What Do You Think of Patrick Fitzgerald Now?
A lefty friend of mine e-mails: “Has Patrick Fitzgerald been rehabilitated in the eyes of your readership?”
Unlike many of you, I supported Patrick Fitzgerald in the prosecution of Scooter Libby. Now, I don’t expect for a moment that a single one of you has changed his mind about the Libby prosecution. Nor am I saying that the Libby situation is anywhere near as scandalous as the Blagojevich situation. Let me be clear: it isn’t. The Blagojevich scandal is one of the most outrageous situations to come along in quite some time — and Libby’s deception, while reprehensible, is nothing close.
Still: back to my friend’s question. What do you think of Patrick Fitzgerald now? Is anyone willing to concede that, just maybe, he’s not the epitome of a Crazy Out-of-Control Prosecutor?
Anyone?
Its not changing my view that the Libby prosecution was an abuse of his discretion.
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/10/2008 @ 6:48 pmWe’ll find out now if Fitzgerald is a real law-and-order man or not. Not by how thoroughly he savages Blago, who is an expendable idiot and a sitting duck – morally inferior to a ham sandwich.
If he draws a cordon around this investigation to protect the rotten system of which Blago is a mere symptom, then we’ll know him for what he is.
Glen Wishard (02562c) — 12/10/2008 @ 6:49 pmAlthough I had problems with the Libby prosecution, I never doubted Fitzgerald’s integrity – the reason he was appointed by the past GOP Senator Peter Fitzgerald (no relation) was specifically to clean up the cesspool of The Combine in IL politics. Prominent members of BOTH parties tried desperately to derail his appointment, with both Rove, Gov. Ryan and other high – ranking Dems pleading with Bush to intervene and get Fitzgerald to back off his appointment of a truly independent prosecutor. Thank goodness they all failed, and as for the courageous stand of Senator Fitzgerald? He was repaid in spades by the GOP, taking so much flack from his own party that he said the hell with it and decided not to run for re – election (he was already wealthy, due to his prior successful business career). We truly deserve the government we have here in IL.
Dmac (e30284) — 12/10/2008 @ 6:52 pmFitz aint even close to Nifong!
This might be getting a bit old, but the few good men and women of this country in power positions had best get the shit flushed cuz there are a bunch of folks ready to use an alternate toilet that care who might be in the pool when it gets drained, but, will still pull the handle just to see a clean bowl.
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/10/2008 @ 6:53 pmIf he draws a cordon around this investigation to protect the rotten system of which Blago is a mere symptom,
Do you have any idea what Fitz has already accomplished during his tenure here? Scores of politicos are now in the Fed prison in Joliet, including ex – Gov. Ryan. I’d say you have to give the man a hell of a lot of credit to have gotten this far – you have no idea the level of obstruction that’s been thrown in his way since his appointment.
Dmac (e30284) — 12/10/2008 @ 6:55 pmThe Libby investigation, after is was well known to Fitz that Armitage leaked Plame’s name and that Plame wasn’t covert, is a huge example of how a US Attorney or DA can be tremendously counterproductive to the administration of justice. It was a witchhunt.
How does the present scandal rehabilitate Fitz? He just happens to have jurisdiction. Only a fool would think this investigation was his idea. A huge case was brought before him and he’s pursuing it. He is great at seeking publicity (I’ve heard him on a GAME SHOW, for example)… and this is just part of that.
I grant he is not covering for dems of republicans, but he went too far with Libby.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:06 pmdeeds not words, and i’m underwhelmed.
personally, i figure that he popped the whole thing early to protect various high ranking demonrats….. and that most of this will wind up being swept under the rug.
a real prosecutor, interested in rooting out crime & corruption, would have let this run as long as possible, to get as much evidence as he could, on as many of the participants as possible. there was no real need to do anything at least until after the appointment was made, the value exchanged, and the payee was on his/her way to Washington. that way you get *everyone* dead to rights, on multiple counts, and all the lower level players too.
instead, he blew the stakeout early.
my predictions are that neither Blag nor Rezko will be forced to name major names, and neither of them will get much time, since they *cooperated*.
Pat will wind up with a cushy j*b further up the food chain, and it’ll all be business as usual.
“It’s Chinatown, Jake….”
redc1c4 (27fd3e) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:07 pmI think the Libby prosecution was wrong. To try a man for lying about not doing something that wasn’t even a crime smacks of a desperate need to prosecute someone for something after the the investigation.
