You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #162: Sealed vs Sealed: Fitz' automatic "Doomsday Machine" response to any "dismissal attack"? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #83
162. Sealed vs Sealed: Fitz' automatic "Doomsday Machine" response to any "dismissal attack"?
Edited on Sat Feb-17-07 04:07 AM by tiptoe
I agree with all you posted above, and have resisted earlier speculating about Sealed vs Sealed. IIRC a previous post by someone with experience, such documents typically remained sealed only about a month. The current Sealed vs Sealed has remained so far, far longer than that. I can't imagine the legal community -- academic and applied -- having not reflected long and hard over the years about Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre and having not come up with a "plan" on how to best/better deal with future SNM-attempts by the PTB, prior to appeals to the SCOTUS.

I have no qualifications/experience to consider what legal processes/consequences/arrangements might/could/would be desirable (and/or possible) by use of a Sealed-vs-Sealed document for automatic response (i.e. as one element, perhaps, of the document*) to the contingency of an attempt by the President (or other High Officer under investigation) to baselessly remove the Special Counsel. Gonzales has already identified himself (see #154) as recused from receiving information about Fitzgerald's investigation in addition to making or participating in decisions regarding the investigation, unlike his relationships, presumably, with the six USDAs whose resignations he sought and got...voluntarily. "Without information about the investigation"** Gonzales and, by extension, the White House lack even the theoretical grounds under which Mr Comey said he, himself, could "end it" theoretically for Fitzgerald: "Well, in theory, if I know what he's doing, in theory I could, yeah." Since neither Gonzales nor the White House (nor even Comey!) has legitimate information base to "know what [Fitzgerald's] doing [investigating]"...none has the theoretical background-basis for legally seeking Fitzgerald's removal.

**Comey (in his capacity of acting-Attorney General wrt to the investigative area AG-Gonzales was obliged to recuse) defined and passed along authorities to another -- i.e. perpetuated his AG-role wrt Plame in Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald -- before subsequently (strategically?) resigning himself from same. By resigning, Comey removed himself as the only legitimate recipient of investigation-information from the Special Counsel, and the Special Counsel no longer would report to anyone regarding the Plame investigation and any other matters of federal law violations extending from that limited-arena investigation. Presumably, Fitzgarald, with all the authority of the AG granted him by subsequently-resigned Comey wrt to the Plame investigation and any other areas of Fedral law violation that investigation may lead, has the capacity to perform what Comey did, i.e. to perpetuate the Special Counsel role in another, IF Fitzgerald ever should, like Comey, resign voluntarily, or otherwise leave office (including death***). (The six USDAs who reported to Gonzales and who "resigned" did not have such recourse.) But Fitzgerald might never have the opportunity to exercise the perpetuation of the Special Counsel role ex post officio (?), i.e. after either leaving his office or, possibly, during any period of legal challenge limbo. One element of Sealed vs Sealed may be preparations by the Special Counsel in the event of a "dismissal attack" by parties being investigated, as but one of the contingencies -- an automatic one -- "triggering" the unsealing of at least some aspects of the document by parties other than Fitzgerald.

***If Fitz' should die -- perish the thought -- AG-Gonzales still would be recused from appointing a successor, which role presumably would pass to the party now in the office Comey once occupied (Deputy AG...see, too, Newsweek- Fitzgerald Could [Be] Thwarted by Comey's Replacement ...Does Fitzgerald report on the investigation to the Deputy Attorney General who replaced Comey?? I wouldn't think so, since the replacement Deputy AG -- a possible Bush crony? -- is not at the same level Comey was (acting-AG for Plame) at the time AG-authority wrt Plame was passed to Fitzgerald...but I'm not sure.)...unless Fitzgerald has somehow prepared for the contingency of his leaving office, one way or another, already. (an element and/or contingency of the unsealing, in some part, of Sealed vs Sealed??)

