So where are we at with this thing?

[WilliamPitt]

I left town, literally, the night before the indictments came down. I was nowhere near a computer and could only go with what I saw on TV. I caught the Fitz press conference, but not much more. I just got home.

From a quick glance, DU is apparently disappointed in the outcome. To a large degree, so am I. But I believe I am correct in thinking:

a) The investigation isn't over;

b) More may be on the way re: Rove and Cheney;

c) Cheney is going to have to testify under oath in open court if they actually get Libby to trial.

What am I missing, where am I wrong or right, where are we at?

QUESTION: Did Fitz get to re-up his GJ? Did he get another one?

[Skink]

1. Bush resigned and Gore stepped in... There feel better.

[Pepper32]

6. LOL

[Lancer]

2. I'm among the more optimistic of the bunch, and I agree with your

three points. Welcome back, BTW.

[wtmusic]

3. That's pretty much where it's at nt

[dennis4868]

4. You seem to have.....

summed it up correctly.....

[shamrock]

5. That's the way

I interpret it too.

[kainah]

7. have you read the indictment?

It's very detailed and lays out a lot to chew on and contemplate.

My summary would be that Libby gave out the classified name of an agent and then lied so Fitzgerald couldn't prove it.

And, yes, it's very much open ... and Fitz made clear that any issues related to the facts of this case will be under his jurisdiction.

And Libby has an arraignment on Thursday.

[Punkingal]

8. I'm not sure about the Cheney testifying part...

since Drudge is the one reporting that. (Unless someone else did and I missed it.)

[WilliamPitt]

12. Well...

If they get to trial, there wqill be witnesses. Cheney will have to be one of them.

[cyberpj]

20. I read he could still pull "Executive Privilege" for that.

Don't know if it's true though.

[murielm99]

42. I think they have screwed themselves on that one, unless

their new pet judges find in their favor.

Clinton had to testify in court under oath. Cheney may be president in everything but name, but if Clinton testified, why not Cheney?

[PDittie]

51. That's exactly why it won't go to trial.

Libby will plead out to something less than five years.

[cyberpj]

9. I think I heard there will be another grand jury to continue

the investigation.

Since then, I've heard others say NO.

I'm going to Google search.

[tsuki]

10. The indictment is on line. Fitz left a trail of bread crumbs so we

could figure out who was who.

Russert is a rat-fink. Tweety got in trouble for telling the truth. Imus let the RW talking point out of the bag this morning. (Russert is a liar.)

M$M wants to move on. They are too complicit in the entire matter.

Oh, and O'Reilly is still a falafel-wielding jerk.

How's that for a summary. Welcome Back! :hi:

[callady]

11. Have the neocons invaded Syria yet?

Indeed they have.

Scooter who?
SCOTUS nomination?

So many distractions so little disobedience.

They keep at it 24/7.



The crime is the invasion. Can we get to that?
The crime is the occupation.
The crime is large scale murder.

How is it Paul Wolfowitz and Michael Ledeen aren't front and center in any investigation?
How is it Richard Perle and David Wurmser aren't in jail?

Who is complicit through their silence?

IMHO that's where we are.

[DoYouEverWonder]

13. Hate to burst your bubble

but Fitzgerald was brilliant on Friday.

Indicting just Scooter put Rove and everyone else that might be a target under immense pressure. At the same time, it neutered Rove's attack machine, at least for the moment, because Rove wants the world to think he got off and can't bad mouth Fitzgerald yet.

Also, up until Friday, no one had a clue as to what Fitzgerald was going to do, what he had for evidence and the direction that he was going to take this thing. By indicting just Scooter, he was able to keep most of his cards close to his chest and didn't reveal much that wasn't already known. While at the same time, he let BushCo know exactly what they are up against. No matter what happens at this point, one thing is for sure, Scooter will be spending at least 1 year in jail, even if he cooperates. Fitzgerald got them by the balls and he plans to put them in jail and now they know it.

[lonestarnot]

14. DU is not disappointed, as I am not disappointed...

No word on another GJ. Still waiting and watching.

[Poiuyt]

15. Is it Will, the howler monkey?

I hope you took a shower before you came here!

:hi:

[yo-yo-ma]

16. small point

the fitz drew largely from libby's notes which showed that he had heard of plame's identity from cheney -
and that novak and that other journalist (name escapes me) were told by someone else (rove)

everyone wanted a big grand slam but this is only the beginning

[cyberpj]

17. Yes, there will be a new grand jury to continue... This is from

Thinkprogress.

