Fitzmas Fizzle

by **albion** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:16 am

I made an effort to not get too excited. Since 2003 my most realistic surmise has been that Rove and Libby would probably get hit with relatively minor charges, so I was only a little let bit down when Rove wasn't knocked out in the first round. However, I have to admit it did sting a bit to read this today: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The Report That Wasn't For weeks in the run-up to the Libby indictment last Friday, reports swirled in the blogosphere and some wires. They contended that CIA leak prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had “widened his probe” to include investigating the origins of the Niger yellowcake forgeries themselves. They spoke of Fitzgerald getting ahold of a secret Italian parliamentary report that reportedly fingered a gang of American neoconservatives and aides to Ahmad Chalabi as being behind the Niger forgeries. “NATO sources have confirmed to United Press International that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government,” UPI’s Martin Walker reported in his column last week. “Fitzgerald's team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair.” [...] There’s just one problem: Not only has Fitzgerald not received such a report or even indicated he has any interest in one. There is no Italian parliamentary report, published or unpublished, on the Niger forgeries. In fact, until today, there has been no Italian parliamentary investigation of the Niger forgeries, or the claim promoted by the Italian military intelligence organization Sismi to the CIA and other western intelligence agencies that Iraq was seeking vast quantities of yellowcake uranium in Niger. <a href="http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002983.html">www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002983.html</a><hr></blockquote> That'll certainly teach me not to believe UPI's "NATO sources." Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=albion@rigorousintuition>albion</A> at: 11/4/05 1:18 am

by **Prac** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:50 am

From www.antiwar.com/blog/ <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"...One has to wonder how Laura (www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002983.html) can have such certain knowledge of what Fitzgerald has or has not requested. Ah, but if there is no such report -- and she cites the head of the Italian intelligence oversignt committee, one Enzo Bianco (a Berlusconi supporter), denying it -- then how can Fitzgerald have requested it? There is, here, perhaps some confusion as to the nature of the "report" -- is it official, or is it just a transcript of a hearing? I think this guy, whoever he is, has the right idea. Giovanni D'Avanzo, writing in La Repubblica [November 3], poses a few questions to Senor Bianco's oversight committee, and in the course of them avers: "Sometime after October 9, 2002, a team of SISMI agents are ordered to keep Rocco Martino under close surveillance ... Why was no surveillance memo or report issued to judicial investigators on Rocco Martino, who is investigated by the Rome Public Prosecutor’s office in 2003, until the fall of 2004?" So there was an investigation, albeit not by the Italian parliament but by Rome's public prosecutor. It could be that this is what both Walker's and my own sources are referring to. Laura cites several other skeptical sources, including a reporter for La Repubblica and "a former U.S. official recently in Italy," who say this story is "the echo of a rumor put out by people back the States." She also cites Vince Cannistraro, "who at one time heard rumors of such a report from Italian sources," and who "now says there doesn't appear to be a parliamentary report either. “'There is no published report,”'Cannistraro told me Monday. 'If there is a report, we might expect it would have some analysis and conclusions. There is no report, at least not a published report. …I think this stuff is just getting circulated.'" Of course it isn't published -- that's the whole point. ..... I trust my source, and I furthermore think it's unimportant whether this information is coming from the Italian parliament or Rome's public prosecutor: the point is that the information is there, and it's getting out. Antiwar.com stands by its story. "<hr></blockquote> __________ Confusing isn't it. The claims and counter claims, info and disinfo. Patrick Fitzgerald is no doubt continuing to do his job. Let's see what if anything he comes up with. Seems pretty good so far, don't ya think.

by **albion** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 5:50 am

Well something's happening in Italy, that's for sure. Too much minutiae! I guess that's the point, bog it all down in details...

by **AnnaLivia** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 6:20 am

Prom comes in the springtime

by **dbeach** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:31 pm

I admit it now I have the post indictment blues.. WOW !now I feel better Ashcan did not appoint Fitzgerlad..he recused himself and Comey appointed Fitz with FULL powers . its all in CS articles some of his best stuff I might add..