*I suspect there's more to Sealed vs Sealed than issues with Rove and Gonzales.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -ADMINISTRATION SETTING TABLE FOR DISMISSAL OF PATRICK FITGERALD !!! Tin Man  Feb-13-07 02:51 PM   #0 
  - Wasn't the so-called 'Saturday Night Massacre' the last straw for Nixon's presidency?  htuttle   Feb-13-07 02:54 PM   #1 
  - yes, but we are a dumber public now and will just let it happen  itsmesgd   Feb-13-07 02:58 PM   #7 
  - Kind of off-topic, but I'd say we are less educated on purpose.  LonelyLRLiberal   Feb-13-07 06:01 PM   #109 
  - You have to remember that back in the mid '70's,  femrap   Feb-13-07 06:19 PM   #113 
  - The difference is the timing. Cox had just begun investigation. Fitz has now "completed" his.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:00 PM   #8 
  - I don't doubt what you're saying but he did ask if the leak was part of what he was  cui bono   Feb-14-07 04:37 AM   #148 
  - Well, yeah, that was the beginning of th end for Crafty Richard.  Jackpine Radical   Feb-13-07 03:00 PM   #9 
  - That was back in the days  seasonedblue   Feb-13-07 03:06 PM   #16 
  - Yes, the attorney general refused to do Nixon's bidding. HUGE historical  robinlynne   Feb-13-07 03:16 PM   #26 
     - Absolutely! How many people did tricky dick go through before he found someone who would? n/t  hootinholler   Feb-13-07 05:04 PM   #87 
        - Didn't Bork finally do the firing? nt  femrap   Feb-13-07 06:20 PM   #114 
           - Yes, Nixon went through two AG, before settling on Bork to do his dirty work.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 07:12 PM   #129 
  - The mainstream media is much more compliant now  NewJeffCT   Feb-13-07 03:30 PM   #43 
  - It won't even go -that- well, because the "LW HEAD" will be Joe Lieberman. nm  dicksteele   Feb-13-07 03:40 PM   #47 
  - I think I saw that interview on Hannity & Colmes last night (eom)  WhaTHellsgoingonhere   Feb-15-07 12:13 PM   #159 
  - Bingo  malaise   Feb-13-07 04:02 PM   #59 
  - Except the GOP didn't control most broadcast media back then.  blm   Feb-13-07 04:03 PM   #62 
  - I remember that like it was yesterday  Jacobin   Feb-13-07 05:37 PM   #104 
     - I remember it very clearly as well....  femrap   Feb-13-07 06:24 PM   #116 
  - Interesting speculation.  Jackpine Radical   Feb-13-07 02:55 PM   #2 
  - Um, they could fire Fitz any time they wanted to.  Kagemusha   Feb-13-07 02:55 PM   # 
  - Timing is everything. Once Libby is convicted, "there's no longer any need" for Fitz to continue  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:03 PM   #13 
     - I'm just saying that was never not in the talking points.  Kagemusha   Feb-13-07 03:08 PM   #18 
     - To counter that point,  Qutzupalotl   Feb-13-07 05:49 PM   #106 
  - I wish I could  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 02:55 PM   #3 
  - Nope. n/t  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 02:56 PM   #4 
  - I scrolled down for your name to see your "take"  Horse with no Name   Feb-13-07 03:00 PM   #10 
  - why?  LSK   Feb-13-07 03:07 PM   #17 
  - Because  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 03:25 PM   #37 
     - the Bush admin has the same problem  LSK   Feb-13-07 03:28 PM   #42 
  - boy, you sure have a lot of valentines!  robinlynne   Feb-13-07 03:17 PM   #27 
  - He sure does!  cat_girl25   Feb-13-07 03:51 PM   #54 
  - I agree, nope nt  Crabby Appleton   Feb-13-07 04:39 PM   #78 
  - You can do better than that.  Morgana LaFey   Feb-13-07 06:36 PM   #118 
  - I'm on htuttle's wavelength on this one. Dismissing prosecutors  Old Crusoe   Feb-13-07 02:56 PM   #5 
  - See my #8 or #13 replies - it's all about the timing of the dismissal  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:05 PM   #15 
     - Intended my response to be in support of your info...  Old Crusoe   Feb-13-07 03:13 PM   #21 
  - I wish what you say didn't make sense, but it does.  SharonRB   Feb-13-07 02:58 PM   #6 
  - BINGO! When I read Fred Thompson's statement I thought  KoKo01   Feb-13-07 03:02 PM   #11 
  - I'm going to consult w an old experienced prosecutor for a reasoned opinion.  lonestarnot   Feb-13-07 03:02 PM   #12 
  - Nothing they do can shock me anymore.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:10 PM   #20 
