Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How BushCo plans to get rid of Fitzgerald...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:12 PM
Original message
How BushCo plans to get rid of Fitzgerald...
...with nary a whisper from anyone.

All he has to do is nothing at all - and let Fitz's appointment as US Attorney expire in October. Sounds like blackmail to me. No indictments or no appointment.

http://www.pantagraph.com/stories/080805/Opi_20050808005.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rox63 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's why he has to finish this up soon
Fitzgerald needs to wrap up his investigation and hand out the indictments before then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. They probably haven't made it easy for him.
The Repubs stick together like stink on a monkey. Their corruption is absolute and they are probably loathe to say ANYTHING about ANYBODY. Rove has been back repeatedly to testify, probably as info leaks out. And the web of involvement seems to be spreading. As long as Fitzgerald casts a wide net and catches as many as possible, it's less important low long it takes. Proof of conspiracy will be a devastating blow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niallmac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. correct me if i'm wrong.
But isn't Fitz's appointment as special prosecutor independent of his role as US Attorney?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yup... That's What I Have Been Told As Well
We'll see though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. It is, but...
...this article makes clear that his role as US Attorney is up in October as well. That makes things mighty hot for Mr. Fitzgerald as he goes after these bozos.

The likelihood that Fitz would be reappointed is absolutely nil - his career as a US Attorney is over unless he plays ball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. He can make a lot more money in private practice anyway!
IMO, people don't become prosecutors to get rich. An attorney of Fitzgerald's experience would command a hansom salary in the commercial world, so reappointment has to be quite low on his list of concerns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. The legal profession is heavily politicized.
Things could get ugly for Fitz even if he goes into private practice (assuming indictments). This has to be on his mind. It's one thing to take down a governor. It's another to take down the President. Totally different level of backlash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ticapnews Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Ken Starr sure has suffered for bringing down a president.
Then again, Democrats aren't as vindictive as the Thugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. This is backwards and new from what I understood... I never heard
that there was an October expiration of his US Atty role. I thought the time period for the grand jury ran out in October unless it was extended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. Geesh, did you even read the first paragraph?
As strange as it may seem, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into whether presidential adviser Karl Rove leaked classified information may be the thing that saves his job come October -- at least for a short period.

There would be screams from members of the Democratic Party if President Bush chose not to reappoint Fitzgerald when his four-year term expires in October, but Democratic politicians would probably be somewhat reserved because Fitzgerald's Chicago office is now investigating federal corruption charges within the office of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a Democrat.


Also, I may be wrong, but his job as U.S. Attorney has nothing to do with him being retained as a special prosecutor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. My point is...
...that the potential appointment as US Attorney can be used as leverage in the Plame investigation.

Note that BOTH terms are up in October unless Fitz extends the Plame leak investigation, which must have judicial approval (which can itself be subject to political manipulation).

Regardless of how honest a person is, that kind of pressure has to weigh on a person's mind.

On the other hand, Fitz may have anticipated that he would not be reappointed as US Attorney. It's hard to know what he's thinking since he doesn't talk much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. Read this if you're worried.
This guy lays the law out in a very understandable way.
<http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/>

The two jobs..special prosecutor and U.S. Attorney are two separate and distinct things. He can be replaced as U.S. Attorney, but not as the special prosecutor on the Rove case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Thanks for the link.
I had read it previously.

IMO, this is the political maneuvering going on behind the scenes to try to limit Fitz's ability to go after BushCo. Something I had anticipated, and expect to get much worse as we approach revelation of what Fitz has cooking. We may find that the investigations and indictments of various players (Hastert, Abramoff, etc) might actually be manuvering on the part of Justice to counter pressure from BushCo over Plame etc. The Illinois indictments and the Plame investigation are linked because of the shared prosecutor, so I would expect to see the same players manuevering in both cases. I expect there's a lot of this manuevering/countermanuevering going on that we're not hearing about.

How this will play out depends on Fitz's ability to withstand political pressure. He has a good track record thus far, but his ability to withstand the pressure that would come to bear in the event of a Bush/Cheney indictment - well, that remains to be seen.

For more in depth, see this link:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/27/232930/764
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. Friz will finish his job before his appointment is done. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
kevsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
16. Fitz keeps his job in Chicago until someone else is appointed.
He doesn't have to be formally "reappointed." Bush won't appoint anyone else, because it looks like payback or pressure. In fact, Hastert (who may soon be the target of an investigation himself) last week publicly called for Fitz to stay on the job.

Pressure only works if there is a viable threat. So far, Bush doesn't have a viable threat that will work on Fitz.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laylah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
19. My understanding
is that the US Attorney position and the Plame Investigation are two completely different issues. Prez dumbass did not appoint him to the Plame investigation, the AG did.

Jenn
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-14-05 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
20. I'm not so hopeful anymore either...
Either Fitzgerald is in their pocket or he's cowering at the threat of getting Wellstoned. Nothing's going to come of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC