Skip to main content

The Indictments You Have...

For a while now, the GOP has been floating the "legal technicality" defense regarding the Plame Investigation (now indictments). Basically, the leak had no teeth, so Fitzgerald chased down a lesser charge to cover his tracks. However, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, "You go with the indictments you HAVE, not the indictments you might want."

During Fitzgerald's press conference, it became clear that he was intensely interested in only bringing indictments that he felt confident in prosecuting successfully. Interestingly, he made some crucial points about the indictments he did issue.

  1. National security was at the heart of the leak charge. CIA operatives have dangerous jobs and about the only security our nation can offer NOCs is that their identity won't be revealed. The leak was despicable and our safety has been threatened because of it. He also subtly implied that the specifics of the law may be too vague and narrow as written.
  2. The indictments are for serious crimes in and of themselves. The nature of these alleged crimes made it difficult, perhaps impossible, to discern the empirical truth of the original charge.
  3. If it is impossible to prove the original leak charge, justice will be served by a conviction on the indicted charges. Fitzgerald appears very confident about the indictments he has issued, and based on the 22 pages, one understands why.

On the issue of the future, he reiterated time and again how important it was to protect the secrecy and privacy of targets up to the point of indictment. If he couldn't make an indictment stick, there would be NO charges, nor ANY revelations about the target. In a not-too-veiled dig at Kenneth Starr, he deflated hopes that a report was forthcoming that would shine the light on other targets or the full breadth of the investigation.

So Karl's future is far from certain. You can bet that if he was completely in the clear, words to that effect would have been offered by Bush, Cheney, Luskin and Rove himself. Didn't happen. What does appear apparent is that the leak charge is probably too sticky to prosecute effectively. Since no one else was stupid enough to perjure themselves, it may be that Libby will be taking the fall alone.

Of course, if Scooter flips on someone...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Two Parties are NOT the same.

Thinking about the differences between the Dems and the Trump. Trump is promising "America First" jingoism without delivering anything but racism, while riding the economic tide of his predecessor. Consider what the Dems have been DEMANDED to fix. 1) Healthcare for all Americans 2) Student loan relief 3) A workable immigration solution 4) $15 min. wage and/or guaranteed income 5) Incremental gun regulation 6) Protecting the environment 7) Iran nuclear treaty 8) Thwarting Russian election interference 9) Reparations 10) Lowering taxes for middle class 11) Raising taxes for the 1% 12) Improving K-12 education 13) Rolling back Citizens United 14) Protecting Roe v. Wade 15) A satisfying DC Cinematic Universe (why not?) It's perfectly fine to be in your feelings if you are upset that this country is so f*cked that your particular issue is not being trumpeted by all (or any) of the Democratic primary candidates. It's even OK if you feel that the cur...

Open Letter to GOP recruiters

To whom it may concern: I am a telegenic, articulate, working, married father of two who owns his own house and a small business. Before you come knocking on my door, there are a few ground rules. Rule No. 1 No discussion of "The Party of Lincoln" without claiming Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms too. I know American history well enough, thank you. I also know that Thurmond was only a Democrat until the party decided to stand up for the rights of Black people. Then he jumped ship (while denying his own half-Black daughter) and led the drive to keeping a strong segregated state. Leave Lincoln in his grave (besides, we both know he didn't really emancipate very many don't we?) Rule No. 2 Liberal is not a bad word. It does not mean that Democrats love big government and spending tax dollars foolishly. That's Bush's job. Nor does it mean that I have been stroked and manipulated by a Leftist cabal that wants to think for me. Convince me on the merits of what YOU ...

An open letter to Bob Johnson

BJ... phi... bruh... Your tirade about Barack Obama is appalling. You earned your billion on the backs of ass-slapping videos, blaxploitation reruns and informercials and you have THE GALL to talk about being "insulted" that "we are so stupid?" Back at you, dawg. Incidentally, NOT ONE PERSON was confused about your thinly veiled reference about Obama's days "in the neighborhood." It was pathetic when the recently dismissed Clintonian flak floated it out there. Coming from you, it's traitorously venomous. We were smart enough to avoid buying tickets to "Who's Your Caddy?" and we're smart enough to understand your half-assed attempt at a smear. By the way, if you're going to "go there," have the balls to own up to it. Your backtrack about referring to his days as an organizer is even worse than the smear. Are we to understand that Obama's grass roots community leadership is somehow less legitimate than the...