     - Old prosecutor says no. Special provisions for special prosecutors.  lonestarnot   Feb-13-07 03:40 PM   #48 
     - But at Fitz's appointment, Deputy Attorney General Comey suggested otherwise  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:15 PM   #66 
        - That is just blah blah blah. Ain't happening.  lonestarnot   Feb-13-07 07:05 PM   #127 
        - "in practicum" is what matters  SemperEadem   Feb-15-07 12:35 PM   #161 
     - Gonzales has a snittier smirk than W....  femrap   Feb-13-07 06:26 PM   #117 
  - The clarifying letter from Comey to Fitzgerald, spelling out  Spazito   Feb-13-07 03:03 PM   #14 
  - but the precedent is established. US Attorney General Gonzales only need wave his hand..  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:13 PM   #22 
  - way wrong. n/t  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 03:13 PM   #23 
  - How is Fitz any different from the recently terminated Gonzo Six?  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:19 PM   #30 
  - He's acting as "special counsel" here,  Marie26   Feb-13-07 05:21 PM   #96 
  - Gonzales recused himself from the CIA Leak Case: He has no legal interest in Fitzgerald (!) ...  tiptoe   Feb-15-07 11:25 AM   #154 
  - Excellent find!  Spazito   Feb-15-07 11:29 AM   #155 
  - Gonzales already distinguished Pat Fitzgerald as THE determiner of "what will happen going forward"  tiptoe   Feb-15-07 11:54 AM   #157 
  - I hope you are WAY RIGHT about it being Way Wrong!  ClayZ   Feb-13-07 03:27 PM   #41 
     - I am. n/t  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 04:36 PM   #73 
  - No, in this case, Fitzgerald is NOT serving as US District  Spazito   Feb-13-07 03:18 PM   #29 
  - But in that capacity, Fitz is still under Gonzales. And if Alberto says:  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:21 PM   #32 
     - Wrong.  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 03:23 PM   #34 
     - I believe in my OP, I requested that somebody *show me* I'm wrong  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:25 PM   #36 
     - Read.  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 03:26 PM   #39 
        - Wrong.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:28 PM   #68 
           - Read further. n/t  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 04:34 PM   #70 
     - I hope you are right.  Seldona   Feb-13-07 05:05 PM   #88 
     - Fitz's boss atthe time he was assigned this case set it up so Fitz can not be removed!  flyarm   Feb-13-07 05:09 PM   #93 
  - He can fire him as US Attorney  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 03:20 PM   #31 
  - Thanks Julie. Now we're getting somewhere.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:27 PM   #40 
  - actually, I think only the pres can fire a us attorney  onenote   Feb-13-07 03:32 PM   #44 
     - We just went through this in Seattle  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 03:58 PM   #57 
        - Regarding authority of Gonzo to remove Special Council, see seasonedblue's post #49 below.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:08 PM   #64 
        - TinMan, I've read James Comey's comments on the appointment of Mr. Fitzgerald previously  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 04:39 PM   #77 
           - Just to add to your comments, the press conference  Spazito   Feb-13-07 05:10 PM   #94 
        - McKay resigned  onenote   Feb-13-07 05:32 PM   #100 
  - Don't think you are right  onenote   Feb-13-07 03:24 PM   #35 
     - Gonzales just did *exactly that* to six other USDAs - under powers "derived" from the Patriot Act  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:33 PM   #45 
        - Tin Man,  seasonedblue   Feb-13-07 03:41 PM   #49 
        - Thanks for that info. If Comey figured he had the authority, then by extension, Gonzales has it too.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 03:53 PM   #55 
        - This press conference took place Dec/2003 before....  Spazito   Feb-13-07 05:06 PM   #89 
           - Thank you,  seasonedblue   Feb-13-07 06:56 PM   #126 
           - Good work, Spaz - a gold star for your succint explanation  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 08:06 PM   #132 
              - Thanks, Tin Man! Posting theories, opinions are the best  Spazito   Feb-13-07 09:13 PM   #137 
