Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

I saw Hitchens on Hardball the other night. Same ol' gasbag as always. He's going to be pissed when they frog-march Bushco out of the White House for lying.

Blueflame, great article; I'm going to read more about it and post later, but if Leopold turns out to be correct, then it certainly doesn't bode well for those who contend that Bush didn't lie about intel.

Cycloptichorn

Gee - the Bushophobes haven't been this excited since they followed Dan Rather down the primrose path.

Don't kid yourself; we're far, far more excited now than we were then. What with the opinions of the electorate swaying the Dems way as the Republicans prove themselves more and more incompetent when it comes to the business of running the country in a responsible manner.

Cycloptichorn

It is not only "bushophobes" (another label) who think something stinks with in the WH with this whole Plame deal. Whether anything ever comes of it, who knows? The point is already made with the American public though.

Gallup: Most Americans Critical of President in CIA Leak Case

"Bushophobes" ...quite a nice label. I prefer "sane."

Better a Bushophobe than a Bushsucker.

Anon

Media Lawyers Hit Back at Libby's 'Fishing Expedition'
Media Lawyers Hit Back at Libby's 'Fishing Expedition'
Published: April 18, 2006 10:30 PM ET
WASHINGTON

Lawyers for NBC News, The New York Times and Time Inc. accused a former White House aide Tuesday of threatening the integrity of their news gathering operations by seeking access to a wide range of documents in the CIA leak case.

The media lawyers, in separate filings, said I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, is on a "fishing expedition" with his request for documents from the news organizations.

They are asking U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton to block seven subpoenas seeking access to drafts of news articles, e-mails and notes generated by any and all of the news organizations' employees ?- not just the three reporters involved in the case.

[Also Tuesday, The Washington Post said in a statement that it had received a subpoena last week for notes of reporter Bob Woodward and had turned material over to lawyers for Libby. "In order to comply with the subpoena, The Post produced the complete version of Bob Woodward's memo of his interview with Mr. Libby on June 27, 2003," the Post disclosed. "This action did not pose legal or journalistic concerns to The Post or Mr. Woodward."]

Libby, 55, is charged with perjury and obstruction of justice for lying to the FBI and a federal grand jury about how he learned about CIA operative Valerie Plame and what he subsequently told reporters about her.

Conservative columnist Robert Novak named her in a column July 14, 2003, eight days after Plame's husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, alleged in an opinion piece in The New York Times that the Bush administration had twisted prewar intelligence on Iraq to justify going to war.

The CIA sent Wilson to Niger in early 2002 to determine whether there was any truth to reports that Iraq had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger to make a nuclear weapon. Wilson determined that there was no truth to the reports. But the allegation nevertheless wound up in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.

Libby is charged with lying about what he told reporters about Plame as he acted as a point man in the White House's efforts to counter Wilson's charges.

The Libby defense team has issued subpoenas to: NBC News and its correspondents, Tim Russert and Andrea Mitchell; The New York Times Co. and its former reporter Judith Miller; and Time Inc. and its reporter Matthew Cooper.

Generally, the subpoenas seek all documents prepared or received by any employee of NBC News, The New York Times and Time that refer to Plame and her husband before Novak's column was published.

The subpoenas also seek drafts of articles, even those that were not published; communications between reporters and editors; and e-mail exchanges among any reporters about Plame or Wilson.

Libby's indictment grew out of conversations he had with Russert, Cooper and Miller in June and July 2003, a two-month period in which the White House, according to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, was mounting a campaign to undermine Wilson's charges about the Iraq war.

Media lawyers argue that documents generated by other reporters are irrelevant and turning them over would violate the First Amendment's protections for the press.

NBC's lawyers said Russert does not have any documents that would show that Plame's CIA employment was known before Novak's column. They said Mitchell's records aren't relevant to the criminal case and are protected from release under the First Amendment.

Lawyers for The New York Times depicted Libby as desperate in casting a "wide net" that he hopes will locate "a statement somewhere" that Plame's role as a covert CIA operative was well known in Washington before Novak's column.

