RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for the Top Dog

There's an interesting article in today's Globe and Mail about Patrick Fitzgerald and his prosecutorial strategy. Here are the money quotes:

And always, he has methodically, inexorably pursued his investigations to target the man at the top of the organizational pyramid....People who have watched Mr. Fitzgerald operate in Chicago, and before that as assistant U.S. Attorney in New York City, are not surprised by his zeal in pursuing the journalists. But don't expect him to stop there.

That's how he operates: Apply maximum pressure to reluctant witnesses in order to build an air-tight case against the most senior member of a criminal conspiracy.

[hat tip Patriot Daily.] I wonder if he believes the top dog here is Libby, Rove or Cheney.

Cheney was interviewed by Fitzgerald's grand jury, but not under oath. That lets out perjury...but not making a false statement to federal officals under 18 U.S.C. 1001.

Here's some past TalkLeft Cheney - Plame Leak links for review:

< Corpse Exhibit Opens in Florida | How Cindy Sheehan Got Swift-Boated >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Re: RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:33 PM EST
    Well where does the buck stop? I know that Cheney may be running things but....I like Dean's point that both Bush and Cheney would not have had to hire their own attys. if they fear being caught red handed. Can Bush give himself a pardon, or does Cheney have to do that?

    Re: RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for (none / 0) (#2)
    by The Heretik on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:33 PM EST
    Every day with every more blustery statement from Cheney, you see more evidence he is most heavily invested in this Iraqi fiasco. He has been in the forefront for the war at the same time he has been the unwise counsel in back rooms. He is both stepfather to Bush junior and to this bastard war. Some have already commented on the mob like way a line of responsibility for conduct cannot be traced back to its source in this administration. Perhaps Fitzgerald will find proof concrete to boot these criminals from their dark seats of power. That may be metaphor, but how else do you explain these dark shadows on our demcocracy? With unprecedented requests for secrecy, Cheney and his kind avoid all accountability. Having looked at this for a while, I think this goes far beyond Rove.

    Re: RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for (none / 0) (#3)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:33 PM EST
    It's good to go for the top dog, and hold power wielders respondible if they broke the law, but don't forget to go after the mid level lackeys who blindly follow and cover for their leaders too.

    Re: RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for (none / 0) (#4)
    by kipling on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:34 PM EST
    I wonder what readers think of Elizabeth de la Varga's article at TomDispatch in which she argues:
    Pundits right, left, and center have reached a rare unanimous verdict about one aspect of the grand jury investigation into the Valerie Plame leak: They've decided that no charges can be brought under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, because it imposes an impossibly high standard for proof of intent. Typically, writing for Slate on July 19th, Christopher Hitchens described the 1982 Act as a "silly law" that requires that "you knowingly wish to expose the cover of a CIA officer who you understand may be harmed as a result." Similarly, columnist Richard Cohen, in the July 14 Washington Post, said he thought Rove was a "political opportunist, not a traitor" and that he didn't think Rove "specifically intended to blow the cover of a CIA agent." Such examples could be multiplied many times over. Shocking as it may seem, however, the pundits are wrong; and their casual summaries of the requirements of the 1982 statute betray a fundamental misunderstanding regarding proof of criminal intent.

    Re: RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:34 PM EST
    Her argument seems cogent to me, even though only one person has been convicted on this charge since 1982.

    Bush's little "anyone who is convicted of a crime will be fired" qualification is starting to look more and more ominous for the admin. It will take time to convict (obviously) so perhaps he's hoping to keep Rove or even Cheney on pre-conviction, and send poor ol' Scotty out there with the usual "can't talk about ongoing investigations" nonsense. But perhaps not...doing so would sabotage the republican party for years. I guess the question is does he care?