WP: Papers Say Leak Probe Is Over (new: possible perjury charge?)

[DeepModem Mom]

Papers Say Leak Probe Is Over

By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 7, 2005; Page A12


The special prosecutor investigating whether Bush administration officials illegally revealed the identity of a covert CIA operative says he finished his investigation months ago, except for questioning two reporters who have refused to testify.

The information in a March 22 court filing by special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald suggests that syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who first published the name of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame, has already spoken to investigators about his sources for that report, according to legal experts. Novak, whose July 2003 column sparked the investigation, and his attorney have refused to comment on whether he was questioned.

Legal experts and sources close to the case also speculated yesterday that Fitzgerald is not likely to seek an indictment for the crime he originally set out to investigate: whether a government official knowingly exposed a covert officer. The sources, who asked not to be named because the matter is the subject of a grand jury investigation, said Fitzgerald may instead seek to charge a government official with committing perjury by giving conflicting information to prosecutors.

Fitzgerald's filing was part of his effort to persuade the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that he needs the testimony of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper to wrap up his investigation....

***

"This would lead me to probably conclude that Mr. Novak testified and did not provide nearly the treasure trove that Fitzgerald expected," (Lucy Dalglish, of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) said....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32380-2005Apr6.html

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. The last line translated:

He took the fifth.

[merh]

6. A little interpretation to add to your translation.

Grand juries have a life span, by statute they meet for a set period of time. To go beyond that life span, the prosecutor has to file a request with the chief judge asking that the grand jury be extended.

Now this grand jury has been investigating well beyond it's life span. I would venture to guess the the "court filings" that are referenced in this article (illegally I might add, as grand jury proceedings and their filings are secretative) are probably the request by the prosecutor that the grand jury term or life be again extended. He has to justify the request and the grand jury efforts to date. To advise the court that "he finished his investigation months ago, except for questioning two reporters who have refused to testify" would be consistent with justifying the work to date of the grand jury and the extension as requested.

The rest of the article is a spin by the media to try to make the public believe that nothing will come from the investigation and no crimes were committed. The Plame investigation is very important to the media, they consider the forcing of the reporters to testify is a 1st amendment violation. Of course they are going to spin this in the negative.

If the court does not or did not extend the grand jury, Fitzpatrick could just resubmit all the evidence to a new grand jury. He can do it with existing transcripts and evidence, but of course, that would take quite awhile and is not as productive as completing the investigation with the grand jury that first heard all of the evidence.

Sources involved and sources representing those involved want to play down the investigation, "nothing to see here, move along". Press prior to indictment that makes it appear that there is nothing to the investigation affect the potential jury pool of the future.

Folks, the media spins the facts and creates fiction, why does that surprise you.

Just my opinion, but I say this is a crap article and it ain't over till the fat lady sings and I haven't heard any singing, only some whining from Novak.

:shrug:

[Stephanie]

2. Perjury is better than nothing

If he can't get the felony charge I will settle for perjury. But let's get cracking, Fitz!

[grumpy old fart]

3. total b.s......just another sham investigation...

if anyone gets prosecuted, which I highly doubt, it will be some obscure nobody prosecuted for some nothing charge totally off the subject....this baby is getting buried deep in the memory hole...

[struggle4progress]

8. Yep. eom

[peacetalksforall]

4. This is the government against two individuals. Beware the tyrants.

The King's men have acted and cabal justice was delivered by the King and the King's men. We're in for feudal times. What comes after trifecta?

[xchrom]

5. well, du posted info re: fitzgerald

he seems to look more like a bushbot than not.

so i've always had low expectations regarding the outcome.

[Festivito]

7. No phone records, no witnessed meetings. NoNovak crime!!!

Or did Novak get some secret deal, he seems too free and easy.

His paper should suffer. They want to keep a treasonous person, we should not buy their paper.