If Libby is permitted access to all that he seeks, they said, it would cause "an immediate and chilling effect on The New York Times' news gathering activities." Sources would become reluctant to talk or allow their interviews to be recorded. And reporters would begin to maintain ?- or not maintain ?- notes with an eye toward possible litigation, they said.

The New York Times lawyers also said Libby is improperly seeking documents pertaining to reporters and editors who will not be called as witnesses. Only Miller, who spent 85 days in jail last year refusing to testify about what Libby told her, is the only New York Times employee expected to testify for the prosecution, the newspaper's lawyers said.

Lawyers for Miller said Libby is improperly seeking access to her telephone records and calendar ?- "personal and sensitive professional references" that are completely unrelated to Libby or the CIA leak case.

Time magazine's lawyers said Libby already has all of Cooper's notes because the company gave them last summer to the special prosecutor, who in turn gave them to the defense team.

Instead, Libby is trying to find out about communications that "MAY have occurred and documents that MAY exist," the Time lawyers wrote.

Valerie Plame Expected for White House Correspondents Dinner
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002382755

Grand Jury Hears Evidence Against Rove
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report

Thursday 20 April 2006

Just as the news broke Wednesday about Scott McClellan resigning as White House press secretary and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove shedding some of his policy duties, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald met with the grand jury hearing evidence in the CIA leak case and introduced additional evidence against Rove, attorneys and other US officials close to the investigation said.

The grand jury session in federal court in Washington, DC, sources close to the case said, was the first time this year that Fitzgerald told the jurors that he would soon present them with a list of criminal charges he intends to file against Rove in hopes of having the grand jury return a multi-count indictment against Rove.

In an interview Wednesday, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove remains a "subject" of Fitzgerald's two-year-old probe.

"Mr. Rove is still a subject of the investigation," Luskin said. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that prediction again Wednesday.

"Mr. Fitzgerald hasn't made any decision on the charges and I can't speculate what the outcome will be," Luskin said. "Mr. Rove has cooperated completely with the investigation."

Fitzgerald is said to have introduced more evidence Wednesday alleging Rove lied to FBI investigators and the grand jury when he was questioned about how he found out that Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the CIA and whether he shared that information with the media, attorneys close to the case said.

Fitzgerald told the grand jury that Rove lied to investigators and the prosecutor eight out of the nine times he was questioned about the leak and also tried to cover-up his role in disseminating Plame Wilson's CIA status to at least two reporters.

Additionally, an FBI investigator reread to jurors testimony from other witnesses in the case that purportedly implicates Rove in playing a role in the leak and the campaign to discredit Plame Wilson's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, whose criticism of the Bush administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence lead to his wife being unmasked as a covert CIA operative.

Luskin said Rove has not discussed any plea deal with Fitzgerald.

"Mr. Rove's cooperation is not contingent on any plea agreement with the prosecutor," Luskin said. "He has always cooperated voluntarily and unconditionally."

Luskin would not discuss the substance of his most recent communication with Fitzgerald nor would he say whether Rove would testify against his former White House colleague, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, who was indicted in the leak case for perjury and obstruction of justice.

Luskin wouldn't comment on whether the investigation of Rove continues to center on alleged misleading statements to which Rove testified regarding a July 2003 conversation he had about Plame Wilson with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper.

Sources close to the investigation, however, confirmed that is exactly what Fitzgerald has continued to focus on and what he discussed with the grand jury Wednesday.

Luskin said that Rove simply forgot about his conversation with Cooper when he testified before the grand jury because Rove had been dealing with other pressing matters, such as Bush's reelection campaign.

Rove's story began to unravel when Fitzgerald discovered the existence of an email Rove sent to then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley after he spoke with Cooper on July 11, 2003.

Rove did not disclose the existence of the email during his first two appearances before the grand jury. Rove testified that he found out about Plame Wilson after her identity was disclosed in several news stories.

