Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wolfie - according to Fitzgerald "a crime wasn't committed"

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:19 PM
Original message
Wolfie - according to Fitzgerald "a crime wasn't committed"
Watching the Late Edition replay while waiting for the Titans game, and Wolfie and Repukes were saying that since Fitzgerald didn't indict for the leak itself that he found a "crime wasn't committed".

We need to stop that "talking point".

Here's my email to him:
Regarding the CIA leak case: I heard Wolf and others claim that Fitzgerald found that "a crime had not been committed." That is not what Fitzgerald said. A crime had been committed, and Fitzgerald went on to describe just how serious describe the breach of National Security was. He also said that in any case, the prosecutor must decide if a case could be prosecuted (that is, is there evidence to convict) and if a case should be prosecuted (intent). Mr. Fitzgerald said that Libby's alleged obstruction kept him from making those determinations.
He also went on to discuss "being convicted under the wrong statute", and stated that conviction of the serious crime of obstruction "vindicates" the investigation into the underlying crime, even if there is no conviction for the underlying crime.
Therefore, let's be clear, a crime was committed. The investigation was vindicated, not the actions of those breached National Security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hold these bastards accountable. Period.
Go Raiders!!!

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. Wanna make a side bet - on who makes the MOST mistakes?
I think this is gonna be a game of the young inexperienced rookies against the old farts. Brother, looks like neither of us has much hope for the play-offs.

Should be an interesting game, though!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I love the Raiders but I'd have to bet against them re: miscues!!!
We have entirely too many of them. We'll see what today brings! We need a WIN!!! Just win, baby!

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. He's Mossad
What do you expect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Excuse me?
Please clarify THIS talking point. And source it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. No
I stand by my statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. Al Haig!!!!!!
I used to have such a crush on him :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Him ? ...
You mean Alexander "As of now, I am in control here in the White House" Haig ? ...

You da bomb ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I just adore those "take charge" kinda guys
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Chuckles ....
Say no more, hun .....

And I MEAN IT ! ....

~waggles~ .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
25. AH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. His guests, for the most part, have all been nutballs. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. Are you watching Haig
:puke: :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:24 PM
Original message
I used to love that guy
but today I want to punch him in the mouth.

Where the fuck has he been? He's still claiming Plame wasn't a covert agent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LizW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Oh, my god. He's lying!
What an unbelievable scumbag! She wasn't covert? This guy is insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. "I have evidence he referred to her as "CIA girl"
Wolf "...prior to Novak's article?"
Haig (stumble mumble)"all I know this is a politically charged...(bullshit, bullshit avoiding answer to direct question)"

Fitzgerald's indictment stated that she WAS covert! It stated none of her family, friends, etc knew she was CIA, and that Libby et. al. KNEW she was in the Operative wing and not the Analyst wing.

WHAT BULLSHIT!
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. I am really glad I do not watch LMSM, this gives, 'Boob Tube'
a whole new meaning!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. That was unbelievable
but when they have to dig out all these old scum bags, they're in deep trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. ask him if a crime was committed in monicagate
not that rank hypocrisy bothers banana republicans at all....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. That will put things in prospective really quickly
But do not hold your breath, the LMSM will never do that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Windy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
11. Thank you. We need to get democrats on tv pushing this truth!
This fabrication was all over the talk shows tomorrow. Unfortunately, they probably got a lot of audience since this is the first weekend after the indictment. The administration is breathing a collective sigh of relief... sad.

Did anyone catch the Russert was telephoned by Libby because Libby didn't like something he saw on MSNBC? What? Why in the hell is the administration contacting the media to express their displeasure?
Sure lends support to the FACT that the administration controls what the populus sees and hears now doesn't it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
12. What we know and what we can prove are two different things.
Edited on Sun Oct-30-05 12:33 PM by Gregorian
Two crimes can make what we can prove turn into something we can not prove. These criminals shredded their evidence long ago. They designed this crime even longer ago, to be faultless. But we also landed a man on the moon. And I also believe there is a god.

I'm not sure I should even be posting today. I'm sick. And as such, fairly incoherent. But that's not unusual.

Plame was outed- Fact.
An illegal war was started- Fact.

A crime was committed, we have to battle monsters uphill and blindfolded to win the fight of justice. But the truth is infinitely sharp.

Ok, you're all sick of me. I'll go take my head of concrete and watch from the sidelines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. You stated it very well.....
hope you will feel better soon. :hug:

"Plame was outed- Fact."
"An illegal war was started- Fact."

The Pundits don't want to get into that "WAR" do they. So much easier to keep repeating: "A Crime Wasn't Committed, A Crime Wasn't Committed." After awhile one stops looking for the crime because they can't remember anything but the mantra...over and over and over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
15. He was very careful, Fitzgerald.
Few others have been.

"That's the way this investigation was conducted. It was known that a CIA officer's identity was blown, it was known that there was a leak. We needed to figure out how that happened, who did it, why, whether a crime was committed, whether we could prove it, whether we should prove it."

Every time Fitzgerald says 'crime' he either sticks to the charges--he's allowed to talk about crimes alleged in the indictment and therefore presumed by the prosecution to have occurred.

He talks about national security, and obstruction of justice as impeding the investigation. Serious and important matters. But he's careful to hedge.

Fitzgerald not say no crime had been committed in the leak. He also didn't say that the leak constituted the committing of a crime, and he decidedly wants to be able to make that judgement.

Careful with his words, that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countingbluecars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
21. At one point during Friday's
news conference, Fitzgerald actually said the words, "We have not charged him with a crime." He said this in the middle of a long explanation about the Espionage Act in relation to England's Official Secrets Act. I winced when I heard it just because I knew that those words would be taken out of context like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
23. Thank you -- This is exactly what I've been saying
He didn't say the leak hadn't happened, only that he couldn't get to the information to allow him to indict on it because of the lying and obstruction of justice. Safire made the same mistake on MTP.
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 Mon May 13th 2024, 06:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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