                 - Yes, and it's always good  seasonedblue   Feb-15-07 12:02 PM   #158 
                    - I think your posting the press conference was a GOOD thing!  Spazito   Feb-15-07 12:14 PM   #160 
        - special protections for special prosecutors regardless of patriot cow paddy.  lonestarnot   Feb-13-07 03:42 PM   #50 
        - wrong. Gonzales did not fire the other USDAs under powers from the Patriot Act  onenote   Feb-13-07 05:22 PM   #97 
           - "Stepping down" is defacto firing. People don't volunteer to resign without credible threat  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 05:31 PM   #99 
              - right. but I don't think Fitz is susceptible to that sort of intimidation  onenote   Feb-13-07 05:34 PM   #102 
  - Bingo  proud patriot   Feb-13-07 05:35 PM   #103 
  - The cat is out of the bag...  Hubert Flottz   Feb-13-07 03:08 PM   #19 
  - You're right - we need Keith Olbermann to mention this - put it on the record  file83   Feb-14-07 12:22 AM   #140 
  - It will be on a Friday with other events dominating the news  herbster   Feb-13-07 03:14 PM   #24 
  - This is discouraging...  meldroc   Feb-13-07 03:14 PM   #25 
  - Fitz is not an Independent Counsel. Independent Counsel law expired in 1999 & was not renewed. n/t  Garbo 2004   Feb-14-07 03:34 AM   #147 
     - Actually, it was the independent prosecutor law that expired  JulieRB   Feb-15-07 11:53 AM   #156 
  - I wonder what took them so long?  The Backlash Cometh   Feb-13-07 03:18 PM   #28 
  - It sounds like Fitz is on the right track  C_U_L8R   Feb-13-07 03:23 PM   #33 
  - Well, good luck with that.  aquart   Feb-13-07 03:26 PM   #38 
  - Never in hell  WilliamPitt   Feb-13-07 03:36 PM   #46 
  - Thank you.  lonestarnot   Feb-13-07 03:42 PM   #52 
  - Altho Fitz cannot be removed, the US Attorneys recently were, hamstringing  Dems Will Win   Feb-13-07 03:49 PM   #53 
  - It's also important  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 04:02 PM   #60 
  - What cause did Nixon have for firing Cox????  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:33 PM   #69 
     - Nope.  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 04:35 PM   #71 
        - Gonzo and Bush are free to invent reasons, too.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:37 PM   #74 
           - You are silly.  H2O Man   Feb-13-07 04:38 PM   #76 
              - If you need a refresher: Time Magazine. Oct. 29, 1973  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:42 PM   #80 
  - Iraq.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:04 PM   #63 
  - If you don't think they've already been over his background  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 04:48 PM   # 
     - He wanted to get a cat? Off-topic but  glitch   Feb-13-07 06:01 PM   #108 
        - It's time for some off-topic Patrick Fitzgerald love!  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 06:38 PM   #120 
  - In their arrogance, however, I have heard several supporters of  Arkansas Granny   Feb-13-07 04:27 PM   #67 
  - You're right. "Plame wasn't undercover. It's a witch hunt by the Bush haters..." yadda yadda yadda  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:35 PM   #72 
  - Seeing "seventeen kinds of fresh hell" set loose amoung the cabal  sellitman   Feb-13-07 06:48 PM   #123 
  - Am I the only one in the world  JulieRB   Feb-13-07 06:51 PM   #124 
     - Someone upthread made a good point about this.  WilliamPitt   Feb-13-07 07:11 PM   #128 
        - Or maybe someone in Congress will ask him to testify.  conscious evolution   Feb-13-07 07:39 PM   #130 
  - I'm sure our courageous risk-taking media has lots of runaway brides, diapered astronauts,  aint_no_life_nowhere   Feb-13-07 03:42 PM   #51 
  - Why is it that all-caps titles always lead to a lousy post?  La_Fourmi_Rouge   Feb-13-07 03:55 PM   #56 
  - If I could recommend a post in this thread it would be yours  Laurab   Feb-13-07 06:44 PM   #121 
  - I double dog dare 'em !  TorchesAndPitchforks   Feb-13-07 03:59 PM   #58 
  - K& R.  Cobalt Violet   Feb-13-07 04:02 PM   #61 
  - kinda late for that if you ask me  HuffleClaw   Feb-13-07 04:15 PM   #65 
  - I think they hired Fitz cause he's a repuke, and figured that HE would be their patsy nt  gulfcoastliberal   Feb-13-07 04:37 PM   #75 
  - That's what I thought when I read Thompson's remarks  SquireJons   Feb-13-07 04:42 PM   #79 