"I didn't take the bait," Rove wrote in the email to Hadley immediately following his conversation with Cooper. "Matt Cooper called to give me a heads-up that he's got a welfare reform story coming. When he finished his brief heads-up he immediately launched into Niger. Isn't this damaging? Hasn't the president been hurt? I didn't take the bait, but I said if I were him I wouldn't get Time far out in front on this."

Hadley, sources said, is also a subject of the investigation.

In December, Luskin made a desperate attempt to keep his client out of Fitzgerald's crosshairs.

Luskin revealed to Fitzgerald that Viveca Novak - a reporter working for Time magazine who wrote several stories about the Plame Wilson case - inadvertently tipped him off in early 2004 that her colleague at the magazine, Matt Cooper, would be forced to testify that Rove was his source who told him about Plame Wilson's CIA status.

Novak - who bears no relation to syndicated columnist Robert Novak, the journalist who first published Plame Wilson's name and CIA status in a July 14, 2003, column - met Luskin in Washington, DC, in the summer of 2004, and over drinks, the two discussed Fitzgerald's investigation into the Plame Wilson leak.

Luskin assured Novak that Rove learned Plame Wilson's name and CIA status after it was published in news accounts and that only then did he phone other journalists to draw their attention to it. But Novak told Luskin that everyone in the Time newsroom knew Rove was Cooper's source and that he would testify to that in an upcoming grand jury appearance, these sources said.

According to Luskin's account, after he met with Viveca Novak he contacted Rove and told him about his conversation with her. The two of them then began an exhaustive search through White House phone logs and emails for any evidence that proved that Rove had spoken with Cooper. Luskin said that during this search an email was found that Rove sent to Hadley immediately and it was subsequently turned over to Fitzgerald.

Still, Rove's account of his conversation with Cooper went nothing like he described in his email to Hadley, according to an email Cooper sent to his editor at Time magazine following his conversation with Rove in July 2003.

"It was, KR said, [former Ambassador Joseph] Wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized [Wilson's] trip," Cooper's July 11, 2003, email to his editor said.

Well, let's see, pundits said Fitz would wrap up the case in a few weeks if there were no other targets. It's been, what? Five months now?


...tick...tick...tick...

blueflame, Good article. Repubs still don't get it! Bush said at the beginning of the leak that anybody found leaking the information on Plame will not work in his administration, then changed it to "if they are crimanally charged." If Bush is responsible for the leak, he needs to resign, but any charges against him will not be forthcoming.

I can't imagine how so many Americans can still support Bush as our president. He's a liar, a terrorist, a killer, and the worst enemy Americans ever had.

I know your memory is a bit faulty, c.i., but you have been wrong every time you have made this claim in this thread. LINK

How many times do you need to be reminded of this before it sticks?

Rove is going to be indicted.

Bullshit

From the NYT:

In Court Filings, Cheney Aide Says Bush Approved Leak
Sign In to E-Mail This Print Save

By DAVID JOHNSTON and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: April 6, 2006
WASHINGTON, April 6 ?- President Bush authorized Vice President Dick Cheney in July 2003 to permit Mr. Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., to leak key portions of a classified prewar intelligence estimate on Iraq, according to Mr. Libby's grand jury testimony.

Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia

Video: David Sanger on Libby Case
Related
Text: Government Filing (U.S. v. Libby)

What I Didn't Find in Africa: Op-Ed by Joseph C. Wilson IV (July 6, 2003) The testimony, cited in a court filing by the government late Wednesday, provides the first indication that Mr. Bush, who has long assailed leaks of classified information as a national security threat, played a direct role in the disclosure of the intelligence report on Iraq at a moment that the White House was trying to defend itself against charges that it had inflated the case against Saddam Hussein.

If Mr. Libby's account is accurate, it also involves Mr. Bush directly in the swirl of events surrounding the disclosure of the identity of an undercover C.I.A. officer.

The president has the legal power to declassify information, and Mr. Libby indicated in his testimony that the president's decision ?- which he said was conveyed through Mr. Cheney ?- gave him legal cover to pass on information contained in a National Intelligence Estimate.

