Jun 13 2007

Fitzgerald Needs To Be Nifonged

Published by at 7:40 am under All General Discussions

Mike Nifong is one of many prosecutors to abuse our laws for personal fame and gain (or vendetta). He appears to be heading towards a career ending date with justice. I am of the strong opinion Prosecutor Fitzgerald is guilty of similar unprofessional behavior – he basically let the US Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court believe he did not know who was behind the leak of Valerie Plame’s name to Robert Novak when he asked these courts to jail reporters for not testifying. Another prosecutor who needs to be Nifonged is Ronnie Earl in Texas, who shopped Grand Juries and indicted a member of Congress using a law that was not on the books. If America cherishes their legal system, they will bring these men up on misconduct charges and let the process work. Otherwise our laws will be used by those with power as a means to their ends, and they will abuse people who get in their way with the very laws they swore to uphold.

10 responses so far

10 Responses to “Fitzgerald Needs To Be Nifonged”

  1. Soothsayer says:

    AJ – as usual, bursting your bubbles of irrationality are one of my morning pleasures along with a nice cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee. I’ll take it slow so you can keep up:

    Nifong got in trouble because he prosecuted a case without sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

    Fitzgerald prosecuted a case with enough evidence to obtain convictions on four counts of perjury and obsturction of justice. The convicted felon, I. Lewis Libby, has been sentenced to 30 months, and will start serving time any day now.

    I know you have a hard time differentiating between these two fact sets, but to boil it down: Nifong LOST his case; Fitzgerald WON his case.

    As for Ronnie Earle and Tom “the Bug Man” Delay – that case is still pending, is it not? DeLay may still serve the time in the slammer he so richly deserves – so – as they say in the legal arena – the jury is still out on DeLay – and Earle.

    Case closed.

  2. Bikerken says:

    Soot, as usual you are living in another world, Nifong got in trouble for telling the DNA lab analyst to leave exculpatory evidence out of his report and concealed facts relevant to the case from the defense.

    Fitzgerald did essentially the same thing when he knew who the actual leaker was from day one and went on with a classic perjury trap investigation and did not even persue the leaker. Also, he never established that any law was broken to begin with. Same thing.

  3. ivehadit says:

    And I’m wondering how the poster knows who is “guilty” before their trial even starts…
    Could it be that, as in the other two cases, the outcome was predetermined for political gain? Hmmmm….Ya think?

  4. MerlinOS2 says:

    The Nifong hearing is being live blogged by KC Johnson.

  5. Soothsayer says:


    1. The Justice Department is the sock puppet of George Walker Bush. If, as you libelously claim, Patrick Fitzgerald acted in some dishonest way – why doesn’t Alberto go after him? Besides Gonzales’ obvious incompetence, that is.

    2. A leak may come from more than one source. I know – this complex concept gives simple minds a lot of trouble – but while Armitage may well have been the original source for Novak – there is uncontrovertible evidence that Libby AND Rove were also outing the covert agent Valerie Plame to other media folks.

    3. It this kind of behavior that makes criminal conspiracies criminal conspiracies – and the thrust of Fitzgerald’s arguments for strict sentencing for the traitor Libby is that by perjuring himself and obstructing the orderly administration of justice – he prevented the government from finding out the underlying facts of the matter.

    4. Your understanding of legalities is so rudimentary as to be laughable:

    he never established that any law was broken to begin with

    That’s why they call it an investigation, you idiot. The prosecutor is under no obligation to establish an underlying crime unless he intends to indict someone upon it. In the course of the investigation Fitzgerald discovered that Libby had committed numerous felonies, and proceeded to indict Libby, arraign Libby, try Libby, prove Libby was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of his peers, and obtain a sentence against Libby.

  6. ivehadit says:

    And we should trust Fitzgerald’s and Comey’s intentions, why?

  7. Bikerken says:

    Soot, that last post of yours was so lame. I will only agree with one thing, Gonzales is not up the job at all. You’re juvenile anger and refusal to face facts leaves me to abandon the conversation instead of experiencing the futility of trying to make an intelligent point to a moron. Better legal minds than you have identified numerous faults in this case. Go argue with them.

  8. Soothsayer says:

    Ken, Ken, Ken . . . so angry . . . so clueless.

    Better legal minds than you have identified numerous faults in this case

    Actually – not. However that may be – I’m perfectly happy to let the predominantly-Republican-appointed Federal Court of Appeals decide whether or not the case was flawed. Get this, Ken, you may as well write it down to use it against me in the unlikely event I’m wrong:

    Libby’s conviction will not be overturned; there are no grounds for setting aside the judgment of the triers of fact. And absent a pardon from the Chimp – who can’t even hold on to his watch in Albania – Libby will see the inside of a Federal prison.

  9. Bikerken says:

    I’m bettin it will be overturned, Soot. I never claimed to be a legal scholar, I don’t have any legal training at all. I’m mainly a systems analyst. But I have read many many opinions from some of the finest minds in this country and there seems to be a concensus that you could float an aircraft carrier through some of the holes in this case. I’m still not convinced Libby will see the inside of a prison cell, but I could be wrong. Nothing surprises me anymore.

    I don’t have any faith at all in Bush pardoning him. He has not shown a lot of compulsion to help those who he should except Gonzales and he is not the best man for the job of AG. Janet Reno was far worse, but Gonzales has not gone after voter fraud and corruption among democrats because he doesn’t want it to look political. Bad decision.

    By the way, he didn’t loose his watch, he put it in his pocket.

  10. ivehadit says:

    A certain poster is so juevenile. And we all know this fix was in a long time ago. Drive a truck through the holes, indeed.

    I just wonder who Fitzy is covering up for…covering certain very BIG mistakes and irresponsible actions from a certain former c-i-c…hmmm who/what could that be? Wonder what’s goin’ on in Iran these days with therir nuclear devices garnered from……

    It’s always all about the big “him”. Sickening rogue. Southerners know ’em a mile off. It’s the stupid hollywooders that get conned by him all the time…