RawStory: Seniori Democrats seek assurances, final leak investigation

[autorank]

Senior Democrats seek assurances, final leak investigation report

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Senior_Democrats_seek_assurances_final_leak_1012.html

10/12/2005 @ 12:41 pm

Filed by Larisa Alexandrovna

The ranking member on the House Permanent Committee on Select Intelligence along with other senior Democrats issued a letter today requesting that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald submit a final and public report on his two-year investigation into the
The letter, released to RAW STORY, requests “assurance that, upon completion” of the investigation “ will submit a final public report to Congress of all indictments, convictions, and any decisions not to prosecute.” Normally, special prosecutors are required to submit a report to the U.S. Attorney General. Fitzgerald's Grand Jury expires Oct. 28.

Signed by Jane Harman (D-CA), John Conyers (D-Michigan), Tom Lantos (D-CA) and Rush Holt (D-NJ), the letter expresses concern about any possible appearance of political influence and for possible acquiescence of legal authorities given the high level status of those under investigation.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Senior_Democrats_seek_assurances_final_leak_1012.html

Raw Story nails it. Here is some good news about our team doing its job. Of course there should be a final report and it’s appropriate for Harman (D, CA), Conyers (D, MI) , Lantos (D, CA), and Hold (D, NJ) to ask. How about that coalition of different DEMS acting together.

[Ignacio Upton]

1. Good news

Jane Harman and Tom Lantos aren't exactly the bst Democrats in the House (by supporting the Iraq War) but at least they want Rove accountable and want to know about the possible indictments.

[Seansky]

2. I would actually say, Finally, they are doing their job...Love this

[ewagner]

3. Sounds like "insurance"

if there are decisions "not to indict" anybody, then the Dems want a written report as to WHY NOT. That, in turn, will turn into fodder for any upcoming campaign....will add to the meme Culture of Corruption

[electropop]

4. Say it loudly every day: Culture of Corruption

We need to drive home this one basic point, which encapsulates everything Republican into two words.

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION

[alfredo]

25. Poster for you

[electropop]

26. That's very attractive. nt

[alfredo]

32. Thanks

[lala_rawraw]

5. Or put on your best Shame t-shirt:) n/t

[wtbymark]

6. They can still start impeachment proceedings

if there are no indictments, they can still decide to impeach on ethical grounds even if there's no criminal charges.

[OregonBlue]

7. Actually, this makes me nervous. Do they believe that there might

not be indictments? Why would they need this assurance if they thought anything was going to come of this?

[autorank]

8. Be of good cheer...I think they want to know about everybody!!!

You know, even if someone isn't indicted, if they played a supporting role, these folks want to know. It's a matter, for them, of who they can believe in formal and informal hearings. Pretty smart tactic, as I see it. I had your reservation initially but the train has left the station on the legal side of this. Now Congress is playing catch up.

[OregonBlue]

10. Thanks for that. I think you're probably right but I, like most of

us here, have been on pins and needles, praying this won't go badly for us.

[autorank]

12. We share that emoticon!

:freak:

[peacetalksforall]

9. I want someone who will examine the motives of Cheney for exposing

Brewster Jennings and what he and friends had to gain regarding Khan Pakistan wmd nuclear equipment trading and trafficking.

[autorank]

11. higher class moves to the front of the class. ..best question out there!

[GayCanuck]

13. Why does in take

two years? You would think that he would have them all nailed by now.

[annabanana]

18. this is how Grand Juries operate..

They have a set time, or commission. You don't hear anything from the good (leak-proof) ones until you see the fruits of their labor. (indictments)

[Garbo 2004]

19. Investigation took longer because Cooper and Miller refused to testify

in 2004. Fitz maintained their testimony was critical to the investigation. Their refusal to testify and their appeals had to be litigated and that took time. An appeals court found in Fitz's favor. As I recall Cooper and Miller appealed to the Supreme Court which refused to hear the case.

Cooper was looking at the slammer until he got a super special waiver from Rove and testified this July. Judy went to jail until Libby sent her the "quaking aspen" note.

And here we are.

[paineinthearse]

14. A day late and a dollar short

When a friend sent me a PM about this, the DU software shortened the displayed URL to "SENIOR_DEMOCRATS_SEEK_ASS"

:rofl:

Nominated.

p.s. Welcome back, lala

[lala_rawraw]

15. Thanks, NYC was productive

As time will tell ;)

[shraby]

16. If Fitz turns over copies, that means that

what he comes up with, indictments, etc. won't be hidden by the administration as "state secrets" which is very possible with this administration.

