You're getting cold not hot

[NoBushSpokenHere]

This is the statement that gives me promise:

QUESTION: Do you anticipate needing to empanel a new grand jury in order to wrap up?

FITZGERALD: I'm not going to comment.

QUESTION: Do you need a new grand jury? Would you need to empanel a new one if you needed to bring further charges?

FITZGERALD: I can't charge myself, so if we wanted to bring charges we'd need a grand jury to do that. But I don't want to comment beyond that.

Here's what I'm trying to convey: We're not quite done, but I don't want to add to a feverish pitch. It's very, very routine that you keep a grand jury available for what you might need.

And that's all I can say because of the rules of grand jury secrecy, and that's it.

QUESTION: Is there any possibility of anybody else being charged?

FITZGERALD: I'm not going to -- I can't go beyond that. Sorry.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) legal jeopardy right now?

(LAUGHTER)

FITZGERALD: That one -- that didn't get any better.

(LAUGHTER)

You're getting cold, not hot.

This gives me reason to think there were other indictments which were sealed - and yes, call it reading tea leaves.......

[hiaasenrocks]

1. To be honest...

I interpreted that to mean simply that Fitz was saying, "Your question isn't any better." In other words, he wasn't going to comment and the rephrasing of the question wasn't going to get a different answer.

Just my opinion.

I hope I'm wrong and your interpretation is correct, though.

[Quixote1818]

2. I agree

He is telling the reporter not to push the envelope it seems.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

3. Well,

since the point of a sealed indictment is to keep the charges secret until the defendant is in custody, why would there be any sealed indictments out of the Fitzgerald investigation?

I mean, if you're talking about Karl Rove, he's right here in DC, very easy to find.

So, I think people are wishing in one hand and reading chicken entrails in the other.

[Zen Democrat]

5. How many times did McClellan say "ongoing investigation" today?

A lot. In answer to every question about the matter. I don't think there are any sealed indictments, but I don't think Fitzgerald is in any way finished. With the referral to "Official A" it seems apparent that Rove is still a target.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

6. He can't say anything else

As long as the investigation is still going on, there's nothing he can say.

There's nothing anyone can say. Do you honestly think any counsel would permit anyone even remotely involved in this whole Plame matter to say anything?

No way.

Fitzgerald will be finished when he closes up the DC office and goes back to his Chicago job full-time. Until then, the investigation is current, and, as such, no one in the administration can comment. Not one word.

[dragonlady]

9. It's a good excuse not to comment on anything

While they can keep on saying there's an ongoing investigation and of course they can't comment, they don't have to say anything substantive or answer questions about anything. It's a great way to put off the inevitable a while longer.

[TahitiNut]

13. It would seem to me there could other reasons for sealing an indictment.

Since the indictment contains charges and specifications, what if it identified someone who was singing like a canary and had the goods (e.g. tapes or documents)? What if there were some more people being targeted and this canary was being helpful? What if, in an intelligence matter, some people needed to be "brought in from the cold"?

It just seems to me that flight isn't the only problem ... some of the specifications could have ramifications in other investigations.

No, IANAL. :shrug:

[Duer 157099]

4. my interpretation of this exchange

was that Fitz was astonished that the reporters kept asking him the same question about whether he'd have a new grand jury -- when he said he wasn't going to comment, I took that to mean "you idiot, I've answered that so many times now, I'm through"

The rest was also a reiteration of what he kept saying, which was, stop asking me what I'm going to do because I'm clearly not going to tell you.

(btw, the clear answer to the grand jury question was: yes of course he will have a grand jury available to him! that's a given)

[FreedomAngel82]

11. Yep

Jon Stewart nailed that tonight I think. He told he couldn't comment on much and what he couldn't and than the reporters just asked anyways. You could tell he was getting a bit annoyed but still answered anyways.

[NoBushSpokenHere]

7. I will rewatch the conference but I am still of the opinion

that he was indicating the reporter was going further away from the truth than closer to it.


Here's what I'm trying to convey: We're not quite done, but I don't want to add to a feverish pitch. It's very, very routine that you keep a grand jury available for what you might need.

So, he was at least trying to convey something. Didn't anyone else play "hot and cold" as a child or is that a west of NY game? lol

[Duer 157099]

12. Re hot and cold game

I'm convinced his comment about getting cold meant that the second question was even more unanswerable than the first (the second question being more specific). This guy Fitz is very good at keeping his poker face on.

Watch it again and I think you'll see it -- Fitz just sort of shakes his head at the guy (in a polite way, of course). The only message I got from him was that he wasn't going to tip his hand, no way no how, so you can keep trying, but you'll get even more vague answers the more you try (that's what he meant by cold).

[Just Me]

8. No. He was adamant about non-disclosure, which is his duty.

I really believe that, we are best served allowing this process to unfold. Fitz is demonstrably committed to the enforcement of the rule of law. I trust he will do everything in his power to maintain the integrity of the legal process on behalf of the American people.

We have a different role to pursue: amassing the facts and truth, and demanding accountability.

[FreedomAngel82]

10. I think so too

I liked that part though. :) He smiled.