A little more than a week later, under continuing pressure, the White House published a declassified version of the executive summary of the estimate, in an effort to make the case that Mr. Bush was justified in arguing, in his 2003 State of the Union address, that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium in Africa.

But the political impact of the disclosure could be significant. It suggests that Mr. Libby, who has been charged with perjury and obstruction in the C.I.A. leak case, may argue as part of his defense that any information he leaked was on the instructions of his two superiors, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush. However, the sections of the N.I.E. that Mr. Libby said he was freed to discuss make no mention of Valerie Plame, the C.I.A. officer who was exposed in the course of the arguments over the intelligence, prompting the leak investigation.

The disclosure prompted Democrats to demand that the White House be forthcoming about Mr. Bush's role. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, released a statement saying: "In light of today's shocking revelation, President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information. The American people must know the truth."

The court filing, which was first reported this morning on the New York Sun Web site, said that Mr. Libby testified that the "Vice President advised defendant that the President had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the NIE."

The prosecutors said that Mr. Libby testified that he recalled the circumstances "getting approval from the President through the Vice President to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval ?- were unique in his recollection."

The leak was intended, the court papers suggested, as a rebuttal to the Op-Ed article published in the New York Times on July 6, by Joseph C. Wilson, IV, a former ambassador and the husband of Ms. Plame. Mr. Wilson wrote that he had traveled to Africa in 2002 after Mr. Cheney had raised questions about possible nuclear purchases. Mr. Wilson wrote that he concluded it was "highly doubtful" Iraq had sought to nuclear fuel from Niger.

At Mr. Cheney's office, the Op-Ed article was viewed "as a direct attack on credibility of the Vice President (and the President) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq," according to the court papers.

The presidential authorization was provided, the court papers said, in advance of a meeting on July 8, 2003 between Mr. Libby and Judith Miller, then a reporter for the New York Times. Mr. Libby brought a brief abstract of the N.I.E.'s key judgments to the meeting with Ms. Miller in the lobby of the St. Regis Hotel about two blocks from the White House.

Mr. Libby testified, the prosecutors said, that he was "specifically authorized in advance of the meeting to disclose the key judgments of the classified N.I.E. to Miller on that occasion because it was thought that the N.I.E. was "pretty definitive" against what Ambassador Wilson had said and that the Vice President thought that it was "very important" for the key judgments of the N.I.E. to come out."

The court filing said that Mr. Libby said "he understood that he was to tell Miller, among other things, that a key judgment of the N.I.E. held that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium." Mr. Libby, the prosecutors, said, testified that the meeting with Ms. Miller was the "only time he recalled in his government experience when he disclosed a document to a reporter that was effectively declassified by virtue of the president's authorization that it be disclosed."

Ms. Miller never published anything about the contents of the intelligence estimate.

Mr. Libby testified that he first told Mr. Cheney that he could not conduct such a conversation with Ms. Miller because the intelligence estimate on Iraq was classified. Mr. Libby testified that Mr. Cheney later told him that Mr. Bush had authorized the release of "relevant portions."

In addition, Mr. Libby told the grand jury that he also spoke with David Addington, then a lawyer for Mr. Cheney, whom Mr. Libby regarded as an expert on national security law. "Mr. Addington opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to declassification of the document," the court filing said.

Mr. Libby testified that at the meeting, he did not discuss Mr. Wilson's wife, because "he had forgotten by that time that he learned about Ms. Wilson's C.I.A. employment a month earlier from the Vice President."

Ms. Miller, in her Oct. 16, 2005, account of the meeting, said that her notes showed that the two had discussed Mr. Wilson's wife, who, according to her notes, worked in a unit of the C.I.A. that is engaged in the intelligence assessments of unconventional weapons.

Ms. Miller said that Mr. Libby discussed a chronology of what she said he described as "credible evidence" of Iraq's efforts to acquire uranium. She made no reference to whether Mr. Libby referred to any material as derived from the intelligence estimate, but said that he alluded to two reports, one in 1999 and another in 2002, that seemed to support the contention that Iraq was interested in obtaining uranium.