New grand jury will continue investigation: “Fitzgerald’s spokesman, Randall Samborn, said the investigation will continue but with a new grand jury. The term of the current grand jury cannot be extended beyond today.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/28/new-grand-jury-will-continue-investigation/

But I'll tell you something --there's not a lot out there about it right now. I'm hoping it's true and that Fitzgerald is simply keeping things close to the vest as is his style.

[flyarm]

18. well this much i can tell you Will....

i want to be a fucking juror!!!!!!!!!!

let me at him!!!!!!!!!!

now!!!!!!!!!

then rove...............

and of course i could be objective about Cheney!!!



:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr:

fly

[Missy Vixen]

19. Will, you might want to re-watch the press conference

I don't believe it's all doom and gloom. It should be interesting to see what happens re: Rove and the famous "pause" Fitz spoke of.

I think the five indictments are just a taste of what we might be seeing in the next several months.

Welcome back, and I hope that you had a nice trip...

Julie

[Jacobin]

21. Places to catch up painlessly

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5226286

H20 Man



www.billmon.org


Good places to catch up without all the fluff, blather, whooha and gnashing of teeth.

[annabanana]

23. (beat me to it). . . n/t

[Generic Other]

22. You missed the part where Rove and Cheney are fired

Oh, I forgot. That hasn't happened yet.

[carolinalady]

24. After any good celebration, there is always a let-down phase.

I think most of us are in that period. If there is disappointment, it is that more people were not indicted and the leaker was not indicted for leaking. If there is hope, it is that the story behind the story is told and Bush and Cheney SUFFER!

[Hardrada]

48. Post coitum, tristia.

[cally]

25. Fitz said he would have

indicted LAST YEAR if Judy had testified then. So we can blame the NYT for * still being in office.

[blue agave]

26. Welcome back Will

Your absence was noticed. Some here were frantically paging you, hoping for an encouraging analysis. I'm sure you will be on it before long. Hope your down time was uneventful, in a good way.

[Junkdrawer]

27. The way I see it, Cheney's defense relies on him not reading the Wilson...

report until May 2003. In fact, if you read the indictment, his whole office swears blind that that's the way it happened.

But we know from Seymour Hersh that Cheney, Bolton, and the whole neo-con gang were working full time to obstruct legitimate CIA inquiries and to "stovepipe" forged intelligence in place.
See: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact

One witness putting Wilson's report in Cheney's hands prior to May 2003 and he's done.

More Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5222729&mesg_id=5222729

[Junkdrawer]

56. ...a few choice paragraphs from Seymour Hersh's "The Stovepipe"...

They always had information to back up their public claims, but it was often very bad information,” Pollack continued. “They were forcing the intelligence community to defend its good information and good analysis so aggressively that the intelligence analysts didn’t have the time or the energy to go after the bad information.”

....

Eventually, Thielmann said, Bolton demanded that he and his staff have direct electronic access to sensitive intelligence, such as foreign-agent reports and electronic intercepts. In previous Administrations, such data had been made available to under-secretaries only after it was analyzed, usually in the specially secured offices of INR. The whole point of the intelligence system in place, according to Thielmann, was “to prevent raw intelligence from getting to people who would be misled.” Bolton, however, wanted his aides to receive and assign intelligence analyses and assessments using the raw data. In essence, the under-secretary would be running his own intelligence operation, without any guidance or support. “He surrounded himself with a hand-chosen group of loyalists, and found a way to get C.I.A. information directly,” Thielmann said.

In a subsequent interview, Bolton acknowledged that he had changed the procedures for handling intelligence, in an effort to extend the scope of the classified materials available to his office. “I found that there was lots of stuff that I wasn’t getting and that the INR analysts weren’t including,” he told me. “I didn’t want it filtered. I wanted to see everything—to be fully informed. If that puts someone’s nose out of joint, sorry about that.” Bolton told me that he wanted to reach out to the intelligence community but that Thielmann had “invited himself” to his daily staff meetings. “This was my meeting with the four assistant secretaries who report to me, in preparation for the Secretary’s 8:30 a.m. staff meeting,” Bolton said. “This was within my family of bureaus. There was no place for INR or anyone else—the Human Resources Bureau or the Office of Foreign Buildings.”