by **chiggerbit** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:39 pm

The Left Coaster has four articles on the Niger story, so if you want the smalll details, check out this site: <a href="http://www.theleftcoaster.com/">www.theleftcoaster.com/</a>

by **dbeach** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:53 pm

Comey resigned in Aug and ashcana ashcroft is long gone "Federal regulations and decisions, germane to Fitzgerald's unique appointment, legally protect the integrity of the Special Counsel's unrestricted mandate from interference by political operatives in this investigation, an investigation to which Acting Attorney General James Comey (empowered as such by Attorney General John Ashcroft's recusal) provided unprecedented patriotic and non-partisan foresight. Furthermore, Fitzgerald was empowered by Comey with unilateral authority to "expand" his jurisdiction and "pursue it wherever he wants to pursue it". Let your imagination run wild because it's all legally in play. THE APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL PATRICK FITZGERALD On December 30th, 2003, Deputy Attorney General James Comey held a press conference wherein he announced that Attorney General John Ashcroft had recused himself, on that day, from all involvement with the Treasongate investigation. Comey stated that the recusal included all of Ashcroft's "staff" and that "a document was created ...that memorialized the recusal." <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm26.showMessage?topicID=36.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...D=36.topic</a>

by **Jerky** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:33 pm

Lockheed Martin.

by **dbeach** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:01 pm

not a thrill for me to hear that..

by **banned** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 2:43 am

from Rory O'Connor's Blog: "Mr. Inside Goes to Washington Here’s a quick quiz for all you Plamegame experts: What actually are the Justice Department regulations regarding the appointment of ‘special’ prosecutors such as Patrick Fitzgerald? Here’s a hint: DOJ’s own rules were ignored in December, 2003 by then Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey when (acting on behalf of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who recused himself owing to past ties with presidential adviser Karl Rove) Comey gave the special counsel job to his old pal Fitzgerald. Still stumped? Okay, let me tell you. Federal rules (namely Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 600.3) require the appointment of a prosecutor “selected from outside the United States government.” As United States Attorney in Chicago – one of the Bush Administration’s top Justice representatives in the Midwest – Fitzgerald hardly qualifies. Comey was obviously aware of what he was doing when he ignored the rules to appoint Fitzgerald. In fact, when asked by Fitzgerald for clarification, Comey wrote in February 2004 that his conferral to Fitzgerald of the title Special Counsel “should not be misunderstood to suggest that your position and authorities are defined and limited” by the relevant regulation. Since that regulation stipulates that the ranks of federal prosecutors (like Fitzgerald) should be the last place to look for a special prosecutor, one must wonder: Why was Fitzgerald chosen? After all, the regulations were put in place, and prosecutors like Fitzgerald disqualified, so as to avoid any potential or perceived conflict of interest that might be created by having a member of any given presidential administration investigate that same administration. Yet those rules were ignored by the Bush Justice Department, and the Bush Administration thus ended up with its own ‘inside’ man running the investigation. To date, that investigation has yielded only the minimum that would forestall a firestorm of criticism – the indictment of Scooter Libby on charges of covering up a crime that apparently never happened. No Karl Rove…no Dick Cheney…not even any answers to the most basic questions underlying the entire affair – who revealed Valerie Plame’s secret identity, and was that in itself a criminal act? How convenient for everyone! After all, “the coverup worked,” as E. J. Dionne has pointed out: If Lewis Libby’s strategy of slowing the investigation down hadn’t been successful, “We would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005,” as Fitzgerald himself noted when announcing the indictments. “Note the significance of the two dates,” Dionne says. “October 2004, before President Bush was reelected, and October 2005, after the president was reelected… “As long as Bush still faced the voters, the White House wanted Americans to think that officials such as Libby, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney had nothing to do with the leak campaign to discredit its arch-critic on Iraq, former ambassador Joseph Wilson.” Given the stakes, is it surprising that the rules were waived and a Justice Department insider put in charge of the inquiry? After all, when the disastrous independent counsel statute – which of course brought us the Clinton-era Starr Chamber – expired in 1999, the question of who should investigate high government officials was seemingly answered by federal regulations meant to ensure that a full and unhindered inquiry could be undertaken with no perceived conflict of interest. Comey’s decision to waive those rules, and instead appoint someone selected from inside the United States government, call into question Fitzgerald’s entire investigation. Fitzgerald’s closemouthed spokesman Randall Samborn declined comment, and Department of Justice representatives failed to return my phone calls and emails. Their reticence is understandable. Although he has been widely portrayed as a fightin’ Irish son of a New York doorman, or alternately a Jimmy Stewart-like, “Mr. Fitzgerald Goes to Washington” Everyman, the special counsel and his curious investigation interruptus can best be understood as an inside job. Rather than being a “priest of the law…neither Democrat nor Republican” (Maureen Dowd’s typically cute but wrongheaded Times Select description) Patrick Fitzgerald is nothing more - but nothing less – than a loyal foot soldier in the John Ashcroft/Alberto “Torturer” Gonzales Justice Department of the Bush/Cheney regime. And if that ain’t a conflict of interest, I don’t know what is…"