MSNBC confirms: Outed CIA agent was working on Iran

RAW STORY
Published: Monday May 1, 2006




On Chris Matthews' Hardball Monday evening, just moments ago, MSNBC correspondent David Shuster confirmed what RAW STORY first reported in February: that outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson was working on Iran at the time she was outed.

RAW STORY's Larisa Alexandrovna broke the story earlier this year, which went unnoticed by the mainstream media (Read our full story).

According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.

Reports Shuster in this rush transcript: "INTELLIGENCE SOURCES SAY VALERIE WILSON WAS PART OF AN OPERATION THREE YEARS AGO TRACKING THE PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS MATERIAL INTO IRAN. AND THE SOURCES ALLEGE THAT WHEN MRS. WILSON'S COVER WAS BLOWN, THE ADMINISTRATION'S ABILITY TO TRACK IRAN'S NUCLEAR AMBITIONS WAS DAMAGED AS WELL."

MSNBC transcript follows (we apologize for the caps; they were in the original). If you've got the video, send it to [email protected].

#
Matthews: Ever since the White House/CIA leak scandal erupted, the nation has seen photographs here and there of Valerie Wilson, the CIA operative whose identity was blown. Now, thanks to a black tie event Saturday night, we have some video. Hardball correspondent David Shuster brings it to us and has the latest on the CIA leak case.

(David Shuster)

FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS REVEALED HER UNDERCOVER IDENTITY AND RUINED HER CAREER --- FORMER CIA OPERATIVE VALERIE WILSON... ACCOMPANIED BY HER HUSBAND JOE WILSON, STEPPED IN FRONT OF THE TELEVISION CAMERAS. AND THEIR RED CARPET APPEARANCE SATURDAY NIGHT AT THE WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT'S DINNER COULD NOT HAVE COME AT A MORE DRAMATIC MOMENT IN THE CIA LEAK INVESTIGATION ITSELF.

PROSECUTOR PATRICK FITZGERALD IS WEIGHING WHETHER TO INDICT TOP PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR KARL ROVE, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BUSH'S BRAIN. AND, WHITE HOUSE SUPPORTERS ARE STEPPING UP THEIR ARGUMENT THAT UNVEILING WILSON'S IDENITY WAS NOT A CRIME. JOE WILSON'S RESPONSE?

Wilson: "Well the CIA I think has responded first by asking the Justice Department to open an investigation and my judgment the leak of national security information is a betrayal a minimum of one's security clearance and certainly of the public trust and I for one can't understand how Mr. Rove remains on the payroll of the US Government."

EARLY IN THE CASE, ROVE ADMITTED TO INVESTIGATORS THAT HE OUTED VALERIE WILSON'S IDENTITY TO COLUMNIST ROBERT NOVAK -- NOVAK WAS THE FIRST JOURNALIST TO PUBLISH WILSON'S IDENTITY AND THE FIRST TO TALK ABOUT IT TO INVESTIGATORS.

AND LAST WEEK, KARL ROVE TESTIFIED AGAIN HE MAY HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THE WILSON'S WITH TIME MAGAZINE'S MATT COOPER.

ROVE SAID HE DENIED THAT UNDER OATH FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THE INVESTIGATION BECAUSE OF MEMORY PROBLEMS. A CASE OF BAD MEMORY IS SCOOTER LIBBY'S DEFENSE.

BUT IN REGARDS TO KARL ROVE, LAWYERS IN THE CASE SAY PROSECUTOR FITZGERALD IS STILL TROUBLED BY THE TIMING OF ROVE'S ROLLING DISCLOSURES: IT SEEMS THAT ROVE'S MEMORY PERKS UP WITH EVERY NEW INDICATION SOMEONE ELSE WILL EXPOSE HIM. WHEN ROVE FINALLY BEGAN TO UPDATE HIS TESTIMONY IN OCTOBER 2004... IT WAS JUST DAYS AFTER COOPER WAS FIRST HELD IN CONTEMPT FOR REFUSING TO DISCLOSE CONFIDENTIAL SOURCES. AND ROVE DID NOT GIVE COOPER A CLEAR WAIVER TO TESTIFY UNTIL AFTER COOPER'S APPEALS HAD BEEN EXHAUSTED 9 MONTHS LATER.

