understandinglife

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-20-05 01:22 PM
Original message

"Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner."

And, Fitzgerald is definitely not distracted by any of Bush's stunts, like nominating Roberts.

<clip>

So why has Bush not acted? It seems there are two possibilities. The first is that he is a man of his word only when it suits his interests. Rove has been instrumental in Bush's political success. Perhaps Bush meant to say that he has one set of rules for his advisers and another for everyone else. The second, more disturbing, possibility is that Bush authorized, either explicitly or implicitly, the leak to retaliate against Joseph C. Wilson IV, who publicly presented evidence that the administration was distorting facts to sell the American people on going to war. Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner.

From Will Bush give Rove a pass?

by DAVID GAGNE

July 20, 2005

More at the link:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2005/07/20/will_bush_give_rove_a_pass/

I agree with Mr Gagne that Bush has 'painted himself into corner.'

And, I think a third answer to the question "So, why has Bush not acted?" is that he has acted. He has knowingly provided protection for those who conspired and leaked Mrs Wilson's (Ms Plame's) covert status.

For several reasons I find the nomination of Roberts to be among the more pitiful 'last gasps' of a regime fully aware of its fate.

Let us remember that on February 15, 2005, the three judges of the Court of Appeals issued their contempt ruling on Miller and Cooper. Even a cursory reading of Judge Tatel's opinion makes clear that Cooper and Miller are being held in contempt because they are protecting one or more criminals.

Yesterday, Murray Waas, published insider information on Fitzgerald's investigation and, as you will see from the quotes I've selected, the information being cited about Rove is information that the Court of Appeals likely had well before their decision on February 15, 2005.

Let's compare a few quotes from Murray Waas July 19 2005 article, with comments from Judge Tatel's opinion, February 15, 2005:

Murray Waas: White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Rove�s first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.

Waas: The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.

From An Unlikely Story: Karl Rove's alibi would be easier to believe if he hadn't hidden it from FBI investigators in 2003

by Murray Waas

July 19, 2005

Link: http://www.prospect.org/web/printfriendly-view.ww?id=10016

Judge Tatel: .... because the communication is unworthy of protection , recipients� reactions are irrelevant to whether their testimony may be compelled in an investigation of the source. Indeed, Cooper�s own Time.com article illustrates this point. True, his story revealed a suspicious confluence of leaks, contributing to the outcry that led to this investigation. Yet the article had that effect precisely because the leaked information -- Plame�s covert status -- lacked significant news value. In essence, seeking protection for sources whose nefariousness he himself exposed, Cooper asks us to protect criminal leaks so that he can write about the crime.

<clip>

Yet it appears Cooper relied on the Plame leaks themselves, drawing the inference of sinister motive on his own. Accordingly, his story itself makes the case for punishing the leakers.

Link:
http://199.249.170.220/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000800474

Please note the persistent, consistent use of the plural by Judge Tatel: "sources," "criminal leaks," and "leakers."

So, now you may want to reflect on Lawrence O'Donnell's assessment of the severity of the situation and how Judge Tatel describes it:

One of the most important observations made by O'Donnell is precisely the fact that "all the judges who have seen the prosecutor�s secret evidence firmly believe he is pursuing a very serious crime, and they have done everything they can to help him get an indictment."

Specifically, O'Donnell notes:

"In February, Circuit Judge David Tatel joined his colleagues� order to Cooper and Miller despite his own, very lonely finding that indeed there is a federal privilege for reporters that can shield them from being compelled to testify to grand juries and give up sources. He based his finding on Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which authorizes federal courts to develop new privileges �in the light of reason and experience.� Tatel actually found that reason and experience �support recognition of a privilege for reporters� confidential sources.� But Tatel still ordered Cooper and Miller to testify because he found that the privilege had to give way to �the gravity of the suspected crime.�

Judge Tatel�s opinion has eight blank pages in the middle of it where he discusses the secret information the prosecutor has supplied only to the judges to convince them that the testimony he is demanding is worth sending reporters to jail to get. The gravity of the suspected crime is presumably very well developed in those redacted pages. Later, Tatel refers to �having carefully scrutinized voluminous classified filings.�

Some of us have theorized that the prosecutor may have given up the leak case in favor of a perjury case, but Tatel still refers to it simply as a case �which involves the alleged exposure of a covert agent.� Tatel wrote a 41-page opinion in which he seemed eager to make new law -- a federal reporters� shield law -- but in the end, he couldn�t bring himself to do it in this particular case. In his final paragraph, he says he �might have� let Cooper and Miller off the hook �were the leak at issue in this case less harmful to national security.�

From The One Very Good Reason Karl Rove Might Be Indicted

by Lawrence O'Donnell

July 7, 2005

Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/lawrence-odonnell/the-one-very-good-reason-_3769.html

See also:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4084675#4084722

Bush, Rove, Cheney, Libby, and many others may deflect a question or two by nominating Roberts, but Mr Fitzgerald seems undaunted in his pursuit of one or more individuals whom he has already convinced members of the judiciary are not just criminals, but criminals who have harmed our national security.

It's not just perjury or obstruction of justice, either, as Congressman Waxman and others have made clear. And, in protecting the nefariousness of others, Mr Bush, since at least July 14, 2003, has provided safe-harbor to those who damaged our national security.

Mr Bush has very publicly painted himself into a corner and he'll have to go through Mr Fitzgerald, for starters, to get out of that corner.

Let us also never forget that the act of revenge, in addition to its violation of our national security, was meant to be a signal to anyone attempting to expose the lies used by Bush to launch his illegal war of aggression on Iraq.

Hopefully, this time, folk like Senator Kerry will remember Iran-Contra, remember the deeds of folk like Abrams, and never allow this pack of traitors to escape full retribution for their crimes against our Constitution, our national security and humanity.

http://www.peacecandy.com/gwbush/remindus
REMIND US

Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - How ever long it takes, the day must come when tens of millions of caring individuals peacefully but persistently defy the dictator, deny the corporatists their cash flow, and halt the evil being done in Iraq and in all the other places the Bu$h neoconster regime is destroying civilization and the environment in the name of "America."

"Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner."

Treason-Gate

Let's DU him and ask for a PROGRESS REPORT!!!