I think that this came from Fitzgerald’s sense of duty and not wanting the time and money spent being a waste.
I hope he goes after Blagojevich hard and follows every thread – wherever it goes.
Stephen Macklin (f552f7) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:24 pmUh, actually, I did.
I thought you were pretty persuasive at the time.
EW1(SG) (078642) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:27 pmI thought that the Plame investigation was not carefully thought out in all of its’ unintended consequences.
Another Drew (4fff38) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:32 pmI only hope that he does a better job in Chicago; and he seems to have a lot more notches on his belt so far.
The Libby persecution was wrong. Can a person who was so wrong ever be right? Well, let’s wait and see. It’s early days.
Charles Harkins (971090) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:36 pmWhen FitzGerald took over the investigation into the Plame/Wilson disclosures, within a few days he knew two things:
1) Richard Armitage was a very early, and possibly the first, source for Robert Novak’s column.
2) FBI agents investigating the case believed that Scooter Libby had lied to them about his involvement.
The first fact argued for shutting down the investigation as soon as the timeline could be clarified and Novak confirmed Armitage as the first leaker.
The second fact argued for continuing the investigation until it could be established whether there was a pattern of deception that included Libby.
In weighting the grand jury testimony of some of the media sources, I am much less confident than FitzGerald that Libby is the only one who was lying or mistaken. But he thought he had enough evidence to go to trial, and he got a conviction.
The closing argument bothers me. I thought he touched on aspects of the surrounding situation for which he had presented no evidence and prevented Libby’s lawyers from discussing.
GaryC (c1edfb) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:42 pmI still believe Fitz thought he could flip Libby and that was the only real reason Fitz chased him.
tmac (f9e092) — 12/10/2008 @ 7:48 pmA lefty friend of mine e-mails: “Has Patrick Fitzgerald been rehabilitated in the eyes of your readership?”
This is the kind of question we get from teaching “zero tolerance” policies. There is no importance in discerning differences between situations. You must either think something is all good or all bad.
If you shouldn’t carry a switchblade, you shouldn’t carry a butter knife.
If you shouldn’t hit someone, you shouldn’t hit back.
If you think progressive taxes are ok, you shouldn’t complain about ‘redistributing the wealth’.
And if a prosecutor seems to be investigating one thing well, all of his investigations have been done well.
For the record, I think Fitzgerald is a bulldog. I don’t think he will let go of something, and I think once he decides someone has done something wrong he will do all he can to prove it. I think he seeks to destroy.
That can be good, and it can be bad.
I don’t think Blogojevich needed to be dragged out of bed in handcuffs yesterday morning.
I don’t think we needed to hear about his wife swearing in the background.
And as another brilliant commenter pointed out, there seems to be a pattern with Fitz that he can investigate for a long time, but what he charges are too often things that come up while he’s investigating the other problem. He did that with Libby, and he’s doing that right now. Five years of investigation and the complaint is all about things that happened in the last month.
I hope he does a good job with this. I hope he gets something better out of it than a perjury charge for Jesse Jackson Jr.
MayBee (4a9480) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:03 pmI hope his energy is not misplaced this time.
One can think Fritz was wrong in pursuing Libby after it was known that Armitage was the leaker, and also think he is right in pursuing Blago. MERRY FITZMAS !!!!!!!
JD (5f0e11) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:06 pmPish. I’m holding my opinions of how he handles this case until after all is said and done.
That said, I found him quite ridiculous with Libby. Fitzgerald knew early on who was to blame for the “outing”- and he knew it was not Libby or anyone he worked for. Going after Libby was a frivolous at best.
Jewels (1d8021) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:12 pmAmen, MayBee.
JD (5f0e11) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:15 pmActually, I don’t have a person judgment on the Libby question, although enough people I trust are close to him and believe he was innocent that I’m skeptical.
But I was much more skeptical of the timing and motivation for this prosecution: my first thought when I heard the story was “Wow, PF, that’s a great way to immunize yourself from replacement by an incoming administration…”
Of course, PF is probably a fine guy, RB is an evil governor no doubt, and the timing was probably an attempt to prevent an appointment or something. But still, to me, the motivation of this prosecution would be much more suspect than the motivation for the Libby prosecution.