...


http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact

And yet we're to believe that Cheney's office never heard of Wilson before May 2003... :eyes:

[Peace Patriot]

28. Well, I've read all the threads here at DU, the indictments, and other...

...sources, and heard the press conference. I think the Bush junta is in big, big, BIG trouble. As to time-frame, we're only just a bit beyond the Watergate burglary (remember the "third rate burglary"?), and Fitzgerald has Bush's and Cheney's two top people by the short hairs, one facing 30 years, the other with (I'm quite sure of it) a sealed indictment against him, who escaped indictment Friday only because of something he gave Fitzgerald at the very last minute, that could be evidence that will help Fitzgerald past the Libby perjury/obstruction to the greater conspiracy. Fitzgerald (highly focused, sharp as a tack, undauntable) made several things very clear in his HOUR LONG press conference: 1) His investigative question is WHY this happened (why Plame was outed)--that is, the big question, and what are its implications for national security?--and he will not stop until he has answered it; 2) he has a grand jury (new jurors) any time he needs it; 3) he is not finished.

Body language, ambience: This is not a man who feels defeated, or expects defeat. Buoyant, extremely intelligent, highly focused.

The Libby indictment (my reading of it): He has Libby nailed. Rove, too. And he's got Cheney in his sights.

Libby and Rove are now under extraordinary pressure to give up the others.

People here were thrown off by Fitzgerald saying "the bulk of the GJ work" was finished, which people took to mean, "...and the only result is the Libby indictment for perjury/obstruction." Big misinterpretation of what he meant, and lack of understanding of prosecutors, and of THIS prosecutor. I think he has a back pocket full of sealed indictments, from this GJ, and is playing this gang just like he would the Mafia or the other political corruption cases that he has been so successful at. The big breaks come at the end, after years of work. That's when people crack. This is what's happening. (Rove sang for over 4 hours last week at the last minute, and I've just learned on another thread that Libby was ALSO dealing, which I thought would take months, and maybe never happen. Fitgerald turned Libby down!)

What we should be strategizing about is how to react when Cheney resigns, and the Republicans install a fresh face VP to be Diebolded into office in '08. I think that's where it's heading.

Some sidebars (but not unimportant): Via this indictment, many Americans have learned for the first time--or have gotten confirmation for the first time--of, at the very least, the massive lying and manipulation of information to falsely justify the war, that it was serious and way high up in the regime, that they would stop at nothing to promulgate their lies, even endanger the life and well being of a CIA agent and her entire *WMD monitoring* and *counter-proliferation* network, and the Bushites' cynical manipulation of the press to lie about WMDs and to punish anyone who called them on their crap.

Although we do not have the free press that we did in 1973, which in many ways spearheaded the Watergate investigation, what Fitzgerald is investigating is so much bigger than Watergate, so much more serious, that even the war profiteering corporate news monopolies must provide information to the public, and even if they are spinning it--which some are--they cannot avoid providing the basic facts, which are damning, even this far (and there is so much more).

So, whatever else happens, the American public got a big dose of the truth last week, and I'm sure that most of them were not that surprised, and are cheering Fitzgerald on, to expose the whole war cabal. (58% of the American people opposed this war before the invasion!). A bit of naked reality broke into the corporate news monopoly illusion, just as with Katrina.

And I have every confidence that Fitzgerald will do everything in his power to fulfill what he sees as his mandate: Why?

[gademocrat7]

54. I agree

Fitzgerald is a very thorough prosecutor. This investigation has exposed the lies and deception of the worst administration in our nation's history. Fitzgerald will get the truth and the crooks.

[Triana]

29. Good to see ya Will....

...was getting a bit worried! :P Yes, Fitz empaneled another GJ.

[tavalon]

30. Pretty much what I got

I felt really let down at first but with more thought, this seems to be the gift that keeps on giving.

So, did you at least sling a little poo?

[Tatiana]

31. We're in the wait and see mode.

a) The investigation isn't over;

Correct. Though Fitz said the bulk of it is complete.

b) More may be on the way re: Rove and Cheney;

Correct. The beltway pundits keep cautioning that Rove isn't completely out of the woods yet. And common sense tells me that if he had to go before the GJ 4 times, including that 12th hour appearance, There's Something About Rover that has Fitzgerald interested. And Cheney is fingered by Fitz as the one who divulged Mrs. Wilson's status to Libby. What was his motive for disclosing that piece of information? What did he expect Libby to do with that information?

c) Cheney is going to have to testify under oath in open court if they actually get Libby to trial.

