|
Banned
|
The jury believed "Pat", ace....and what he told the press, on camera, and what he told the court....federal judges....ace....facts asserted by a prosecutor, Pat Fitzgerald, who is clean enough to survive Rove's "opposition research" efforts, unscathed....
....and what he has said contradicts your points, which are identical to the talking points that are posted on conservative websites and uttered by conservative pundits, all over this land, for the past 3-1/2 years:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801340_pf.html
Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference
Courtesy of FDCH e-MEDIA
Friday, October 28, 2005; 3:57 PM
FITZGERALD: Good afternoon. I'm Pat Fitzgerald. I'm the United States attorney in Chicago, but I'm appearing before you today as the Department of Justice special counsel in the CIA leak investigation.
Joining me, to my left, is Jack Eckenrode, the special agent in charge of the FBI office in Chicago, who has led the team of investigators and prosecutors from day one in this investigation.
A few hours ago, a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Columbia returned a five-count indictment against I. Lewis Libby, also known as Scooter Libby, the vice president's chief of staff.
The grand jury's indictment charges that Mr. Libby committed five crimes. The indictment charges one count of obstruction of justice of the federal grand jury, two counts of perjury and two counts of false statements.
Before I talk about those charges and what the indictment alleges, I'd like to put the investigation into a little context.
Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community.
Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.
FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security.
Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.
But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told.
In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson.
Now, something needs to be borne in mind about a criminal investigation.
FITZGERALD: I recognize that there's been very little information about this criminal investigation, but for a very good reason.
It may be frustrating when investigations are conducted in secret. When investigations use grand juries, it's important that the information be closely held.
So let me tell you a little bit about how an investigation works.
Investigators do not set out to investigate the statute, they set out to gather the facts.
It's critical that when an investigation is conducted by prosecutors, agents and a grand jury they learn who, what, when, where and why. And then they decide, based upon accurate facts, whether a crime has been committed, who has committed the crime, whether you can prove the crime and whether the crime should be charged.
Agent Eckenrode doesn't send people out when $1 million is missing from a bank and tell them, "Just come back if you find wire fraud." If the agent finds embezzlement, they follow through on that.
FITZGERALD: That's the way this investigation was conducted. It was known that a CIA officer's identity was blown, it was known that there was a leak. We needed to figure out how that happened, who did it, why, whether a crime was committed, whether we could prove it, whether we should prove it.
And given that national security was at stake, it was especially important that we find out accurate facts. ......
|
ace....if you're gonna continue to post your "stuff" with no support that comes close to matching or trumping mine....please strengthen your argument by offering support for a contention that Patrick Fitzgerald is mistaken, iis unreliable...so as not to be believable, or that he has lied in court filings or in statements to the press....there are video tapes, and transcripts. Or...post for us some reasons why Libby's lawyers did not try to prove that the testimony that Libby was convicted for falsely swearing to, was "not material", as a defense that you are attempting for him, here and now.....
....could this be why, ace?:
Quote:
http://noeasyanswer.blogspot.com/200...s-wilsons.html
Friday, November 17, 2006
Fitzgerald Response re: Mrs. Wilson's Employment (Paper 184)
Case 1:05-cr-00394-RBW Document 184 Filed 11/14/2006 Page 1 of 10
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) CR. NO. 05-394 (RBW)
v. )
)
I. LEWIS LIBBY )
also known as Scooter Libby )
GOVERNMENT'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT
RELATING TO VALERIE WILSON'S EMPLOYMENT STATUS
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, by its attorney, PATRICK J. FITZGERALD, Special
Counsel, respectfully submits the following memorandum of law in opposition to the Motion of I.
Lewis Libby to Preclude Evidence and Argument related to Valerie Wilson's employment status and
the actual or potential damage caused by public disclosure of that status.
INTRODUCTION
(From Page 2, bottom)
1
The government reserves the right to offer proof of the classified status of Ms. Wilson's
employment if the defendant contends that the questions and answers at issue were not material
to the grand jury investigation or seeks jury nullification based on the absence of such evidence.
To the government's knowledge, the defense intends to contend that defendant's answers were
accurate but if they were not accurate they were misremembered omg and does not intend that any
intentionally false statement was not material.
|
...and please forgive the link to a "blog" page for the preceding citation.
Document 184 is not located with other filings in the Libby case, here:
http://www.pegc.us/archive/US_v_Libby/
...and I cannot find document 184 elsewhere, but I am confident as to it's validity. May loquitur....if he's reading this, can validate it's authenticity, for us..... |