Joe Bingham (34bf32) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:23 pmdangit! personal judgment
Joe Bingham (34bf32) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:24 pmThis is the old “but he built great railroads” logic …
Comparing a sitting Governor trying to sell a Senate seat to prosecuting a superfluous figure (Libby) in an investigation while letting the guilty guy go (Armitage).
WTF does one thing have to do with the other?
Da'Shiznit (089453) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:32 pmPeople like Fitz are the right hand of a totalitarian regime.
As long as you convince them someone is “bad” they turn into Ahab with the White Whale.
Da'Shiznit (089453) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:35 pmA darkly cynical view of all this is that Fitzpatrick has gotten the word from Obama that it’s okay to throw Bloggo under the bus. I personally think that Obama may well come out pretty clean on this specific problem.
Bloggo was outraged that all he would get for appointing Valerie Jarrett–Obama’s choice for the job–was their respect! So Bloggo asked/demanded–and Team Obama said no.
Team Obama may well think that you put Bloggo in jail and other problems that they are worried about just go away and the investigation can come to an end.
Bloggo has been a crook for nearly six years–and he’s going to get hung for what he did in just the last 6 weeks? If I’m supposed to think that that is all there is, I better go back to my turnip truck parked at the curb and go home to the farm.
Mike Myers (31af82) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:38 pmEven a crazy out-of-control prosecutor can hit gold in a target rich environment like Chicago politics.
I bet you that Ken Starr would have done just as well.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:44 pmThe beauty of the American justice system is that it is guided by the rule of law and thus the people in charge shouldn’t matter. The curse of the American justice system is that, ultimately, it needs people to work and people are fallible. But IMO it’s still the best justice system in the world.
Sometimes the rules that guide our justice system aren’t well-known or well-understood, and there are times when following the rules produces unexpected results. But what makes the system work is participants who understand and follow the rules. Nifong is an example of a prosecutor who didn’t follow the rules. Everything I’ve seen suggests Fitzgerald is the antithesis. That he’s smart, skilled and willing to take on the highest powers of government makes him truly admirable.
DRJ (b4db3a) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:49 pmFitzgerald was fishing with the Libby prosecution and I believe he lied to the Supreme Court. I also think aspects of his Conrad Black trial strategy were pretty shaky.
His pursuit of political corruption in Illinois, however, has been bipartisan and ongoing. It hasn’t made enough of a dent yet, though.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 12/10/2008 @ 8:51 pmThe sad part here is just a Fitz gets rolling on cleaning up Chicago, Obama will fire all U.S. attorneys just like Clinton did. Game over–and no smoking gun.
Rovin (a5d8b7) — 12/10/2008 @ 9:00 pmFitz took down Blogo too soon. If he waited, we might have had Obama lining up the payoff.
Alta Bob (02edb7) — 12/10/2008 @ 9:19 pmHe claimed his timing was to prevent the gov from actually naming a new Senator. While it seems obvious that person would not have been permitted to serve as a Senator and we’d have much more of a crime to prosecute, I see his point
Hopefully he offers a great deal to Blagovich, because we need to know more. We neeed to know what other payola’s the gov gave and was solicited for. We need to know all about the apparatus and all involved in all of the payola in that state. That’s very important. Sending this clown to jail is only somewhat important.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/10/2008 @ 9:37 pm#27 “Fitz took down Blogo too soon. If he waited, we might have had Obama lining up the payoff.”
which explains why he took them down now…. the “stop the appointment” line is BS.
PF is just running a different version of “pay to play”. let’s see where he winds up next…..
for his sake i hope he doesn’t get the Vince Foster reward.
redc1c4 (27fd3e) — 12/10/2008 @ 11:26 pmFitzgerald I don’t mind so much, it’s Patterico that’s starting to get on my nerves….
Joe (98b642) — 12/10/2008 @ 11:34 pmDRJ, your post #24 is probably the most succinct & straightforward description of why Fitzgerald is one of the good guys. Bravo!
Icy Texan (b7d162) — 12/10/2008 @ 11:35 pmi for one will be waiting to see released phone conversations between obama’s office and blago’s. then we’ll see how non-partisan he is.
ktr (1cfb4a) — 12/10/2008 @ 11:40 pmi for one will be waiting to see released phone conversations between obama’s office and blago’s.
Yes please mind the “gaps”
LH (b40869) — 12/11/2008 @ 4:18 amhttp://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/7346
Drj
With all due respect – I’m not happy that Pat Fitz has been appointed for a few reasons.