by **banned** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 3:13 am

<a href="http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051104.html">writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051104.html</a> A Cheney-Libby Conspiracy, Or Worse? Reading Between the Lines of the Libby Indictment By JOHN W. DEAN ---- Friday, Nov. 04, 2005 <snip> "Indeed, when one studies the indictment, and carefully reads the transcript of the press conference, it appears Libby's saga may be only Act Two in a three-act play. And in my view, the person who should be tossing and turning at night, in anticipation of the last act, is the Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney." From your mouth to God's ears, Johnny baby. Veep Crashcart needs to go back down to Hell where he came from.

by **dbeach** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:06 am

banned.. that quote from rorys blog shows that Fitzgerald MAYBE another insider...However EJ dionne is a HUGH insider as is Moe Dowd and the rest of the DC MM ..all mockingbirds And my bet is still wilson is in on some level of these crimes and certainly not the hero that the left is portraying him. .He has had the luxury life for yrs..WHY give it up to help the commoners ? Don't make sense to me..ambassadors are placed for strategic reasons and have big access to Classified info. IMHO Given the amount of dirt from the bush cabals right in plane sight for amateur sleuths like us. It would seem logical that an investigator would be able to gather up the facts and SCORE. And again MAYBE Fitzgerald is already bought and paid for as is the Harry Reid Charade of this wk. We will know soon enough IF fitzgerlad is clean its hard to hide that Comey is already at Lockheed. If cheny walks with ONLY an unindicted co-conspirator and jr also then It looks like a fix to me. Its all obvious to me...11/22/63 to 12/00 to 9/11/01 to 3/14/04 to 11/02 /04 to 7/7/05 It all smells of bush/bliar and the the other syndicates.. [bush sr and his gangs doing the older crimes although bush sr is also involved in EVERY one of them in his role as queenies US viceroy] If Fitzgerald cannot crack this crime web then its up to the US Citizens to be the 4th branch of govt. or its all over but the tears... The rulers are playing for keeps.

by **dbeach** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:28 am

Comey apponted Fitzgerald. Comey graduated U Chicago home of neo-cons where Leo the marxist Strauss taught many TRAITORS like wolfowitz. These facts need to be brought into the discussion "Lockheed Names James B. Comey General Counsel BETHESDA, Md., Aug. 5, 2005/Satnews Daily/ ¾ Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] has named James B. Comey, 44 as successor of Frank H. Menaker, Jr., 65, the corporation’s senior vice president and general counsel, effective October 1, 2005. Menaker, who has served as general counsel since March 1995, will retire at the end of January 2006. Comey joins Lockheed Martin from the U.S. Department of Justice, where he has served as Deputy Attorney General since December 2003. In this position, he oversaw many important government cases, including terrorism and securities fraud prosecutions. Previously, he served as United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, where he had earlier been an assistant U.S. Attorney and lead prosecutor in the highly publicized United States v. John Gambino racketeering and murder trial. From 1996 through 2001, he was Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney in charge of the Richmond Division of the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia. In that position, he handled the Khobar Towers terrorist bombing case, arising out of the June 1996 attack on a U.S. military facility in Saudi Arabia in which 19 United States Air Force members were killed and hundreds wounded. Comey has also worked in commercial litigation, having been a partner with the law firm of McGuireWoods, LLP. He is a 1982 graduate of the College of William & Mary and earned his law degree from the University of Chicago Law School in 1985."

