Jan 21 2007

Is Fitzgerald On A Personal Vendetta?

Published by at 12:45 pm under All General Discussions,Plame Game

It would seem Fitzgerald should be investigated for lying to the Federal Courts (Appeal Cour and US Supreme Court and whether his obsession with Libby, even in the face of Deputy Sec of State Armitage as the source of the Plame leak, was all an act of a personal vendetta.

Two of the prosecutors who worked on the Rich case over the years were none other than Mr. Fitzgerald and James Comey, who while Deputy Attorney General appointed Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. Mr. Fitzgerald worked in the Southern District for five years starting in 1988, at the same time that Mr. Libby was developing a legal theory of Mr. Rich’s innocence in a bid to get the charges dropped. The prosecutors never did accept the argument, but Leonard Garment, who brought Mr. Libby onto the case in 1985, says that he believes Mr. Libby’s legal work helped set the stage for Mr. Rich’s eventual pardon.

Fitzgerald is as worthy of investigation as is Libby. Especially since he knowingly withheld information from the courts that would have ended is investigation before he subpoaned and jailed reporters.

33 responses so far

33 Responses to “Is Fitzgerald On A Personal Vendetta?”

  1. Carol_Herman says:

    Are people assuming the judge, Reggie Walton, won’t gavel Fitzgerald in the courtroom, should Fitzgerald try tricks and fakes? Do you really think Fitzgerald would get so much leeway?

    Let alone, Theodore Wells, not holding Walton to the LAW, by “objecting” to all the bullshit that you’ve seen already flying through the dishonest paperwork Fitzgerald’s presented to the judge.


  2. ivehadit says:

    The original mandate given to Fitzgerald did not include the wider scope. Check it out. Get the facts. What is posted on his site is the larger mandate…NOT the original, is it not?

    And my questions are still unanswered….but cone, we know how much you hate the actual facts…just drama and repeating of the Huffington Post and Kos for you.

    You have not been here long enough and should probably read the archives on this subject. We have discussed it in depth here for over a year… we like finding out the facts whatever they may be…

    Again: This whole affair is about the undermining of a sitting President during war…by rogue elements in the CIA..oh, and Armitage…THAT IS THE REAL CRIME…

    with a shabby cover-up.

  3. AJStrata says:

    Conesplif did not get the message. He is now outta of here AND all his comments have been deleted. Maybe this time he will take his childishness back where it belongs


  4. Dc says:

    Whine and moan all you want, the facts remain unchanged. Is Wilson under indictment?

    I s Bush under indictment? Is Hillery Clinton under indictment? Oh..I forgot..it\’s Rove. Rove was indicted…oh..wait..no..it was top/secret, double down, indictment that nobody has seen.

    Is Fitzgerald under indictment?

    Is Honey West under indictment? Is M. Jackson under indictment?
    Is Nancy Pelosi under indictment? How about Rove? Is he under indictment? Is Dick Chenney under indictment?? Are you under indictment? AND…………

    Did either of them lie to a federal grand jury?
    Did Libby lie to a grand jury? I thought that\’s what this trial was supposed to be about? The grandjury is only to say there is enough evidence for the trial..but it\’s not a trial. Nor has Libby been convicted. He may have…I don\’t know. But..then..you don\’t either …do you bub?

    Perhaps…any number of people who have testified in the \”Grand jury\” ..might come back now to testify and have some descrepancy in their testimony that will end up with THEM facing such a charge. You never know.

    Did the CIA file a criminal complaint against Wilson or Fitzgerald?
    Did the CIA file a criminal \”complaint\” against Libby???

    Did the Department of Justice – headed by John Ashcroft – and then Alberto Gonzales – authorize prosecutors to investigate their behavior?

    Did they authorize prosecutors to investigate anybody else\’s behavior???? It was the CIA who requested the investigation. And they didn\’t name \”Libby\”. Nor has Libby been charged in the CIA\’s initial complaint that started the entire investigation to start with. Nobody has been charged with that…..not even the \”real\” …\”leaker\”…(the State Dept: Armitage).

  5. Dc says:

    re: Wilson lied.

    Ok..if you say so. I just make the distinction..between…a person actually comprehending that they are misleading people…and people like Wilson and Gore, who have narssisitic dellusions.

    To me, that’s a distinction of difference. Maybe not to some people. So be it.

  6. Dc says:

    Further, I would add..that if you want to look at what you are talking about (a conspiricy) …his wife…would be the better place to start. She’s the one who actually would have had access to such information…not Wilson.

  7. Dc says:

    If I could be so bold Strata…you should check out the timeline of the history of those “forged documents” before you decide that nobody in the CIA knew what was contained in them before they were actually in our possesion (right before Powells UN speech).
    The fact is…US intelligence knew the subject, the dates and the names on it…long before they actually had the document in their hands. There are some who suggest we actually had copies of it…long before then. The issue more was..the yellowcake wasn’t even remotely a major factor in their assement.

    All of that somehow gets lost in this. But, the truth is..my friend…that NONE of it was material as to why the CIA thought Saddam had a nuclear program (Iraq already had yellowcake).

    I don’t know. Do any of you actually read any of this stuff? HERE:


    The CIA was HELL bent that the alum tubes were “it”. The smoking gun. The yellow cake wasn’t even a factor in it. The entire thing is a red-herring in regards to intelligence estimates on WMD.

  8. Dc says:

    I would add for Ko’s kids that visit who have trouble discerining between facts and campaign t-shirt slogans….the statements from the link above by G Tenent, directorate of intelligence, was in direct response to a lot of the flak that was generated by MSM by Wilson’s media claims…and is also factually backed up by the Iraqi intelligence committee findings.