One, despite partisanship – I am only, only interested in justice for all – Fitz clearly is not – only the win, at any cost, is for him
Two, Fitz clearly belongs in prison when finding out that Libby was not the source Fitz exceeded his authority and lied and misled the jury during the prosecution.
The fact that a corrupt unseemly tainted prosecutor has been tapped to investigate the biggest political corruption case in nearly 40 years is disquieting.
Lets compare what Happened with Libby
The VP through his intermediaries, put the word out that we, the collective we, were aware of efforts to obtain fission and fissionable materials. This was done to put those high minded radical countries on notice that the gig was up and we were prepared to defend ourselves in kind. This was in defense of the women and children of the United States. Fitz was told this in no uncertain terms, went and made up crap anyway.
To what happened with Chicago
well…. I’m not even going there…….
And Patterico
Look up what happened to Janet Schakowskys’ husband and how Fitz somehow failed to indict her on the check fraud charges that her husband went to jail for.
Before we get all mushy over this guy
EricPWJohnson (5a816b) — 12/11/2008 @ 4:51 amAu contraire. He have been paraded in front of the press in handcuffs while wearing his PJs as should every politician who is indicted. No courtesy phone calls. No backdoor exits. No special treatment whatsoever. To the public square with them and placed in stocks.
Horatio (55069c) — 12/11/2008 @ 5:15 amoops – He should have been paraded….
Horatio (55069c) — 12/11/2008 @ 5:18 amWhat do you think of Patrick Fitzgerald now?
Same as always.
Is anyone willing to concede that, just maybe, he’s not the epitome of a Crazy Out-of-Control Prosecutor?
Nope.
He got enough on Blagojevich and pulled the plug to protect Obama. Would Obama of played pay-for-play, we won’t know and Fitzgerald made sure we wouldn’t find out.
Gerald A (b593e5) — 12/11/2008 @ 5:23 amWonder how much the senate seats are in NY and Del?
krusher (a3fbdb) — 12/11/2008 @ 6:35 amProsecutors prosecute, period,
rwallis (4d83ca) — 12/11/2008 @ 6:38 amif they have enough to get a conviction they prosecute,truth and justice does not mater, innocences or guilt does not matter, just “can I get a conviction and the bigger the better” that is what drive PF
That he’s smart, skilled and willing to take on the highest powers of government makes him truly admirable.
My thoughts exactly.
Dmac (e30284) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:18 amHe went after Libby, when he had no cause, because no one really wanted to touch Armitage, Powell’ aide de camp, and the Caspian oil connection. He went after Black on a bogus charge; and he succeeded in defanging the right
narciso (57971e) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:23 amin Canada, the UK and the US. The Telegraph has become a totally useless paper, since then. He goes after Blago, even though his original investigation was to investigate Rezko and Obama’s land purchase, which included Auchi
and Al Sammarai; no one really wants to kick up that ground. So if his job was to cripple the Bush administration, and stifle it’s supporters
in the press; I’d say “Mission Accomplished”. If it had anything to do with justice, I’d say no.
There is a lot of self promotion in Patrick Fitzgerald. How many high profile US Attorneys have their own blog. Fitzgerald does.
http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com/
In the Plame case he knew early on the White House was not the source of the leak. He knew where came from, yet he continued to pursue the White House angle and never brought charges against the real source, Richard Armitage. If there were an underlying crime, why not seek charges against the leaker? If there was none why continue the investigation, especially a dead end.
Illinois, especially Chicago, is a different case. It is a cesspool of political crime. He can squeeze information from a never ending cast of characters. It started with Rezko, who undoubtedly provided enough information to get a wiretap on Blagojevich. His real target is the Daly machine and hopefully he will get there. I think he wants to become the new Elliot Ness.
I think he also realizes that unless he develops an unassailable reputation for crime busting, the dark forces of Chicago politics will try to run him out of the city. And these dark forces now extend to Washington. It will be subtle, such as an offer of a promotion to New York that can’t be refused. Or perhaps it will be the Clinton m.o. of firing all US Attorneys and replacing them with a new team.
