How did Murray Waas know at 7:23 AM EST on 10-28-05 that Fitz was going

[hang a left]

to announce an indictment later on that day. The GJ didn't even meet until 9:00 AM that Friday morning. I thought the indictment was dated October 28, 2005. We know that Fitzgerald doesn't leak. As a couple of people say around here..."no one knows anything".

So how did MW know that?

Hmmmmmmmm?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5201564


posted by murray waas at 7:23 AM Friday, October 28, 2005

Libby to be charged later today

The special prosecutor in the CIA leak case will later today announce a federal grand jury indictment against I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff, and national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney, according to attorneys involved in the case. The indictment will focus on charges that Libby mislead federal investigators and the grand jury hearing evidence in the case for the past 22 months, according to the same sources.

Contrary to many news reports that with today's indictment, special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has now wrapped up his investigation are incorrect. The prosecutor will still want to hear Libby's later testimony regarding the role of others in the Bush administration in the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

Federal prosecutors have long believed that Libby not only mislead the grand jury to protect himself, but perhaps others in the White House who might have played a role in the outing of Plame, and the role to conceal their role, the legal sources said.

Lost in the more significant news of the moment, the vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Democrat of West Virginia, last night renewed demands on the White House to turn over materials regarding Libby's role in allegedly distorting intelligence information to make the administration case to go to war with Iraq. Rockefeller was reacting to a report that was posted online yesterday in the National Journal, and which I wrote, disclosing that Vice President Cheney and Libby personally overruled the advice of some political staff and administration attorneys that they cooperate with the committee probe. (see post below for more details.)

Here below is Rockefeller's statement:

more at link

[benburch]

1. Don't ask inconvenient questions!

You'll upset the know-it-alls!

[spuddonna]

2. Now THAT is an excellent question...

How the heck did he know? :shrug:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

3. I think they actually voted and handed down the indictment

on 10-26 (I believe that is the date people mentioned this morning). The 10-28 date was the court filing date of the indictment.

[stop the bleeding]

4. sounds reasonable either way MW has sources, could MW be

one of the people that have contacted Leopold in support through this debacle?

MW would have could have only know through some good sources and judging by his past/recent articles he seems to have an inside line on this story.

It is a good observation

[Snivi Yllom]

9. Fitz in his press conference says the indictment was the morning of 10-28

go figure

i'll suggest...a good educated guess

[hang a left]

12. That is the day that the jurors walked down the hall and delivered it

to the judge. Do you know when the GJ handed up the true bill?? Do you know when Fitzgerald asked them to vote?

[hang a left]

10. but but but but but

the date on the indictment was THE 28th. That must have been the day it was decided upon by the GJ.

:sarcasm:

[Patsy Stone]

5. It depends on what time (or if) these arrived in Waas' Inbox:

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/press_advisory_1028.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_pr_28102005.pdf

They could have arrived anytime after midnight.

[hang a left]

7. I was just making a point about the back and forth regarding Rove.

There has been an argument about how Libby was indicted on the 28th. I think that is the day the GJ delivered their true bill to the judge. I don't think that was the day it was voted on. I believe it was voted on before that date.

[Patsy Stone]

14. I see.

That's possible. I'm also still waiting to find out if some (provided there's more than one, and I think that's the case) were dated from back when Scooter was indicted and sealed. :popcorn:

[hang a left]

16. Agreed. I never have gotten over the "package" that was handed

to the judge along with the true bill for Libby. No one has ever ever explained that.

I'll take two.

:popcorn: :popcorn:

[Zen Democrat]

6. It's from "attornies close to the case" -- Another Luskin leak?

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

8. Please Don't Talk Nonsense

Get everyone started on a non-story. I already went back last week, and did a search of DU to see when the Libby story started to break. It was at around Midnight EST on Thursday Night October 27. Reports were coming in from MSNBC, CNN and finally the NY Times website, that Libby was to be indicted on Friday. By Friday morning, there was talk that there would be a press conference, which was soon announced.

If you go back to the posts on DU from Thursday night 10/27/05, you will see when people started posting about reports of Libby's indictment the following day.

[hang a left]

11. But I thought the indictment was dated on 10-28-05!?!?

How did everyone know who was going to be indicted and when. The GJ hadn't even met yet??

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. GJ met on 10-26 (Wed) and voted.

[hang a left]

20. I know that is what people speculate.

But really we don't know when the jury actually voted. I also remember talk regarding how Libby wouldn't make a deal with Fitz. However I don't remember if that was ever substantiated. Supposedly Fitz met with the judge on the 26th, but what occured during that meeting is all speculation as well.

My point is this. We don't know when the jury handed up the true bill. We also still don't know what was in that "package" that was handed to the judge along with the true bill.

There could be(operative words)several sealed indictments in this case. Fitz waited until the last day of that particular grand jury to file against Libby. There are also several cooperating witnesses, and we don't know how their cooperation was gained. Remember there was a coordinated effort to cover up this crime and many people were questioned in the beginning by the FBI.

I am reminded of the tape of John Dean talking to Nixon where Dean says something to the effect of "and people are going to start to perjure themselves and there are no guarantees..."