  - Agree wholeheartedly, 100% - nt  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 04:49 PM   #82 
  - So, God forbid, suppose no one beyond Libby is convicted...  Frustratedlady   Feb-13-07 04:48 PM   #81 
  - I would defer to H20 Man's judgment (and crystal ball) on anything to do with  Peace Patriot   Feb-13-07 04:54 PM   #83 
  - Sealed vs Sealed: Fitz' automatic "Doomsday Machine" response to any "dismissal attack"?  tiptoe   Feb-17-07 03:07 AM   #162 
     - And in answer to my premature question: "Does Fitz' report...to anyone in AG Office?"...from #110:  tiptoe   Feb-17-07 05:20 AM   #163 
  - Wait, So That Melodramatic All Caps Header And Rambling Body All Came Down To "Cause I Think So"???  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Feb-13-07 04:54 PM   #84 
  - Read it again.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 05:01 PM   #86 
  - No Thanks. I Wasted Enough Time Already Reading It The First Time.  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Feb-13-07 05:07 PM   #91 
     - Yours, by contrast, are non-existent. Same as it ever was.  Jim Sagle   Feb-13-07 11:31 PM   #139 
  - Perhaps the handle of the OP  Patsy Stone   Feb-13-07 06:51 PM   #125 
  - I see but...  JackRiddler   Feb-13-07 05:00 PM   #85 
  - Or alternatively, attack Iraq, then shitcan Fitz - and Cheney stays put.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 05:06 PM   #90 
  - Why bother?  Marie26   Feb-13-07 05:07 PM   #92 
  - The action would *NOT* happen now. Libby's trial will conclude, with Fitz in charge.  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 05:24 PM   #98 
     - There's no indication they're planning to do that  Marie26   Feb-13-07 05:34 PM   #101 
     - Yes, they won't fire Fitz in the middle. But once Libby is convicted, no "need" for Fitz to remain  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 05:44 PM   #105 
        - Nah  Marie26   Feb-13-07 05:53 PM   #107 
     - It's not Fitz's grand jury. It's not a special grand jury dedicated solely to Fitz's investigation.  Garbo 2004   Feb-14-07 03:22 AM   #146 
        - GJ term expires this April  Tin Man   Feb-14-07 08:47 AM   #150 
           - Fitzgerald can always use a regular Federal grand jury....  Spazito   Feb-14-07 09:06 AM   #151 
  - No need to fire Fitzgerald....  MilesColtrane   Feb-13-07 05:11 PM   #95 
  - Yes, "Plan A" is to sacrifice Libby. What I have described is "Plan B"  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 06:17 PM   #112 
  - Fitz can't be removed as Special Counsel.  Independent_Liberal   Feb-13-07 06:08 PM   #110 
  - I remember the outrage when Nixon's people fucked with the justice system  antifaschits   Feb-13-07 06:17 PM   #111 
  - yeah, then Conyers will appoint him special prosecuter  AZDemDist6   Feb-13-07 06:20 PM   #115 
  - Just want to add a comment on the Comey letter, and any reliance on a  Peace Patriot   Feb-13-07 06:37 PM   #119 
  - "We live in a bubble of Bush facism"  agincourt   Feb-14-07 12:35 AM   #141 
  - I love it..  sendero   Feb-13-07 06:48 PM   #122 
  - The most important thing on their agenda is to make a last gasp  higher class   Feb-13-07 07:51 PM   #131 
  - Did you go with TIN MAN just so that people would give you  BuyingThyme   Feb-13-07 08:12 PM   #133 
  - ROTFLMAO !!!  Tin Man   Feb-13-07 08:18 PM   #134 
  - Tin Man, you are scaring me big time...  derby378   Feb-13-07 08:22 PM   #135 
  - That is what I have been afraid of. They will not let anyone do the  jwirr   Feb-13-07 09:12 PM   #136 
  - I would imagine that the Congress wouldn't roll over for that.  Vinnie From Indy   Feb-13-07 09:41 PM   #138 
  - this IS the most corrupt administration in history, right?  Stephanie   Feb-14-07 12:42 AM   #142 
  - "The Man" speaks the truth as to the intentions of the "evil doers"  autorank   Feb-14-07 01:43 AM   #143 
  - Hmm, sounds complicated  ProudDad   Feb-14-07 01:43 AM   #144 
  - Totally vile, and completely logical.  Edweird   Feb-14-07 03:03 AM   #145 
  - Looks like people need to actually read legislation...  GreenEyedLefty   Feb-14-07 07:42 AM   #149 
  - Great post Tin Man  bobbie   Feb-14-07 10:47 AM   #152 
  - So, do they dismiss him now, during the Libby trial, or afterwards?  leveymg   Feb-14-07 02:49 PM   #153 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC