|
Edited on Wed Jan-24-07 11:26 PM by Dems Will Win
 This is from Oct. 2005, from a DailyKOS blogger, Sherlock Google. Sherlock surmises from all the evidence that Ari flipped -- and we now know that Ari took the Fifth and did turn State evidence against the White House. Fitz got Ari to testify under immunity from prosecution. That's why Ari resigned. The question is: did Ari testify against Bush himself -- who was on the flight in July where the INR report was passed around and was a hot topic. Did Bush know and order Plame's name revealed on the flight to Africa on Air Force One? Right when Ari was notified he would be forced to testify, he announced his resignation, and in June of 2004, both Bush and Cheney LAWYERED UP! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/8/153415/917 Ari Fleischer Guilty in Leak Case? Did He Testify Against Bush?Don't be surprised if former WH PRess Secretary Ari Fleischer is indicted soon by the Plame Grand Jury. Although in his testimony, Fleischer denied reading the INR memo on AF One, "Comical Ari" was said to have been seen reading it. This could mean a perjury charge.
And Ari's log shows a call from Novakula the day after the July 6 Wilson article came out! Rove said Novak told him the name. Did Ari tell Robert who then told Karl? Or is that just more Karl CYA?
And did Ari "flip" for Fitz and testify against Bush?!?! ... Among those asked if he had seen the memo was Ari Fleischer, then the White House press secretary, who was on Air Force One with Mr. Bush and Mr. Powell during the Africa trip. Mr. Fleischer told the grand jury that he never saw the document, a person familiar with the testimony said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the prosecutor's admonitions about not disclosing what is said to the grand jury. Mr. Fleischer's role has been scrutinized by investigators, in part because his telephone log showed a call on the day after Mr. Wilson's article appeared from Mr. Novak, the columnist who, on July 14, 2003, was the first to report Ms. Wilson's identity. In his column, Mr. Novak referred to her by her maiden name, Valerie Plame, which she had used when first employed by the C.I.A. Mr. Fleischer has told the grand jury that he did not return Mr. Novak's call, a person familiar with the testimony said. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/politics/22leak.html?On the same day the memo was prepared, White House phone logs show Novak placed a call to White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, according to lawyers familiar with the case and a witness who has testified before the grand jury. Those people say it is not clear whether Fleischer returned the call, and Fleischer has refused to comment.
The Novak call may loom large in the investigation because Fleischer was among a group of administration officials who left Washington later that day on a presidential trip to Africa. On the flight to Africa, Fleischer was seen perusing the State Department memo on Wilson and his wife, according to a former administration official who was also on the trip. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=awksAN7mYRZY&refer=usTechnically, Rove was in charge of politics, not "communications." But, as he saw it, the two were one and the same—and he used his heavyweight status to push the message machine run by his Texas protegé and friend, Dan Bartlett. Press Secretary Ari Fleischer was sent out to trash the Wilson op-ed. "Zero, nada, nothing new here," he said. Then, on a long Bush trip to Africa, Fleischer and Bartlett prompted clusters of reporters to look into the bureaucratic origins of the Wilson trip. How did the spin doctors know to cast that lure? One possible explanation: some aides may have read the State Department intel memo, which Powell had brought with him aboard Air Force One. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8600327/site/newsweek/print/1/displaymode/1098Near the end of a round table discussion on ABC’s This Week, George Stephanopoulos dropped this bomb: Definitely a political problem but I wonder, George Will, do you think it’s a manageable one for the White House especially if we don’t know whether Fitzgerald is going to write a report or have indictments but if he is able to show as a source close to this told me this week, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney were actually involved in some of these discussions. This would explain why Bush spent more than an hour answering questions from special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. It would also fundamentally change the dynamics of the scandal. President Bush could no longer claim he was merely a bystander who wants to “get to the bottom of it.” As Stephanopoulos notes, if Bush played a direct role it could make this scandal completely unmanageable. http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/02/bush-directly-involved/The only former administration official on the trip was Colin Powell. Colin dropped the dime on Ari, who could have called Novak back from AF One, as the AF One records do not show WHO places the call! Plus they are encrypted and Fitz fought to get the AF One logs to see what they did show and it took quite a long time to get them. We also do not know who Novak fingered. I think we've all missed Comical Ari's role in all this.
... I wouldn't be surprised if Ari and Colin told Fitz that Bush was in on the July 7 discussions about the memo and Wilson. Did Ari testify against Bush? Progressive blogger investigative speculation turns real! Will the rest of the speculative thread come true as well? Comical Ari testifies against Bush as well. Ari's career went NOWHERE after leaving the WH, btw -- if that tells you anything! Here's John Dean on Bush lawyering up in June 2004: Asking a President to testify - or even be interviewed - remains a serious, sensitive and rare occasion. It is not done lightly. Doing so raises separation of powers concerns that continue to worry many. Instead, it seems the investigators are seeking to connect up with, and then speak with, persons who have links to and from the leaked information - and those persons, it seems, probably include the President. (I should stress, however, that I do not have access to grand jury testimony, and that grand jury proceedings are secret. But the facts that are properly public do allow some inference and commentary about what likely is occurring in the grand jury.) Undoubtedly, those from the White House have been asked if they spoke with the president about the leak. It appears that one or more of them may indeed have done so. . If so - and if the person revealed the leaker's identity to the President, or if the President decided he preferred not to know the leaker's identity. -- then this fact could conflict with Bush's remarkably broad public statements on the issue. He has said that he did not know of "anybody in administration who leaked classified information." He has also said that he wanted "to know the truth" about this leak.
If Bush is called before the grand jury, it is likely because Fitzgerald believes that he knows much more about this leak than he has stated publicly.
Perhaps Bush may have knowledge not only of the leaker, but also of efforts to make this issue go away - if indeed there have been any. It is remarkably easy to obstruct justice, and this matter has been under various phases of an investigation by the Justice Department since it was referred by the CIA last summer.
It seems very possible the leaker - or leakers, for two government sources were initially cited by columnist Robert Novak -- may have panicked, covered up his (or their) illegality, and in doing so, committed further crimes. If so, did the President hear of it? Was he willfully blind? Was he himself the victim of a cover-up by underlings? The grand jury may be interested in any or all of these possibilities.
What Might a Private Attorney Advise Bush to Do?
It is possible that Bush is consulting Sharp only out of an excess of caution - despite the fact that he knows nothing of the leak, or of any possible coverup of the leak. But that's not likely.
On this subject, I spoke with an experienced former federal prosecutor who works in Washington, specializing in white collar criminal defense (but who does not know Sharp). That attorney told me that he is baffled by Bush's move - unless Bush has knowledge of the leak. "It would not seem that the President needs to consult personal counsel, thereby preserving the attorney-client privilege, if he has no knowledge about the leak," he told me.
What advice might Bush get from a private defense counsel? The lawyer I consulted opined that, "If he does have knowledge about the leak and does not plan to disclose it, the only good legaladvice would be to take the Fifth, rather than lie. The political fallout is a separate issue."
- John Dean
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040604.html
Please Recommend... |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
As far as Nixon's personal involvement in the same criminal conspiracy for which his aides were soon to be tried (and convicted) put to the test the maxim that 'No Man is Above the Law'. 
