Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Yeah ... really heartwarming in way, ain't it? Good to know some things remain constant. Sorta reaffirms one's faith in the wisdom behind the human condition.

No Mr. Anderson here. WTf are you talking about?

Heehee...yep.

Some folks fool only themselves.

Now WTF are YOU talking about?

Well?

Feigning ignorance becomes you nikki - it goes well with the multi-faceted nature of the screen personna you project. The indignation thing is an artful touch, too.

What am I feigning ignorance about? What am I fooling myself about? If you have something to say, try being man enough to say it rather than making girly insinuations.

Of course, maybe being girly befits you.

Still waiting for Maya to explain what he is talking about.

It's just a reference to a well-known line from the Matrix movie trilogy. Don't you follow pop culture?

Why? What did you think I meant?

Does it "become me," timber?

Like lipstick on a pig

I didn't see Matrix but what does it have to do with homosexuality. BTW is constantly making girly insinuations a way to express your repressed feminine self?

Nothing at all wrong with conjecture. Some circumspection in the practice could be advisable though ... inuendo and calumny are not quite the same, a saving grace for the former.

Fitzgerald Presents New Information to Grand Jury
Fitzgerald Presents New Information to Grand Jury
First Appearance in Probe Since Libby Indictment
By Carol Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; 1:09 PM

Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald appeared this morning to present information to a new grand jury in the CIA leak investigation.

Fitzgerald has been probing for two years what role senior Bush administration officials have played in leaking a CIA operative name to the media in 2003.

Today's appearance was the first time that Fitzgerald has gone back to a grand jury since the Oct. 28 indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff.

At that time, the original grand jury probing the case expired.

With the new grand jury, Fitzgerald continues to consider charges against Karl Rove, White House deputy chief of staff, who failed to reveal to the FBI and the grand jury in the early days of the investigation that he had provided information about CIA analyst Valerie Plame to Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper.

Fitzgerald has spent the past two years investigating whether any Bush administration officials disclosed Plame's name and employment at the CIA as part of an effort to discredit allegations by her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson IV, that President Bush had twisted intelligence to justify the Iraq war.

Fitzgerald has not charged anyone with the crime he originally set out to investigate: the illegal disclosure of a covert CIA operative's identity. Instead, he has focused on alleged wrongdoing in the course of the investigation-- Libby was charged with lying and obstructing justice in the CIA leak probe.

The most recent new twist involves Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward. Woodward told Fitzgerald last month that he had discussed Plame with a senior administration official -- and that the official was someone other than Libby -- before Libby's first conversation with another reporter about Plame.

The Libby legal team cheered Woodward's testimony, calling it "a bombshell" and contending that it undercut Fitzgerald's case that Libby was the first official known to have talked about Plame and her CIA status with a reporter.

t just looks to me like there was less a desire to protect a source."

Fitzgerald's comment must be reiterated:

quote:

"This indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel.

THIS IS SIMPLY AN INDICMENT THAT SAYS, IN A NATIONAL-SECURITY INVESTIGATION ABOUT THE COMPROMISE OF A CIA OFFICER'S IDENTITY THAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE CONTEXT OF A VERY HEATED DEBATE OVER THE WAR, WHETHER SOME PERSON--A PERSON, MR. LIBBY LIED OR NOT"

end of quote

smellyKat, thank you for pointing out how very important Mr. Fitzgerald's comments are. Compromise of the CIA is not to be taken lightly.

A heated debate where people in the WH felt it was just fine to reveal the names of CIA officers in defense of their position. Then some of those same people felt it was just fine to lie to investigators. Sorry Mortkat, but it makes the WH look bad no matter HOW you slice it. The fact that the WH and President refuse to condemn those that did it makes it even worse.

Rove's Lawyer an On-the-Record Liar
Rove's Lawyer an On-the-Record Liar
Lawrence O'Donnell
12.07.2005

At Arianna's HuffPo party last month, Mickey Kaus was surprised when I told him I did not think Bob Luskin was a liar. In several posts here, I've had my fun with Luskin's endless media spinning on behalf of his most famous client, Karl Rove, but I have never said he is a liar.

That was then.

Rove's lawyer is now an on-the-record liar. The proof: Luskin told the Washington Post the other day that if Rove escapes indictment, it won't be "the product of my particular skill or cleverness." Whenever prominent Washingtonians resort to humility in print, they are lying at minimum about their state of mind. Luskin's lie runs deeper than that. The truth is Rove is not yet indicted exclusively because of his lawyer's "particular skill."

