weapons.

Click above link for rest of article. Hopefully the truth comes out.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Keep Investigating, Fitz
Robert Dreyfuss
October 28, 2005


Robert Dreyfuss is the author of Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (Henry Holt/Metropolitan Books, 2005). Dreyfuss is a freelance writer based in Alexandria, Va., who specializes in politics and national security issues. He is a contributing editor at The Nation, a contributing writer at Mother Jones, a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and a frequent contributor to Rolling Stone.

Back in the 20th century, when born-again prosecutor Ken Starr was industriously probing into every nook and cranny of the Clinton administration, it was a very, very big deal to the Republicans that President Clinton committed perjury in his testimony about—well, you know what it was about. Now, of course, we are about to be treated to a chorus of Republicans saying that it really isn’t a big deal at all that Karl Rove, the Scooter and who-knows-who-else in the Bush administration might have lied under oath about the outing of Valerie Wilson.

The irony of that aside, there is an important lesson here. Starr, one recalls, was originally given what seemed to be a very limited mandate to investigate an obscure real estate deal in Arkansas that took place many years before. But Starr, spreading tentacles everywhere, eventually dug into every manner of (unrelated) non-scandal he could find: Travelgate, Filegate, Vince Foster-gate, etc. Eventually, Linda Tripp trundled into his office to tell on Monica. At that point, Starr could have said: “Umm, no. That has nothing to do with Whitewater. Go tell someone else.” But he didn’t. Denying the affair with Monica as the cock crowed thrice, Clinton was nabbed, impeached by the House and his presidency was ruined.

What’s the relevance of this history lesson for 2005? The intrepid Mr. Fitzgerald, who apparently has discovered high crimes (or at least low crimes) in the White House in the Wilson affair, can nail Rove and Scooter, it seems, if he chooses to.

But like Starr, Fitzgerald can choose much more. He can choose to investigate the entire spider’s web of scandals that all overlap in what we ought to start calling Iraqgate.

He can investigate not only the outing of Wilson, but its root cause: the mythmaking about Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program. And he doesn’t have to stop with the Niger uranium angle, a thread much easier to follow now that La Repubblica has uncorked a lot on the Italian end of that one. He can also investigate the parallel myths of the aluminum tubes, looking at who in the administration’s Office of Special Plans, the Iraqi National Congress, the American Enterprise Institute (see: Michael Ledeen) and other neocon-sponsored entities might have forged documents, passed on false reports and spread alarming bits of nonsense—intentionally—that helped Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Condi Rice issue exaggerated warnings to Americans about Iraqi mushroom clouds.

He can investigate the creation of the Counterterrorism Evaluation Group, the forerunner of the Office of Special Plans, and its first two staffers, David Wurmser and Mike Maloof. They, both friends of Richard Perle’s, spun tall tales that helped Bush, Cheney and the propaganda-minded White House Iraq Group link Saddam Hussein (falsely) to Al Qaeda.

He can investigate the burgeoning Larry Franklin scandal involving the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). In fact, how can he investigate Rove, Libby and Co. without overlapping their nefarious activities with the Office of Special Plans and the trips to Italy and other places in Western Europe by Ledeen and the OSP’s Franklin and Harold Rhode? The Ledeen who apparently turns up in the Niger hoax is the selfsame Ledeen who bundled Franklin and Rhode off to Europe to meet the lying Manucher Ghorbanifar. It sure looks like the same scandal to me.

He can investigate Mr. Bad Penny himself, Ahmed Chalabi and his ties to the neocon doomsayers. What was Chalabi’s role (while on the U.S. payroll, through the Pentagon-funded INC) in providing fake intelligence so readily gobbled up by Judy Miller, George "Slam-Dunk" Tenet and the OSP? What is Chalabi’s relationship to the evildoers in Iran, to whom he reportedly blabbed out top-secret U.S. information in 2004? Who in the Pentagon decided, without telling the CIA or the State Department, to fly Chalabi’s own private militia into southern Iraq while the invasion was still pushing its way north to Baghdad? And what sort of business relationships does Chalabi have with the neocons?

He can investigate the creation of the OSP itself, starting with Douglas Feith, Bill Luti and Abram Shulsky, its titular director. Were crimes committed when Pentagon insiders, outside consultants, and assorted other hangers-on created an entire, parallel intelligence-evaluation group whose mission was to cherry-pick intelligence out of the system and funnel it up to senior U.S. officials through talking points that were based on lies? Surely Fitzgerald can drag those guys before a grand jury and see what they will say about their work—including, of course, efforts to intimidate or discredit people who disagreed with their now provably false conclusions.

He can investigate the rest of Cheney’s machine inside the government—from people like John Hannah and John Bolton to the ever-sly Jennifer Millerwise, who was Cheney’s spokesman in 2003 and who has now slipped over to the CIA to serve as no-commenter-in-chief at that demoralized, Porter Goss-led agency.

Of course, it’s possible that Fitzgerald will issue his indictments, halt any future inquiries and content himself with prosecuting Rove or Libby or a few others ensnared in the Wilson affair. Let’s hope not. At the very least, a special prosecutor snooping around the White House for the next three years will give White House counsel Harriet Miers something to do, now that she won’t have to bother with learning all that constitutional law she’d need on the Supreme Court.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

More to come folks..;-)

Fitzgerald: Leak investigation not over
WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 (UPI) -- Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald Friday said the inquiry into who outed a CIA agent is not over but it is unlikely any more charges will be filed.