Corky Boyd (e038ec) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:26 amDuring the Libby thing there were interviews with several Dem-leaning law types about Fitzgerald. It seems that he is well known to push the legal envelope in his prosecutions and has had to be pulled back many times by the judiciary in Illinois. It is up to the individual to decide if that is a good thing or not. I know since that time, I have less ease with the federal prosecutors. They have power to destroy lives, companies (Arthur Anderson) etc. They must be watched carefully.
bio mom (a1e126) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:46 amI don’t know of anybody — critical or favorably disposed towards Fitzgerald — who was of the opinion that he isn’t aggressive. It was that he wasn’t always reasonable in who he went after in the Libby case.
If a pit bull bites a bad guy in proper defense of his owner, would it change your mind about the pit bull having mauled a kid who was jaywalking?
Nah.
That said, I doubt that those folks disposed to think ill of Fitzgerald will likely not be reassured by this — the timing of the arrest protected whoever the purchaser of the Senate seat was going to be, and somebody ill-disposed toward Fitz could argue that that was the intent.
(I’m not; my guess is that he pulled the trigger for the reasons that he said to, and that this will likely let him keep his USA gig rather than being kicked upstairs by Obama is merely a fortuitous coincidence.)
Joel Rosenberg (5ec843) — 12/11/2008 @ 8:55 amI’m not sold on Fitzgerald, what he did to Scooter Libby was over the top, unjustified, and unduly harsh. I mark him as a partisan and a zealot.
As noted above in #41 and 42, Fitzgerald is wide of his initial target. His disclosure of the phone taps is sufficiently premature as to allow some of the bigger fish to make for murky waters. Looks to me like he blew the whistle early to make sure only small fry were trapped when the nets were hauled.
Possibly, just possibly Fitzgerald is well aware that The Obama is not just some guy who lives in the neighborhood, Obama’s one of the guys Federal law enforcement exists to serve and protect.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 8:56 amHey, Rosenburg, you talkin’ to me?
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 8:59 amI’ve always been a fan of Fitz, though I think his blasting of Libby was excessive – note I didn’t say it was completely wrong.
Libby did commit obstruction and perjury by the letter of the law. The sentence was, shall we say, a bit harsh, but Libby DID do it.
Those were my only problems with it, and this looks to be Fitz going back to “nuke the corrupt”.
And anyone who is thinking “He’s only doing this to protect Obama”…
Well, I won’t waste my breath. I doubt you;d hear me from under your tinfoil hats anyways…
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:04 amLost in the hubub over Fitzgerald’s prosecution of Libby was the fact that while Fitzgerald did know that Armitage was the initial leaker when Fitzgerald was given the investigation, Libby had ALREADY lied to the FBI in his first interview. That took place before Fitzgerald was assigned the case.
So, while he knew Libby wasn’t the original leaker, he nevertheless had evidence of criminal conduct by Libby in trying to cover his tracks for the conversations he did have.
WLS Shipwrecked (a6f10d) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:17 amExactly. Did he have to press? Well, no, but the law is the law. I’m not usually a fan of ignoring it “just because”.
Like I said, the sentence was overly hardsh, but that’s neither here nor there.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:26 amWhile speculation on the timing of Fitzgerald’s revelation of phone taps is interesting on it’s own merits, the fact that it alerted everyone who may have been involved in “pay to play” discussions that the Feds were listening in on Blogo’s phone lines is indisputably true.
Why Fitzgerald pulled the plug when he did hasn’t yet been fully explained. Till it is, we might want to consider rounding up the usual suspects.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:27 amRopelight, actually I believe that a news report revealed the phone taps and forced Fitzgerald’s / FBI hand.
SPQR (72771e) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:36 amYes, SPQR, someone gave a reporter a heads-up on a Federal wire tap investigation of Governor Blogo. Now, who might be in a position to do such a thing and force Fitzgerald’s hand?
Do you imagine Fitzgerald might swing into action, put that reporter under oath, and grill him for information on who the leaker might be? Fitzgerald knows how to crank up the heat once he’s got his man on the hot seat. Yep, actions speak louder than words and we’ll just have to wait and see how Fitzgerald takes to someone undermining a Federal investigation.
Convenient newspaper story or inconvienient leak, you be the judge.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 10:02 amropelight, that’s a damn good point!
It would be someone in Fitzgerald’s ‘command’ who leaked this information which was far more damaging to the US than leaking Valerie Plame’s name (which actually helped this country debunk her husband’s lies).
With anyone investigate this leak, or is it OK for Fitz’s people to do what Fitz took great pains to investigate Libby for?