Correct. This should be the fun part. Cheney's name was included in Libby's indictment for a reason. I expect everyone whose name appeared in that indictment will be called in as witnesses.

What am I missing, where am I wrong or right, where are we at?

I think we're in the wait-and-see mode. Wait for Libby to be put on trial and see if he will decide to be honest and truthful in fingering his boss.

QUESTION: Did Fitz get to re-up his GJ? Did he get another one?

He will have a different GJ as the 18 months plus a 6-month extension are up for the one he was using.

[Duer 157099]

32. Regarding another GJ:

I rewatched the whole press conference, and this question came up several times, which was bizarre because Fitz answered it each time very clearly.

He said that it is SOP to have a grand jury available; the current one could not be renewed. He cautioned people to not read anything into this fact, that he will have a grand jury available to him.

This man was very good at holding his cards close to his chest! It was great.

But, yes, the bottom line is YES he will have another grand jury available to him --- there's no way he wouldn't.

[Scout1071]

33. Thanks Will, but I already channeled you and shared with the crowd

in your absence.

Nice to be away from the computer for a change, eh? But for the love of.....did you have to do it doing Fitzmas?

Here is the thread where I briefly channeled you: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5223940&mesg_id=5224409

[Scout1071]

59. Damn dawg...I thought it was funny.

A little DU humor.

[Awsi Dooger]

34. I was hardly disappointed

The expectations were always too high, in regard to number of indictments and especially the down the road impact. I remember a thread here last week where a GOP talking head was quoted as saying he would bet Rove wouldn't be indicted. Amidst all the laughter I think I was the only one who responded that it would be a great bet, or at least not a poor one.

I've done some research on grand jury proceedings since Friday. I was encouraged when the George Ryan example was floated around here. Admittedly, it's very difficult to gauge which examples are most relevant to this one. Fitzgerald may have a style and timetable unique to himself. But among the three dozen+ samples I found of federal grand juries, there were only four instances in which indictments were apparently handed out after the initial grand jury's term ended. That is the type of mathematical probability indication I look for. I would be extremely surprised if Rove or anyone else is indicted.

I almost started a new thread with that conclusion and the numbers, but frankly it's not worth it. It would have been interpreted as more pessimism than analysis, similar to a year ago when I posted a thread regarding how overrated our supposed registration advantage was. I think when you start a potentially controversial thread like that you have an obligation to hang around and respond to the replies, which I don't have time for in the heart of football season, given my job in sports stats. I'll just root for Fitzgerald to turn the tables on my research and make it irrelevant.

[NNN0LHI]

35. We are right in the middle of watching as the Bush administration...

...dies of the proverbial "death from a thousand cuts". I can barely stand to watch. Queasy stomach and all.

Don

[donheld]

36. Will you summed it up quite well

I'm disappointed, but hopeful.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

37. Disappointed? Only if you lack patience....

...look at it like this...when a captain gives the order for a super-tanker the change direction, the super-tanker will continue on the present course for another SEVEN MILES before it begins to turn toward the new heading.

Think of all the momentum built up by the people that have been squatting at the Nation's helm for the last 5+ years...the Ship of State is beginning to turn but it will take time before it begins to travel in the correct direction.

[WilliamPitt]

40. DU? Lack patience?

Perish the thought.

[garybeck]

49. for some of us, our optimism about the situation was squelched.

I used to be confident that at least Rove and probably others would be indicted.

Now the confidence is reduced to hope.

I know I am not alone.

peace

[BigYawn]

38. My guess is Bush will pardon every law-breaker on the grounds

that he rewards loyalty. So unless Bush himself is indicted
(and there is no precedence of a sitting president ever being
indicted) my guess is no one will see the inside of a prison.

[ginnyinWI]

39. There was a burst of excitement on Friday at DU

And well into Saturday, and then about Sunday morning everyone started going cynical and hopeless. I couldn't figure it out--except that they were expecting too much. Or else the disrupters moved in.

I'm optimistic--there's more to come!

[Just Me]

41. We remain the advocates for truth, accountability and democracy.

Fitz is doing his job.

We must continue to do our passion: truth, accountability and democracy.

[ngGale]

43. I have Fitz's press conference on tape...

ever time I watch it, I hear something I missed the first time.
I would advise watching Fitz in action, the radio didn't do him justice. He's very impressive...JMO, but I think Fitz has a game plan. Cleaning up Chicago, he's been doing that for year's and this at the same time - he does have a way with, nailing corrupt people.

Welcome back, Will.

[grasswire]

44. a possibility must be considered, Will...

On Friday, John Dean reported that the Nixon WH had considered perjury as a strategy to hide underlying crimes.

It is possible that strategy has been played out by Libby and this White House.

The plan: Libby lies intentionally so that the matters of substance are obscured. He's charged with crimes of process. He pleads guilty. If no one else is charged, the investigation is over and the underlying crimes are never explained or exposed to the people.

I believe the WH wargamed this "perjury as strategy" scenario and I find it highly plausible as an explanation of why a "brilliant" lawyer such as Libby would blatantly lie under oath -- something Washington insiders cannot seem to understand.

[grasswire]

45. ...which is why....

....Fitzgerald should not cut a plea bargain with Libby without making other indictments.

No plea bargain!!

[longship]

46. Interesting question near the end of the press conference.

It was one on the tip of my tongue.

What about conspiracy charges?

Reading the indictment, and from what we already know about the case, with so many people involved in the outting of a single person, I would expect there to be conspiracy charges. But Fitz didn't indict for conspiracy. Why?

Because he might have run out of time on his GJ and he might have been forced to scale back his indictments because of it.

Or, he is holding back conspiracy charges because that would tip his hand. He's after big cheese here. If there's conspiracy, it almost has to touch Crashcart. If he's after Crashcart, maybe he doesn't want to indict Libby on conspiracy now. Anyway, he can use prospective conspiracy charges as additional leverage against Libby.

This might also explain why KKKarl hasn't yet been indicted. If KKKarl is going over for conspiracy, Fitz may just wait until he gets the net around the lot.

Many possibilities here.

I see conspiracy charges coming. Rove is toast. A middle WH staffer or two are crispy critters. (Fleischer? Matalin?) How about Hadley? Bolton? Is Rove Official "A"? Is Bolton "X"? (discussed last week)

Fitz is a good poker player. He's got everybody baffled. MSM pundits are pretty much all saying Libby is the end of it. The RW thugs are screeching that Fitz is creating crimes where no crime exists.

I think the MSM and the RW thugs gonna be surprised.

[Peace Patriot]

47. It is almost irrelevant what happens next, although I think a great deal

is going to happen. The spell has been broken--that evil cloud that was hanging over us of seemingly impenetrable lies, and unreality, and illusion and fraudulence is broken. In one fell swoop, Fitzgerald laid bare the utter falsity on which this regime is premised: the chief aide of the vice president lying to him that the reporters he talked to had told him that "everybody knew Wilson's wife was CIA," when in fact Libby had originated that information, and what they were trying to do was to create the IMPRESSION that "everybody knew." The manipulation, the mindboggling cynicism, and the layers and layers of deception that that lie to prosecutor represents was exposed for all to see. Two corporate news monopoly lapdogs, who had been helping to cover for this criminal gang through the election, were then compelled to testify that, no, they had not said that to Libby; Libby had told a baldfaced lie, repeatedly. And Miller, the news monopolies' chief war propagandist, was compelled to disclose her clandestine 'Mati Hari' meeting with Libby, to create this network of lies and impressions.

The war in a nutshell. Fitzgerald said, at his press conference, that his indictment of Libby' was not about judgments of the war; that was not his purview. But he had to say that; criminal proceedings are in motion against an individual. Still, his exposure of this deeply deceitful mode of thought and behavior at the heart of the regime spoke for itself. And the effect of their lies in this case? To strip a loyal and important servant of the American people, Plame, a counterproliferation specialist, and an expert on the very issue that the Bushites had made such a huge issue of, and had lied so completely about, of the protection of her government for herself and everyone she had ever worked with, in order to punish her husband for his exposure of their lies!

Fitzgerald stripped it bare. And, although Libby's perjury and obstruction blocked him from bringing the charge of INTENT to do harm to a U.S. government servant, and to U.S. agents, assets and contacts throughout the world, that charge hung in the air like the sword of Damocles, ready to fall at any moment on the entire regime.

They are not going to wiggle out of this--whether they "fall on their swords," or continue to lie and obstruct, or try to cut deals, or get pardoned or don't get pardoned, or do time or not, they are disgraced, and the "talking points" they're still feeding into the newsstream, trying to trivialize it, and to demean their accusers, are not going to fly this time. They have dragged the entire U.S. news establishment into their disgrace with them.

At the press conference, someone asked Fitzgerald about a Kay Bailey Hutchinson "talking point" that the charges against Libby of perjury and obstruction are a'technicality.' Fitzgerald's answer...

"That talking point won't fly!"

He knows quite well that this is about the war, and the lies and the spin and the 'talking points' that got tens of thousands of people dead, and others tortured and looted. He may not be able to speak about those things, but you can tell from this zinger that he is right on top of the beast: the tyranny of the executive, the failure of our system of checks and balances, and the failure of the Fourth Estate.

And he is out to set it right--to see that at least one of those checks and balances is still viable.

I get high-flown in my rhetoric. He does not. I've never seen such discipline on a political/legal stage. They drew him out of this extraodinary self-control only once, and then only with this terse remark, which almost took one's breath away. It was a rebuke to nation's press corps for their collusion and their obeisance to power.

I tell ya, Will, I was impressed--and I've gotten to be a rather jaded, over the past 5 years, as to hopes for good leadership. This was something unusual. And whatever he can make of these murderers and thieves, we owe him our deepest gratitude for what he has already done: brought to national attention how an honest man sees them, as perps who can and must be held accountable.

[legin]

50. In a war: how to work out what your opponent will do

think what is the last thing you would like to happen.

Everybody here wants a nice trial with Cheney having to testify. Lots of nice bad publicity for bush*. So that wont happen.

My guess. Libby pleads guilty to some charges, so no trial. Then bush* uses presidential priviledge and pardons him.

[Domitan]

52. Actually, most were pleased with the outcome

while the disappointed ones were in the minority. However, most of us do anticipate that more is to come. Now if last Friday was "it", there'd be massive disappointment and more. However, given Fitzgerald's track record, I truly sense that it's only the beginning.

[H2O Man]

53. I think it is perfect.

People who think that it would have been better if Rove had been indicted are as entitled to their opinion as I am mine, of course. But one can not make a serious case that Karl Rove has been a key player in the effort to invade Iraq. He has no foreign policy credentials. None.

Karl Rove is on tv far more frequently than Libby. Rove enjoys media attention. Libby despises it. Yet the fact that Karl is in the media a thousand times more often than Libby does not make him as significant a player in the Iraqi policy.

More, Karl Rove on his own would not have a clue about who Valerie Plame was. While he is a terrible human being, who has brought "politics" to a new low, it is far more important for our country that Libby be indicted.

As I said on another thread, many decades ago, when I was a boxer, I remember an old trainer telling me, "If you kill the body, the head dies with it." That lesson applies here.

[Peace Patriot]

60. I agree, H20 Man. I think your assessment of Rove and how he fits into

this is right on. He is a minor player in this mega-scandal. That doesn't mean that he is not guilty of a number of things (perjury, for instance)--or for congenital lying, or for helping to destroy our political system, or for stealing the 2004 election--but he did not hatch this particular plot. In this case, he was a water-carrier for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bolton, Libby and others who have long wanted to destroy the CIA's honest information gathering capabilities and people. I think this may be the thrust of the new information he gave Fitzgerald last week--evidence that the others set him up to take the fall on this (should someone have to). My suspicion: someone deliberately misled him on its legality, or so he is saying. (THAT would be the type of thing that would give Fitzgerald "pause," and cause him to withhold his indictment of Rove for the time being--something that could help him get around the Libby perjury and obstruction to the greater conspiracy.)

Posters at DU tend to look at things strictly politically--and sometimes with only the narrow view of "how will this help the Democrats" in the immediate future. That is an important viewpoint, but it is one in which Rove is the front and center bad guy. He's the one spewing all the garbage "talking points" to the lapdog press (exactly what got him into trouble in this case). He seems all-powerful in a political sense--the Bush junta's liar in chief. The people who view the Fitzgerald prosecution this way--many--therefore wanted his head, and I can't blame them.