Related Headlines
Cheney regrets Libby's resignation (October 28, 2005) -- U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney Friday said he regrets the resignation of his chief of staff Lewis Scooter Libby following an indictment in the CIA ... > full story

Libby indicted in CIA leak probe, resigns (October 28, 2005) -- Lewis Libby, chief of staff and national security adviser to the vice president, has been indicted on multiple counts in the CIA leak case. The ... > full story

Libby indicted in CIA leak probe. (October 28, 2005) -- Lewis Libby, chief of staff and national security adviser to the vice president, has been indicted on multiple counts in the CIA leak case. CNN ... > full story

Libby indictment expected at 2 p.m. (October 28, 2005) -- U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff Friday faced expected indictment on charges stemming from the outing of a CIA agent. Special ... > full story

Report: Libby to be indicted Friday (October 27, 2005) -- Associates of Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Scooter Libby expect Libby will be indicted Friday, the New York Times ... > full story



A federal grand jury in Washington Friday indicted Lewis Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, charging him with obstruction of justice, lying to the FBI and lying to a grand jury. The indictment followed a two-year investigation.

Fitzgerald said the grand jury's term ended. Although in normal investigations, a grand jury's term can be extended repeatedly, the special prosecutor charter under which he was operating provided only for one six-month extension and that extension expired Friday. He would not say whether another grand jury would be impaneled.

Fitzgerald said no one was actually charged with leaking the name of Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak because investigators could not determine whether the leak was inadvertent or intentional.

"We can't make those fine judgments," Fitzgerald told a news conference. He likened the obstruction charge leveled against Libby to "throwing sand" in prosecutors' eyes.

Libby allegedly lied about who gave him Plame's name, telling investigators he had learned it from reporters. Plame apparently became a target after her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, publicly critiqued the administration's Iraq war policy.

Fitzgerald said the charges alleged in the indictment "damaged all of us."

Fitzgerald refused to comment on whether Cheney may have encouraged Libby and said he could not say anything about "Official A" named in the indictment as the individual who spoke with Novak.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Leak investigation not seen over
Jason Leopold





In one of the boldest moves yet in the 22-month investigation into the outing of a covert CIA agent to a handful of top reporters covering the White House, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is extending his probe and pursuing much more serious charges against senior White House officials, lawyers directly involved in the case told RAW STORY Friday.

While many people were left confused by news reports that said Rove wouldn't be indicted Friday, the lawyers said that Rove remains under intense scrutiny and added that Fitzgerald is betting on the fact that he can secure an indictments against him or other officials on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, the misuse of classified information, and possibly other charges, as early as next week.

“This investigation is not yet over,” one of the lawyers in the case said. “You must keep in mind that people like Mr. Rove are still under investigation. Rather than securing an indictment on perjury charges against Mr. Rove Mr. Fitzgerald strongly believes he can convince the grand jury that he broke other laws.”

Advertisement



The lawyers said that in the past month Fitzgerald has obtained explosive information in the case that has enabled him to pursue broader charges such as conspiracy, and civil rights violations against targets like Rove. Rove could also provide information that would allow Fitzgerald to target additional officials.

Specifically, the lawyers said Fitzgerald is focusing on phony intelligence documents that led to the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity: the documents that claimed Iraq was attempting to purchase yellow-cake uranium from Niger.

A court filing posted on Fitzgerald’s website last week was the first such confirmation that the prosecutor has in fact decided to pursue the broader claims that intelligence the Bush administration used to build support for the Iraq war was flawed and, as a result, the reason many officials inside and outside of the White House went out of their way to out Plame, whose husband was a vocal critic of the Iraq war who was sent on a mission to Niger to investigate allegations that Iraq had attempted to buy Niger from the African country.

"On August 12 and August 20, 2004, grand jury subpoenas were issued to reporter Judith Miller and her employer, the New York Times, seeking documents and testimony related to “conversations between Miller and a specified government official occurring between on or about July 6, 2003 and on or about July 13, 2003, concerning Valerie Plame Wilson (whether referred to by name or by description) or concerning Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium.” the filing made by Fitzgerald last year states.

NATO sources told United Press International Monday that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government.

This claim, which made its way into President Bush's State of the Union address in January, 2003, was based on falsified documents from Niger and was later withdrawn by the White House."

Fitzgerald will draw on another grand jury that is already empaneled. Federal law says that a grand jury’s term cannot be extended more than once, which is the case with the grand jury that has been hearing testimony in the case.

would bet that this is far from over......... One by one......

 

[Ten Packs]

Who wants to bet there isn't some horrific "Threat to National Security" in the next ten days to a month? Obviously, praying for a Natural Disaster to divert attention ain't gonna do them any good - so CREATE something!

Mark my words...

 

[mrmom2]

Uhhh Ten your starting to sound like a bit of conspiracy theorist :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: 8)

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: "Hurricane" Fitzgerald

Who wants to bet there isn't some horrific "Threat to National Security" in the next ten days to a month? Obviously, praying for a Natural Disaster to divert attention ain't gonna do them any good - so CREATE something!

Mark my words...

not taking that bet..;-)

...or a "staged" terror attack??? Desperate folks do desperate things. ....particularly if "cornered"...

would put NOTHING past the criminal element that is housed in Washington now.

 

[Andygal]

RE: "Hurricane" Fitzgeral

Yeah I wouldn't put anything past these feckers. They are a whole bunch of crookef fecking nutcases.

 

[mrmom2]

Do you know what your saying Ocean You too 8O

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Do you know what your saying Ocean You too 8O

yep....... ( there are too many questions.....aren't there??)

 

[Ten Packs]

Uhhh Ten your starting to sound like a bit of conspiracy theorist

With THESE clowns???

Nahhhhhh......