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/11/2008 @ 10:06 amFitz already has a reputation for putting reporters in the slam who don’t like to reveal their sources.
Another Drew (3a8a2c) — 12/11/2008 @ 10:12 amWill he do it again?
I supported Fitzgerald then, saying elsewhere on the ‘net that he was a man of integrity and I trust that he will do the right thing. I don’t understand the charges of abuse. Libby lied to investigators and obstructed justice. He was convicted by a jury for those things.
How can Martha Stewart or Bill Clinton’s lies be prosecutable, but not Scooter Libby’s?
As for Fitz, this really does make it hard for Obama to fire him. I love what he’s doing in Illinois.
carlitos (e40f11) — 12/11/2008 @ 11:12 amNot exactly illegal is that.
As for you, Juan, you seem to have no idea about anything regarding the Libby trial. it continues to be position of the CIA that Iraq did not attempt to purchase uranium. It remains the contention of the Brits that they did. Joe Wilson “lied” in his statements, no more than you guys did when you claim Armitage was the only leaker (he was not, Rove was the first, Libby the second and Armitage was the third, by accident, to Novak).
Since you guys all hate Bush now, can’t you just give the rest a pat on the back for beating to you to the punch?
Crixus (a83d56) — 12/11/2008 @ 11:33 amCarlitos, you have a fair point that Scooter Libby is guilty in exactly the same way Bill Clinton was.
I think that’s a good metric of intellectual honesty. But Bill Clinton was being investigated for crimes including sexual harassment. Scooter was not being investigated for a crime… he was just being investigated. Fitz knew who leaked and that the leak wasn’t of a covert nature. Libby was convicted by a jury, and I presume his trial was fair (and he obviously had great resources), so I can accept the conviction.
But it’s really hard to be perfectly consistent when you are interrogated long enough. I don’t like the idea of endless investigations which only turn up violations in cooperation with the investigation. Fitz found nothing to prosecute beyond that… which says something.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/11/2008 @ 11:36 amThe following is from the Chicago Tribune, 12/10/08 from reporter, James Janega. He tells how the Tribune first contacted Fitzgerald’s investigation and how subsequent events unfolded.
Janega says that reporters following their own inquires into Blogo’s activities wanted to confirm their information prior to publication and called Fitzgerald’s office.
(N.B. para 2, which clearly indicates cooperation between Fitzgerald’s office and the Trib began prior to the wire tap.) If you can believe what you read in the papers.
“In a news conference Tuesday, Fitzgerald said Tribune reporters called his office for comment on a story about part of the probe eight weeks ago, prompting prosecutors to ask the paper not to publish some elements of the story.
“We thought we’d never have the opportunity to install the bug or place the telephone tap and we made an urgent request for the Tribune not to publish that story,” Fitzgerald said. “That is a very rare thing for us to do and it’s an even rarer thing for a newspaper to grant.
“I have to take my hat off that the Tribune withheld that story for a substantial period of time, which otherwise might have compromised the investigation from ever happening,” he said.”
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 12:27 pmThe lead to the newspaper in Chicago did force Fitzgerald’s hand.
And, more significantly than the Plame case, Fitzgerald was burned by a similar leak in his investigation into the Holy Land Foundation while he was still in New York, when Judith Miller called the organization on December 3, 2001, and asked for a comment on the fact that the feds were preparing to raid the organization the next day. Miller published an article about the investigation on December 4, 2001.
As for where the leak to the Chicago papers came from, when there is a wiretap in place, the existence of the application and order, as well as the contents of both, would be known inside the US Attorney’s Office and the Federal District Court Clerk’s Office. Given the nature of the pervasive corruption at all levels of government in Chicago, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that there might be people working in either of those two places that are connected to the corrupt Democrat machines that run Chicago and Illinois.
WLS (26b1e5) — 12/11/2008 @ 12:55 pmReading the democraticunderground’s thoughts on this, they apparently do not share Fitz’s appreciation of the Tribune. It’s just another bit of proof that the MSM is right wing.
I actually saw a lot of folks there note that they knew this guy was a crook governor but voted for him anyway… that’s like Republicans voting for Ted Stevens.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/11/2008 @ 12:55 pmI’m certain that the Trib agreed to hold off publishing because the Trib itself was being victimized, and Blago was making a concerted effort to get a Trib Assitant Editor fired.