The Washington Post profile that provoked Luskin's one-and-only public lie stresses how good Luskin is at both the legal complexities of criminal defense work and the much simpler but time-consuming task of spinning/using the Washington press corps. If Luskin wasn't brilliant at both of those things, Rove would be indicted now. Luskin's use of Viveca Novak in his last minute meeting with Patrick Fitzgerald as the first grand jury's term was expiring is what left Fitzgerald with only one name to indict.

When the FBI started investigating the case, Rove did not tell them that he was Matt Cooper's source. Lying to the FBI is a crime. Then Rove did not tell the grand jury that he was Cooper's source. Lying to a grand jury is perjury. The only defense Rove has to those charges is memory failure, which is an effective defense if credible. Enter Viveca Novak.

Luskin then has a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, who the Washington Post describes as a friend of his. For Rove, this turns out to be the most important friendship Luskin has. Here's Novak's friend David Corn's account of the chat:

Now, according to completely trustworthy sources close to Viveca Novak, this is what happened. Novak wasn't trying to tip off Luskin or to help him. During a conversation, Luskin said to Viveca Novak that Rove had never spoken to Cooper about Valerie Wilson. Novak instinctively pushed back, in the way many a reporter would challenge a source whom he or she believes is spinning or lying. "She assumed that Luskin was giving her BS," one close-to-Novak source says. "And she replied with something along the lines of, 'This is not what I hear.' She assumed that Luskin did know about the Rove-Cooper conversation and that she was not telling him anything he did not already know."

Corn's stated mission in this account is to prove what a good person and honorable reporter Novak is. "Novak wasn't trying to tip off Luskin …" Uh huh. But she did. Why was a Time reporter discussing Time's secret source with Rove's lawyer? No other Time reporter did that. Corn's Novak defense could not be more tortured. He says she didn't know who Cooper's source was, that she didn't tell him anything, she just "pushed back." Then he quotes another friend of Novak saying, "She assumed that Luskin did know about the Rove-Cooper conversation and that she was not telling him anything he did not already know." So, according to that friend, Novak did know Rove was Cooper's source and she did tell Luskin. With friend/defenders like these … Hey, I like Viveca Novak too. Everyone does. But in this case, she may have more to answer for than any other reporter involved.

You're Rove's lawyer. You're sitting there with a Time reporter discussing another Time reporter's secret source. You say it wasn't your client. The Time reporter says that's not what I hear. You try not to fall off your chair and keep the conversation going. This moment made every hour Luskin has ever spent working the press worth it. And it made every penny Rove has paid Luskin not enough.

Luskin then tells his client that the word inside Time magazine is that he is Time's source. Rove then conducts a "new" email search at the White House and finds one of his quickies written right after his fateful conversation with Cooper that shows, well, yeah, he was Cooper's source.

Luskin then brings that email to Fitzgerald and explains that they just found it and it has jogged Rove's memory. Rove would now like to return to the grand jury and tell them about being Cooper's source. Fitzgerald obliges.

Luskin knows that Rove is still in trouble after he corrects his testimony. As indictment week approaches, Luskin has a final meeting with Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald's problem had always been why did you guys suddenly go looking for new stuff. This time the answer is Viveca Novak. Luskin tells Fitzgerald about his conversation with Novak and says that's what made him ask Rove to do another email search.

You're the special prosecutor. You're on the verge of indicting one of the most powerful White House aides in history on lying to the FBI and perjury. His lawyer makes a last minute pitch that really muddies your waters. At trial, the lead prosecution witness is going to be a Time reporter testifying about his conversation with the defendant. Now you learn that the lead defense witness is going to be another Time reporter testifying about her conversation with the defense lawyer. You know this is going to sound too weird for a jury to get past reasonable doubt. You don't indict.

Instead, what Fitzgerald is doing now is getting Viveca Novak under oath to check how her story is going to sound to a jury. If Fitzgerald does not indict Rove after hearing from Novak, then it will be Viveca Novak who saves Rove. Which is to say it will be Luskin's relationship with the press, with Viveca Novak in particular, that saved Rove. If Rove beats the rap, it will definitely be the product of Bob Luskin's particular skill and cleverness.