But the bigger picture of this conspiracy was laid out by Wilkerson (Powell's former aide) who recently said that it is a "cabal" that has taken over our government. That is what Fitzgerald is trying to crack, and I think he made that very, very clear in his press conference, and in the way he wrote the Libby indictment. He wants to know WHY this happened--he said that several times, in several ways, but clearly he had reasons for not wanting to articulate it yet, specifically: how is it that top gov't officials were conspiring to ENDANGER nat'l security by outing a CIA agent, in order to punish an ex-diplomat for his dissenting article? (was the outing just reckless? knowingly malicious? treasonous?). What was going on here, what sort of a conspiracy was it? And he said, several times, that he will not rest until he finds out.

So, to him, Rove is a pawn or maybe a castle in this chess game. He was not the prime mover. He was both protecting the bigger players on the board, and being used by them.

Think back to how this tale originated. It was portrayed as a typical Rovian revenge story--and was so very believable as just that. Rove outed Wilson's wife, in a fit of pique that anyone dare question their lies about the war. That flew for a while in the lapdog press. But it did not fly with the CIA, which lay mortally wounded by the assault on its covert agents' protected status, and on one of its chief functions--so critically important in today's world--WMD information gathering and counterproliferation. Tenet--for all his loyalty of Bush--as his last act, saw that this matter was turned over to an independent prosecutor.

The turmoil in the intelligence community over Cheney's and Rumsfeld's interference with their jobs, and suppression of essential, objective, internal dissent had been building for some time. This was the last straw.

They tried to make it LOOK LIKE a mere political mistake, motivated by Rove's vengefulness. It was far more than that. It was part of an effort to DISMANTLE an important gov't agency and turn it into shell agency to be used for the benefit of war profiteers.

There is evidence (in Wilson's book), and it is inherent in the situation, that Rove was/is furious that he was being made the fall guy; that he was being used as the cover story (hoist on his own petard) for something THEY had all hatched and that he--not being in the national security loop, and not being a lawyer--didn't know the true import of, or, at the least, didn't know the legality of.

People should ask themselves: If they had a choice between full exposure of this cabal, and accountability for at least some of its chief players, and seeing Rove in jail, which would you choose?

I think that that is, more or less, the conundrum that moved Fitzgerald to withhold his indictment of Rove last week. Rove may be trying to play him--that is undoubtedly true--but this is the exactly the sort of game that Fitzgerald is legendary for winning.

Libby may look like a background figure, compared to Rove, if your view is strictly political, or if you tend to perceive things through the fog of corporate media disinformation. But Libby is no background figure. Libby is central to the war and all their lies about the war. And it is so startling that Fitzgerald snagged Libby (who has been described as "Cheney's alter ego") that analysts of this situation are speculating that Libby let himself get caught, as part of the coverup.

That is a good possibility, but it is very, very dangerous game, with a prosecutor like Fitzgerald. It is just the sort of misstep that he has been working toward, in his meticulous, methodical way. Libby "falling on his sword" means there IS a conspiracy, and that the biggest players in that conspiracy (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bolton) are legally culpable and indictable and are extremely concerned about it. Criminal gangs don't give up someone like Libby without good reason. Also, the speculation that Libby is "falling on his sword" may be wrong. He may have just had the stupid arrogance to think that he could lie through his teeth and get away with it; or may have been counting on the corrupt press to cover for him, and the judge disregarding the extraordinary nat'l security considerations (presented to him by Fitzgerald in redacted information) as to busting the collusive reporters.

One other thing, that keeps coming back to me from the press conference: Fitzgerald said, "Watch this trial." It was kind of enigmatic. It was said in the context of the larger national security issues that he had said are his focus. I think he has several game plans--as any brilliant strategist always does. One of them has to do with total, continued obstruction, by Libby and the other major players (and Rove or others not giving him enough to get around their obstruction). The rumor (with some substantiation, as I understand it) is that Libby tried to deal last week, and Fitzgerald turned him down. He doesn't just want Libby in jail for obstructing him, he wants the people who hatched this conspiracy on the stand, under oath, in full view of the American people. That's why he said, "Watch this trial." He was saying, "If they obstruct me, you are going to SEE just how they are doing it." If he can't crack the conspiracy before that, and bring the major perps to justice, he is going to force them to show their lying mugs to the American people for US to judge, and no nefarious "talking points" are going to fly in the cold air of that exposure.

"That talking point won't fly." --Patrick Fitzgerald.