  9. lurker9876 says:

    Are there any efforts, other than Clarice’s letter and those following her suit, in pushing the Department of Justice and our government in pursuing the potential ethics issues against Fitz and the Libby case?

    Has anyone heard from the Department of Justice regarding Clarice’s letter?

  10. jerry says:


    Fitz was told about Armitage when he took over – or did you forget that?????”

    Armitage didn’t use Plame/Flame in describing Mrs. Wilson to Woodward and Novak, and didn’t know that she was covert, though he did know that she was an analyst at the CIA.

    So I’d say Armitage isn’t a target of this investigation for good reason, surely Novak was asked by Fitz and the FBI about this conversation with Armitage and whether Plame and her covert role came up.

    The conversation with Woodward was hidden, by Woodward and Armitage, from Fitzgerald (not by Fitzgerald!). But the facts of this conversation are consistent with Novak’s in that Plame as a covert agent wasn’t discussed.

  11. Carol_Herman says:

    You want to look at CIA inspired conspiracies?

    Well, you could look at what Castro says. But then you’d have to go to Cuba. And, I think we have evidence right here, at home.

    I think John F. Kennedy was murdered by PLOT. Not a single bullet theory. And, probably not from Oswald’s gun, either.

    I think LBJ knew more, but took that information to his grave.

    I know Gerald Ford was on the Warren Commission. A terrible piece of American fiction. But that when he died people no longer mentioned that an idiot could be “sold” on the one-bullet theory. That Ford then “sold this” to Americans? I bet to differ. And, yes, the first time he ran for President, he LOST. All he really got was a gift from Nixon.

    But people hate conspiracy stories.

    Nixon, though. Was taken out by a very big conspiracy! Designed between the Washington Post, and the head guy at the FBI. Why did Nixon NOT survive? He picked terrible people to represent his office. Erlichman and Haldemann looked like nazi con guys. And, when Rosemary Woods died, Mark Steyn wrote her obituary. He said Nixon really went down because Woods (who heard what Nixon was saying), did a “secretarial clean up job,” and stuck in “expletives deleted, for “god damn” … While everyone thought he was dirtier in his speech than Lenny Bruce. And, all those “deletes” were to the word that begins with the letter “F.” (Which wasn’t true!) Steyn adds that if she wasn’t the “perfect secretary,” but instead kept all the “ums, and repeats, and speech confusions, nobody would have read the tapes and gotten a clear picture of what “her boss meant.” But Rosemary decided not to allow a single curse word to appear. She typed the tapes into a “reality” designed to pass muster with Nixon’s mother: Hannah.

    So, Nixon not only went down because of poor reporting. And, slanted reporting. But Vietnam, too, saw its liars emerge victorious. Or you don’t understand the pullout from Vietnam. And, that today the vietnamese, have learned the hard way that it was the CHINESE who were not their friends! And, living under the thumb of communism isn’t idelic. Can’t put genies back in bottles, though!

    While at the current rate of things, our “elites” are gonna go the way of the old British aristocracy. (They went kurplunck.)

    Do you know why? There are more of us, than there are of them. And, they can hoist and foist the likes of hillary; but she ain’t gonna “sell da movie.” (Drudge used to announce on his radio show, that the hollywood moguls flew off the tracks. Because the insiders were giving Jennifer Annison star power. When she couldn’t “open a movie” to save her life.)

    But people with lots of money also have habits of throwing this money away. All you have to do is look at the HOUSE OF SAUD and scratch your heads. You’d have used the wealth they got from the West, to try and destroy the West? I think all those lazy tent dwellers are dumber than dirt. And, in no way does “lots of money” add brain cells. Even bright men, who marry dumb blondes, if they’d live to see the progeny they get grow, would find their ugly looks prevail. But their offspring’s brains are on par with the dumb blonde’s.

    Barbara Tuchman said for European aristocrats, it’s all gone within seven generations. (Only Winston Churchill stands out as proving what happens to most aristocrats, wrong in one particular instance.) Well, it’s not a science.

  12. Carol_Herman says:

    Since none of us have any idea how the judge will handle this trial, we can at least assume that WOODWARD threw a monkey wrench into the works; BECAUSE he is NOT GOING ALONG with the rest of the media.

    Woodward’s already dropped the bombshell that leads to Armitage.

    And, Theodore Wells has all the advantages (that only the judge can remove). When it comes to telling the jury about what Fitzgerald did with the truth. (He hid it!)

    And, if nothing else?

    One thing this attempt has done is put Woodward on notice that his own Watergate investigation was AGAINST THE LAW. And, also against what most Americans would consider FAIR PLAY.

    In other words? Woodward knows NOW, that history won’t look kindly on the “take out of Nixon” through media scams. And, ploys.

    So no matter what else happens, Woodward is gonna be tempted to CLEAN UP HIS OWN IMAGE!

    How can Woodward do this?


    Have you noticed that when he writes books you hear about them?

    You really think Libby goes down the toilet. Based on a what I believe could be a mistaken belief that “all blacks are moronic camp followers.” Just as I don’t believe hillary would be hot among black voters, either. But the media only works at fooling people.

    You bet, if Walton screws up, Woodward will blast out the TRUTH at full volume.

    Why would Reggie Walton want a reputation that he got his job through affirmative action. But even his gavel-swinging is on par with Kofi Anan’s leadership of the UN?

    Sometimes, in life, you need a better tailor. And, sometimes in life, when you want to consider a whole bunch of people “losers” because they’re black; you should sit back. And, count to 10.

  13. jerry says:

    Carol, you’re fascinating…tell me about companies, what do you think will be news in 2007?