by **dbeach** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:33 am

very interesting <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/boyle08022003.html">www.counterpunch.org/boyle08022003.html</a> ""My Alma Mater is a Moral Cesspool" Neo-Cons, Fundies, Feddies and the University of Chicago By FRANCIS A. BOYLE Professor of Law, University of Illinois School of Law It is now a matter of public record that immediately after the terrible tragedy of September 11, 2001, U.S. Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld and his pro-Israeli "Neoconservative" Deputy Paul Wolfowitz began to plot, plan, scheme and conspire to wage a war of aggression against Iraq by manipulating the tragic events of September 11th in order to provide a pretext for doing so. Of course Iraq had nothing at all to do with September 11th or supporting Al-Qaeda . But that made no difference to Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the numerous other pro-Israeli Neo-cons in the Bush Jr. administration. These pro-Israeli Neo-cons had been schooled in the Machiavellian/Nietzschean theories of Professor Leo Strauss, who taught political philosophy at the University of Chicago in their Department of Political Science. The best expose of Strauss's pernicious theories on law, politics, government, for elitism, and against democracy can be found in two scholarly books by the Canadian Professor Shadia B. Drury: The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (198<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"> ; Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999). I entered the University of Chicago in September of 1968 shortly after Strauss had retired. But I was trained in Chicago's Political Science Department by Strauss's foremost protege, co-author, and literary executor Joseph Cropsey. Based upon my personal experience as an alumnus of Chicago's Political Science Department (A.B., 1971, in Political Science), I concur completely with Professor Drury's devastating critique of Strauss. I also agree with her penetrating analysis of the degradation of the American political process by Chicago's Straussian cabal Chicago routinely trained me and numerous other students to become ruthless and unprincipled Machiavellians. That is precisely why so many neophyte Neo-con students gravitated towards the University of Chicago or towards Chicago Alumni at other universities. The University of Chicago became the "brains" behind the Bush Jr. Empire and his Ashcroft Police State. Attorney General John Ashcroft received his law degree from the University of Chicago in 1967. Many of his "lawyers" at the Department of Injustice are members of the right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, and totalitarian Federalist Society (aka "Feddies"), which originated in part at the University of Chicago. Just recently the University of Chicago officially celebrated its Bush Jr. Straussian cabal, highlighting Wolfowitz Ph.D. '72, Ahmad Chalabi, Ph.D. '69, Abram Shulsky, A.M. '68, Ph.D. '72, Zalmay Khalilzad, Ph.D. '79, together with faculty members Bellow, X '39 and Bloom, A.B. '49, A.M. '53, Ph.D. '55. According to the June 2003 University of Chicago Magazine, Bloom's book "helped popularize Straussian ideals of democracy." It is correct to assert that Bloom's rant helped to popularize Straussian "ideas," but they were blatantly anti-democratic, Machiavellian, Nietzschean, and elitist to begin with. Only the University of Chicago would have the unmitigated Orwellian gall to publicly claim that Strauss and Bloom cared one whit about democracy, let alone comprehended the "ideals of democracy.""

by **trachys** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 4:45 am

friend to dictators and cheap-labour conservatives everywhere ... and the law-shall-serve-the-economy judge Richard Posner. "moral cesspool" indeed

Fitzmas Fizzle

Re: Socks for Fitzmas

Re: Socks for Fitzmas

Re: Socks for Fitzmas

work on plans all fall and winter

Re: work on plans all fall and winter

Re: work on plans all fall and winter

Fitzgerald apponted by Comey

And where is Comey working now?

Re: And where is Comey working now?

Is Fitzgerald in on it?

Yo robertdreed...check out John Dean today....

Re: Yo robertdreed...check out John Dean today....

comey

ashcraft comey wolfowitz

let us not forget Milton Friedman

Who is online