[H2O Man]

61. Well said!

There is an important clue as to why Libby told the lies he did found in the indictment. It was "on or about September 26, 2003" that the Department of Justice authorized the FBI to begin investigating the case. (As noted in Wilson's book, the CIA is required to report possible violations in criminal law in these cases to the DoJ; an Agency attorney left a message with the Chief of the Counterespionage Section of on 7-24-03, followed by letters to the Criminal Division on 7-30 and again on 9-5. Then, on 9-16, the Agency informed the DoJ that their internal investigation was completed, and requested the FBI investigate. On 9-29, the DoJ informed the CIA that the FBI had been assigned the case.)

At this time, Attorney General Ashcroft was in charge of the over-all investigation. It might be speculated that the people in the VP's office felt it was going to be handled in that "good old boy" fashion. Libby was interviewed by the FBI on 10-14 and again on 11-26, both times in the presence of his attorney. He seemed confident that if he had a good cover story, which would be unlikely to be examined closely for contradictions, he was safe. Hence the detailed story about Russert -- a cover story that detailed cannot be attributed to a faulty memory, by the way, but is instead extremely strong evidence of consciousness of guilt.

Ashcroft wasn't about to go after journalists in a contest of wills that would end up before the Supreme Court. As one senior White House official chuckled to a Financial Times reporter, "We have rolled the earthmovers in over this one."

But, of course, a few short weeks later, Fitzgerald was brought in. And he went where Ashcroft didn't dare. Libby was in a tough position: should he come clean, or should he stick with the Russert lie? I do not think that it wuld be safe to say hat this question has been fully answered at this point.

It's a strange case that comes at a strange time in our society. The larger society values people's ability to be in the spotlight, as if publicity is an accurate measure of power. Libby, who should be recognized as a highly disciplined and capable foe, has surely learned the power of keeping a low profile, and holding his tongue. I've read where he values old Sam Rayburn's saying, "They can't convict you on what you don't say." He must be thinking that right now. But he is in a position where that won't help him.

[leesa]

55. No disappointment. It's all being laid out beautifully by Fitzgerald

Listen to his announcement. Very succinct. Very clear it ain't over yet.

As usual, the bumps in the road are the Bush Crime Syndicate's pet media and their hand-picked judges.

[zippy890]

57. Just the beginning - not disappointed at all

Cheney & Libby are being slow-cooked by the Fitzgerald investigation

I am very heartened by the legal proceedings. Here's a very good explanation of the status of things legally, well worth the read:

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/10/29/20254/872

Fitz's Knuckle Ball

"The Libby indictment goes considerably beyond what the rule requires, or even envisions. It is what’s called, in courthouse vernacular, a “speaking indictment.” The purpose of a “speaking” filing, in any court proceeding, is to show the other side some of the stronger cards you’re holding in your hand, and this indictment is no exception.'"

____

Also, the media is waking up through this process, and there will be more of this kind of article, which puts the spotlight on the neocons and how they brought the country to war. In the Boston Globe,

Indictments put focus on neoconservatives

"The indictment and resignation of I. Lewis ''Scooter" Libby yesterday deprives the White House of one of its most influential national security thinkers, a powerful advocate for some of the Bush administration's most far-reaching foreign policy decisions since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

His pending legal battle, however, could also bring new scrutiny to the actions of the close-knit group of officials, many of them his old friends and colleagues from previous Republican administrations, who had long agitated for overthrowing Saddam Hussein and who are accused of exaggerating the threat from Iraq to achieve their goal, according to current and former government officials and specialists."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/10/29/indictments_put_focus_on_neoconservatives/



Patience, my fellow DUers! It took a long time for this country to get where it is, change does not happen over night. But change will happen as a result of many things happening, not the least of which is this legal proceeding against Libby.

Also, I would like to echo some people above as far as Rove goes; don't get hung-up on him for now, look to the larger and most important issues here.... who were the real architects of the Iraq war? We know, but the rest of the country is just getting a glimpse. More to come

[AnnInLa]

58. Between the "A" and the "T"

One time, long ago, when I first began posting on DU, you properly corrected my grammar (my grammar skills are minimal), and I just wanted to return the favor: Correctly, it is: Where are we with this thing, not where are we at.

That being said, (sure hope you have a sense of humor), can't wait for your analysis on "this thing." Calm and logical analyses are greatly needed around here!

I visit your site regularly and am a great fan of your DU posts!