WLS (26b1e5) — 12/11/2008 @ 12:57 pmWLS, you’re right that it’s no surprise a crook was in the loop on this wiretap. But it seems more worthy of investigation than the Plame leak was, and I don’t think we’ll ever see such and investigation because it wouldn’t be a witchhunt like the Libby/Rove investigation was.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 12/11/2008 @ 12:58 pmFitz should not have made this public. He should have confronted the gov. with the tapes and made him wear a wiretap on the real corrupt player in this scandal.
Roy Mustang (ad5f36) — 12/11/2008 @ 1:03 pmJuan — I’m not completely unsympathetic with the view that the Plame leak investigation can be viewed by some as having been the product of an overzealous prosecutor. I don’t agree, but I can see how others might think so.
Frankly, when Fitzgerald was handed the case, and where there was a glaring problem with Libby’s first FBI interview, it would be hard to simply shut it down without making some effort to see where that went. The problem that Libby created for himself was that he kept digging the hole deeper with each interview and GJ session.
He was in a uniquely disadvantageous position, given that the President had directed all WH personnel to cooperate with Fitzgerald. Libby’s options were really to keep his mouth shut and probably be forced to resign, or try to finesse his way out of trouble with answers that weren’t 100% truthful, and hope nothing would come of it. Unfortunately he gambled and lost.
WLS (26b1e5) — 12/11/2008 @ 1:04 pmAt #58, WLS said, “The lead to the newspaper in Chicago did force Fitzgerald’s hand.”
I don’t agree. The important point here is not when the Trib first contacted Fitzgerald’s office, (8 weeks ago) but when the Trib decided to reveal wire taps on Blogo’s phone lines. That revelation sparked the arrests.
The question is, why not hold off and give the bad guys enough rope to hang themselves? Unless, of course, you really don’t want to catch the big Kanuna.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 1:49 pmThere is a lot of self promotion in Patrick Fitzgerald.
OMG, a prosecutor who’s out big – game hunting. Run for your lives! Eeeek! How childish – of course he’s after the big fish, that’s the only way to get ahead of this rotting, stinking entrail we call Chicago politics. Talk to some of us who’ve had to live here our entire lives, and ask anyone if they think Fitz has gone too far. There will be no takers, other than the usual brain – dead voters who think the only thing that matters is the “D” on their ballots. And as for his apparent early action on this case, what do you suppose would’ve happened if Blago had made the Senate selection on a straight bribery play? The howls of outrage for Fitz not acting sooner (in order to preserve the last shreds of integrity of the government) would have been deafening.
Dmac (e30284) — 12/11/2008 @ 1:59 pmDmac, you make good points. I understand Hemingway’s message in “The Old Man and the Sea,” some fish are just too big for ordinary men to handle.
You go fishing on the briny deep and you can’t tell what sort of cold blooded monster might take the hook. If the fish is too big and could wreck your boat, it’s best to cut the line and go home to your supper early. That way you can put out again tomorrow on the morning tide.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 2:27 pmIf you listen to Fitzgeralds press conferences, what he desires most is good press coverage.He spent months and millions to nab Libby,a small figure but close to the VP and so sure to win press approval for taking him down. Lets see who he takes now but you can be sure it won t be a press favorite like O b.
john morrissey (dda662) — 12/11/2008 @ 2:42 pmIt is, however, evtirely possible that they heard some indications that he was about to seal a deal and make an appointment, and wanted to get this out ahead of any announcement from Blago.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 12/11/2008 @ 2:44 pmScott, so why not let Blogo go ahead and make an appointment, track the pay-off, and then nail the dirty rats red handed?
The appointment could be blocked in the Senate on clear grounds of corruption and would have 10 times the impact of an obscure indictment in some ongoing corruption investigation in Chicago.
If Fitzgerald wants publicity for himself, he just passed up a golden opportunity to be at the center of a perfect storm.
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 3:11 pmHe abused an abusive power in Libby.
He knew very quickly that Armitage was the leaker. The “crime” alleged was solved. Yet Fitz spent millions more in a political fight. A clear abuse.
Having said that, his performance in Illinois, as far as I know, has been stellar. He is a treasure and he just ensured his re-appointment with a deft, and fully justified, indictment of Blago and Co.
Ed (957a32) — 12/11/2008 @ 3:36 pmwhat he desires most is good press coverage.
Tell me truthfully, now – what prosecutor on this earth desires anything different regarding his work? Again, this ain’t some PoliSci 101 class, it’s reality. Did you think that Rudy was a glory – hound narcissist during his prosecution of the Mob in NYC during the 80’s? Of course he was! But that always comes with the territory – you’re not going to take down prominent public figures with somebody who shrinks from the spotlight – big crimes begat big egos chasing them down. Chicago politics has always been larger than life, which is why the current MSM speculation of the Governor being mentally – deranged is ludicrous. That kind of mentality is par for the course here, some folks need to brush up on their history of this place, and the bizarre means and mores that engulf the city and the state.
Dmac (e30284) — 12/11/2008 @ 3:37 pmBecause he wouldn’t have to wait. As soon as the agreement is made, he can nail them.
You’re starting to come down with a nasty case of ODS there, Rope…
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 12/11/2008 @ 4:57 pmSo, Scott, you don’t see the wisdom in allowing Fitzgerald to make double sure his ducks are in a row before he reveals his taps on Blogo’s phone lines?
Ropelight (5b609a) — 12/11/2008 @ 6:31 pmI hate to answer a question with a question, but should the Blagojevich investigation change anyone’s view of Fitzgerald? I mean, anyone other than a dunce like Ropelight who thought Fitzgerald was a rabid Democrat partisan (if memory serves he’s a Republican)?
My view of Fitzgerald is that he went overboard in throwing the book at Libby, and if it there had been anything remotely nuanced about Blagojevich’s conduct, Fitzgerald would have found a way to go overboard there, too. Fitzgerald is a law-and-order, bust-anything-that-smells-of-corruption partisan, not a Democrat or Republican partisan. But in Blagojevich’s case, the underlying conduct is so egregious that such “partisanship” scarcely matters.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 12/11/2008 @ 6:51 pmQuestions are being asked by me and others Pat: was the investigation shortstopped before a crime was actually committed? Is what Blago did a crime or just despicable? Would it not have been better to wait and see who paid off since then we have a completed case of bribery? Since no payment was ever made, not job taken, no 501 (c) (4) ever created, do we have a case of bribery?
OTOH, in the case of Libby, Fitz knew who leaked Plame’s identity but was unsure if a crime had been committed by the leakers. So he pursued the case far enough that he ensnared a high value target in a process crime. A notch on his gun, but a travesty nevertheless.
Could a case not be made that what we have now is simply a small-time version of promising the Unions an end to a secret ballot in return for $400 million in campaign contributions? Except for the “F bomb” is one that much more unethical than the other?
Moneyrunner (ea5fc8) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:30 pm“I hate to answer a question with a question, but should the Blagojevich investigation change anyone’s view of Fitzgerald? I mean, anyone other than a dunce like Ropelight who thought Fitzgerald was a rabid Democrat partisan (if memory serves he’s a Republican)?”
Xrlq – No need to get all hatey on Ropelight. In addition to putting away former Governor Ryan, Fitzgerald has been inching closer to Mayor Daley, steadily nailing his cronies nut not quite getting close enough to Little Richie himself. Blago is just among the higher profile Dems he has gone after, but Daley is who he would really love to get.
My opinion is that Fitzgerald pulled the plug to save Obama and his team embarrassment because Blago’s antics were getting too out of hand. Fitzgerald did not want to sully the office of the PeBHO by letting any deals get struck.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:50 pmNot a bad trick, to have a President owe you a favor.
Another Drew (821fe5) — 12/11/2008 @ 7:52 pmFitzgerald? Tool. And for now he’s a barrel-fishing tool I think.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 12/11/2008 @ 8:47 pmThree high profile cases of late have shaken my faith in the justice system. First, Martha Stewart, then Scooter, then Conrad Black. I didn’t see the criminality in any of the three.
By “criminality” I mean a danger to the rest of the citizenry. Maybe the prosecutor could invent a violation of the letter of the law or a “process crime.”
Politics in Illinois certainly needs to be cleaned up for the good of the citizenry but do I trust Fitzgerald to do it? After Libby and Black, I don’t trust him to serve me. He seems a loose cannon with little sense of WHY he holds his position of public power.
It reminds me of power plays in a Turkish harem.
Joseph Somsel (7fd130) — 12/11/2008 @ 9:36 pmMemo to Gordon Lightfoot:
“The Wrath of the Patrick Fitzgerald.”
DCSCA (d8da01) — 12/11/2008 @ 10:48 pm