Reply #5: This about the third thread on this. Perhaps Drobny should wait until [View All]

[Garbo 2004]

the investigation is actually completed. Then he could tell us why he would have done a better job.

As I recall in 2004 Fitz said the bulk of the investigation was completed except for Miller's and Cooper's testimony to tie up some loose ends. As we've seen, that didn't mean the investigation was over and nothing would come from it.

Indictments don't have to include the sort of info Fitzgerald included in his "speaking" indictment. Info such as Cheney told Libby that Wilson worked in CPD in the Directorate of Operations (where the spies work). Thus Cheney and Libby knew she wasn't an analyst in WINPAC (Directorate of Intelligence). The indictment also notes that Libby discussed disclosure with an assistant and that it would create problems with the CIA. Uh, yeah. But if he thought she was a mere analyst would that be reason enough for him to have any concern that disclosure would cause problems with the CIA? He and his bosses had been shitting on the CIA for years.

Since we know that Libby told Miller that Wilson worked for WINPAC when he knew she worked for CPD in spooksville, we understandably may regard that as likely evidence of Libby intentionally creating an alibi to cover the fact he knew she worked in CIA Operations where the spies are. And that he knew he was disclosing information of a highly sensitive nature (her employment with the CIA) that he shouldn't be telling a reporter. (Of course, Libby's claiming faulty memory for all of his problems.)

The indictment contains information that suggests there is a basis for more than Libby just lying about the contents of a discussion with Russert. Would Fitzgerald unnecessarily include this info in the indictment if he was just taking a fall for the administration? This wasn't public info. Would he do so only to leave himself open to criticism such as Drobny lobs at him?

Drobny as far as I know is not an attorney and never has been a prosecuting attorney. I don't yet know the outcome of the investigation and neither does Drobny. If he wants to cast aspersions on Fitzgerald's credibility and integrity based on his record as a prosecutor in Chicago, let him so so with facts rather than innuendo. We'd all be interested.