[crizzo5137]

13. things that make u go "hmmmmmm"

[splat]

15. He read it in the morning Times!

NYT archive search:
Cheney Aide Appears Likely To Be Indicted in Leak Case

October 28, 2005, Friday
By DAVID JOHNSTON AND RICHARD W. STEVENSON (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 1, 1455 words

DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF 1455 WORDS -Lawyers in the C.I.A. leak case said Thursday that they expected I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, to be indicted on Friday, charged with making false statements to the grand jury. Karl Rove, President Bush's senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, will not...

Earlier:

Knight Ridder posted this photo the Wednesday before the press conference with the caption,
KRT US NEWS STORY SLUGGED: LEAKPROBE KRT PHOTOGRAPH BY CHUCK KENNEDY/KRT (October 26) WASHINGTON, DC -- Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald arrives at the Prettyman Federal Court Building in Washington D.C., Wednesday, October 26, 2005. The results from the grand jury that Fitzgerald used to investigate the leak of a CIA officer's identity allegedly by White House officials are expected either today or Friday."

CNN Oct. 27, 2005: Fitzgerald is expected to announce Friday the results of his investigation and whether he has come up with indictments, a source said.

[napi21]

17. I think I remember Fitz had told the court he would be filing papers

sometime that AM. I don't know if the press jumped to the conclusion that it was an indictment, or perhapse someone from the court (a clerk?) may have had to record something for the judge's schedule. I think the prosecutors notify the judge to make sure he has made room on his schedule.

[Connie_Corleone]

19. 10-28-05 was also the very last day for the grand jury to meet.

Everyone pretty much assumed Libby would be indicted on that Friday since it was the last day for the grand jury.

Regarding Rove, it's a different situation because this is a new grand jury (hearing several cases) and we don't know how long they will meet.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. I thought Fitzgerald

went to a Grand Jury that was already seated this time. In that case, we don't know when their term will expire.

Does anyone know when this GJ's term expires?

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. Found the answer to my own question

Fitzgerald Announces New Grand Jury

On Nov 18th Fitzgerald decided to go to a NEW grand jury. That is significant. Originally he said he would go to a GJ that was already seated. This would indicate that Fitzgerald has a much bigger case to bring to court then he previously thought. Also, going to a new GJ means he's in it for the long haul.



November 18, 2005 8:05 p.m. EST

Denise Royal - All Headline News Staff Writer

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said he will have to bring more information before a new grand jury in the CIA leak probe, adding that his work is not complete.

In a new court filing, Fitzgerald said sensitive information from his investigation still needs to be protected, especially since proceedings will involve a different jury than the one that indicted Lewis Libby, former chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Lawyers in the case have said President George W. Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, remained under investigation and could still be charged. Fitzgerald has been investigating the leak of Valerie Plame's identity for two years and the grand jury that indicted Libby expired after it brought charges against him for perjury and obstructing justice on October 28.

Plame's cover at the CIA was blown after her husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, accused the Bush administration of twisting prewar intelligence to support invading Iraq. Wilson said it was done to undercut his credibility.

On Monday, Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward gave a sworn deposition to Fitzgerald about three Bush administration officials he interviewed for his 2004 book on the run-up to the Iraq war, "Plan of Attack." Woodward's sworn deposition sparked renewed speculation about who first leaked Plame's identity, and sent Bush administration officials scrambling to deny involvement. A lawyer in the case said Woodward's source had not previously testified before a grand jury.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7001094350

[hang a left]

23. Is this grand jury Fitz's or is it grand jury that other federal

prosecutors use??

I have come to believe it is the latter. However someone here has stated that that is not true. I sure would like to have confirmation of that fact.

[DoYouEverWonder]

24. This article was written a few weeks after the Libby indictment

Since they specifically say a new GJ, I would assume they are using the term correctly, otherwise what was the point of the article?

[hang a left]

25. With all due respect....

I don't think the article is clear on that. It states he will have to use a new grand jury not empanel one.

[DoYouEverWonder]

26. You are correct

It is not clear.

Is there a way to find out? Shouldn't it be public record if Fitzgerald empaneled a new GJ or if he's using a jury that was already sitting?

[hang a left]

28. Christy Hardin Smith at FDL has been adamant in proclaiming

that the GJ that Fitz is using a regular grand jury any federal prosecutor may use. H20 man references David Shuster comments that it is a GJ just for the Plame case. I don't know where the links are to back up either claim.

[DoYouEverWonder]

29. Originally Fitzgerald was very clear

that he would use a GJ that was already seated.

If he changed his mind that would be significant.

Either way I'd still like to know when the GJ that he is using term expires? Since that of course would impact how fast he has to wrap things up.

[hang a left]

30. Can't tell you.

Haven't seen that anywhere in writing. So many questions.

[Catherine Vincent]

27. This has nothing to do with the OP...

I just want to say that I don't believe Fitzgerald will handle the "Karl Rove indictment" the exact same way he handled the Scotter Libby indictment. I'm sure he realizes that Rove is a bigger fish than Libby which will attract a larger media frenzy. If he actually issues a media advisory, he just may do this on a Saturday or Sunday for all we know. Fitz knows it has to be done but he also doesn't like all the attention.