IN ANY CASE, AS PROSECUTOR PATRICK FITZGERALD CONSIDERS WHETHER TO CHARGE KARL ROVE WITH PERJURY, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, OR WORSE... MSNBC HAS LEARNED NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE WHITE HOUSE LEAKS.

INTELLIGENCE SOURCES SAY VALERIE WILSON WAS PART OF AN OPERATION THREE YEARS AGO TRACKING THE PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS MATERIAL INTO IRAN. AND THE SOURCES ALLEGE THAT WHEN MRS. WILSON'S COVER WAS BLOWN, THE ADMINISTRATION'S ABILITY TO TRACK IRAN'S NUCLEAR AMBITIONS WAS DAMAGED AS WELL.

THE WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERS IRAN TO BE ONE OF AMERICA'S BIGGEST THREATS.

President George W. Bush: "the Iranians should not have a nuclear weapon, the capacity to make a nuclear weapon, or the knowledge as to how to make a nuclear weapon. And now that we've got the goal in mind, we're working on the tactics."

BUT THE TACTICS ARE NOT AS CLEAR IN THE MIDST OF RECORD LOW APPROVAL RATINGS AND A DIPLOMATIC AND MILITARY PLAYING FIELD LIMITED BY THE U-S WAR IN IRAQ.

Madeleine Albright: "The world is in total turmoil right now. Worst I've ever seen it. (reporter) How do we get out of it? Whats the number one issue as far as whats related to that turmoil? (Albright) Iraq. (reporter) What do we do about it? (Albright walks away)

THE IRAQ WAR IS THE BACKDROP FOR THE CIA LEAK CASE. JOE WILSON HAD CRITICIZED THE ADMINISTRATION'S CASE FOR THE IRAQ WAR... AND THE WHITE HOUSE TRIED TO UNDERCUT HIM BY LEAKING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, INFORMATION ABOUT HIS CIA WIFE.

Shuster: THE WILSONS SAY THEY'VE SPOKEN TO PROSECUTOR PATRICK FITZGERALD TWICE SINCE THE CASE BEGAN... AND THE LAST TIME WAS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. SO, THEY ARE WAITING, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE, FOR SOME SORT OF ANNOUNCEMENT FROM FITZGERALD'S OFFICE ABOUT ROVE. KARL ROVE'S ATTORNEYS SAY THEY'VE BEEN TOLD BY FITZGERALD THAT NO DECISION WILL BE MADE FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER WEEK. CHRIS?

I'm not so sure why Fitzgerald's investigation is taking so long; most of the stuff must be all old hat and repetitions. How long does it take to keep asking the same question if it's that important? How many versions in the answer is Fitzgerald looking for?

ci, ya gotta remember a few facts about the case.

First, Fitzgerald is reportedly one of the best in the biz. Thorough. Broke up some organized crime over the last fifteen years. He wouldn't bring a case forward unless it was solid, and that takes a long time when the criminal organization that you are dealing with has the resources of the WH.

Second, The stakes are huge; we all know that this case could lead up to the VP or Prez himself. Fitz was given the explicit ability to investigate other crimes during his investigation, and there is some thought that Fitz has been looking into acts of pre-war intelligence manipulation.

Third, Fitzgerald has been working on a couple of other cases simultaneously- Lord Conrad Black case, and the recent Gov. Ryan indictment; Mayor Daly in Chicago, and the RISCISO indictments he just started on in Feburary.

He's just plain busy and thorough. Give it time, and it will all come out in the end. Here's the money quote that makes me think so:



Cycloptichorn