[paineinthearse]

17. With all due respect to Raw Story and Larisa...

DU had this around 11PM last night. Not as complete, but in Rep. Conyers' own eloquent words, staight off his blog.

I posted it to LBH, but for some reason it was locked and apended to an unrelated WaPo post. At 12:14AM I reposted in full to GEN. Guess this is in keeping in the Dem tradition of shooting ourselves in the foot.
:silly:

See "Conyers/Johnston (NYT): Times Reporter to Testify on Recently Found Notes" at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5038551

Now that it has been reported, I can add to my earlier entry ("Conyers: the stonewall" in the "politics" forum) that I, and four of my Democrattic colleagues have written to Mr. Fitzgerald requesting a report on all decisions relating to Rove-Gate, including decisions to prosecute, convictions and any decisions not to prosecute after he concludes his inquiry. The New York Times has the story.

more.....

...followed by the NYT article.

Mr. Conyers :yourock:

[Catrina]

28. Rep. Conyers is the best!

I don't know how he stays on top of all these issues, but from the beginning, he has not missed a beat. And, even when he was being ignored by the WH and the press, he got everything into the Congressional record.

He motivates his colleagues in Congress and I hope, when all this is over, he writes a book about it, and puts it all in perspective.

I also love what Henry Waxman has contributed to this case. He put all the legal aspects into perspective, and wiped out the original WH defense, that Rove, Libby and Novak could not be charged with a crime because they 'would have to have known it was a crime' to 'verify the information'.

I remember reading Henry Waxman's paper on the law, and it blew that defense away. It makes me think that these people in the WH never took the trouble to read the law, and really thought they could spin their way out of it, because they are so used to doing that.

This is the first time they were under oath, not just talking down to the rest of us, lying and lying to a complacent press.

If nothing else, Fitzgerald got them all on the record, UNDER OATH! I bet they have learned the hard way, that it's not so easy to spin when you are facing consequences for your lies.

[longship]

20. This is an extremely shrewd move.

It sets the stage for impeachment if indictments of principles come down. Note that even if Chimp/Crashcart are not indicted, they have presided over a wreckless, out of control White House, in violation of their oaths of office to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land. They can still be impeached on that basis.

If there are no indictments (extremely unlikely from everything we now know), this holds the Justice Dept feet to the fire that there will be congressional action. If there is no indictments what is the likelihood that an impeachable obstruction of justice has occurred?

With a sword of Damocles hanging over their throats (the 2006 midterms) it's now inevitable that centrist Reps are going to break loose. How many are there?

Things are going to get

Very interesting!!

[longship]

21. Dupe, stupid DU browser hang.

nt

[paineinthearse]

22. "The letter, released to RAW STORY"

Please check the link, it goes to Raw Story's home page, not the story.

Do we have a copy of the full letter?

[OKNancy]

24. It's a press release,

It's hardly exclusive to rawstory. The New York Times reported this already yesterday. I'm sure it would be available on the Congress website, or the individual Congress person's site.

[lala_rawraw]

31. Hardly

First, we did not call this an exclusive as it was part of a release to the press. Second, my calls to the signatories and their staff would make that part exclusive to Raw, although and again, we did not preface the story with the label of "exclusive." We reserve that label only for stories on which we are directly the only recipients of information or are the only investigators/writers on a story.

Finally, this was issued early this morning to the press, not last night.

[OKNancy]

23. The New York Times had this story already

I imagine this is a dupe



In another development, four senior House Democrats wrote to Mr. Fitzgerald in a letter dated Oct. 12, urging him to issue a final report to Congress when he concludes his inquiry. Such a report, they said, should address "all indictments, convictions and any decisions not to prosecute."

The letter was signed by the top Democrats on their respective committees: John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, Judiciary Committee; Jane Harman of California, Intelligence Committee; and Tom Lantos of California, International Relations Committee. The letter was also signed by Rush D. Holt of New Jersey, the senior Democrat on the intelligence panel's policy subcommittee.

A report, the letter said, would assure the public that "the investigation of this serious matter has been undertaken with utmost diligence and has been free of partisan, political influence."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/12/politics/12leak.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129144145-gW2XRHX2BbvFCLgqZHfBHA
Title: Times Reporter to Testify on Recently Found Notes

[paineinthearse]

30. Yes, I posted the Conyers/Johnston stories in LBN last night, but.......

Let's just say I had to repost it at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5038551

[merwin]

27. Not LBN. Moving to General Discussion

[paineinthearse]

29. self-deleted

:yoiks:

[Independent_Liberal]

33. Congressman Conyers, I'm kicking for you once again!

You are my hero!

:)