CIA leak investigator warns against document release

[Quixote1818]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Justice Department and the special counsel investigating the leak of a CIA operative's identity pressed Congress to block legislation that would compel the administration to turn over documents related to the case, the department said in a letter released on Thursday.

The Justice Department, in a letter dated September 14, said special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald had advised that producing documents and holding hearings would interfere with his investigation. The letter was sent to the House Intelligence Committee's Republican chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan.

Congressional Democrats have so far failed in their attempts to pass legislation that would force President George W. Bush and the departments of state, justice and defense to provide Congress with documents relating to CIA operative Valerie Plame.

snip>

Lawyers close to the Plame investigation say there are signs that the 20-month-long inquiry could be wrapped up within weeks. The outcome could have major political implications for Bush, whose current approval ratings are the lowest of his presidency.

Continued:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050916/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc_1

[Stephanie]

1. wrapped up within weeks?

wrapped up? so, no indictments, no trials? how do they wrap it up?

[Quixote1818]

2. I think they mean anything could happen then.

"Wrapped up" I think means that Fitz will make indictments or do what ever he needs to do based on his findings. I think they just mean the initial part of the investigation will be wrapped up but then it will move to the courts to see who is guilty and who is not. That is if their are indictments.

[Carolab]

3. And when will Roberts be installed as chief justice? n/t

[Carla in Ca]

11. After 20 months, something has to come of it

That sure is a long time. One thing leading to another. I'm so nervous about it. Hope it isn't too much longer.

[FreedomAngel82]

14. I hope so

Due to how Bush has gotten away with everything so far I'm not holding my breath though. I can hope but I don't want my face to be blue. Heh.

[Carla in Ca]

15. The prosecutor sure holds his cards close to the vest.

Unlike that slime Starr. I will never forgive how Susan McDougall was paraded with the orange jumpsuit and shackles...shackles!
I want pay back...big time!

[Tinksrival]

4. Good news right?

I would think if the investigation did not produce any indictments, there would be no reason for the letter on the 14th to the house intelligence committee.

[Lecky]

5. That's what I was thinking n/t

[Quixote1818]

8. Thats the way I was thinking too. nt

[dweller]

6. hey now, what is this?

releasing docs, could that hinder, jeopardize the investigation? Is this a legit attempt to quash something in Congress that could derail Fitzgerald?

at the same time, Repugs have stopped the release of info and investigations, so is this a message to Dems? or Repugs?

dp

[emulatorloo]

7. fitz is legit leave him alone - read this if you havent already

The Prosecutor Never Rests
Whether Probing a Leak or Trying Terrorists, Patrick Fitzgerald Is Relentless
By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 2, 2005; Page C01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A55560-2005Feb1?language=printer

[dweller]

9. thanks, but that's from Feb 05

and this is current.

I'm not doubting his prowess. I just want to know who he is trying to stop in Congress from requesting/releasing docs.
On the one hand, releasing info could harm his case. But who will it harm?

and on the other:
The Dems are trying to get more info, and i say more power to them. Is Fitzgerald trying to stop that? and why?

dp

[emulatorloo]

10. there were threads on DU that a repug led "investigation" would somehow

mean that Karl Rove could cut a deal to testify to the committee - which would result in him being immune from prosecution by Fitz.

Well anyway, that was what was argued by some of DU's historians and legal minds.

Therefore if that is the case, Fitz would not want congress messing up his indictments.

PS Fitz is still legit, no matter when the post article was written.

[dweller]

12. i'll agree he is legit

just looking for the legal angle to not have a Congressional inquiry.

If he's blocking the repugs, more power to him.
just trying to make sure that is the point.

dp

[Peace Patriot]

28. The Congressional investigation should come AFTER the indictments and

trials--in case Bushites defy or ignore court orders, or Bush pardons traitors, or whatever the fallout is going to be. Or if Fitzgerald wasn't able to go far enough, because of stonewalling or lying or withheld documents. Or to expose other perps. Or to impeach "unindicted co-conspirators."

Don't want Bush's "pod people" in Congress to interfere, or grant immunity--nor any toadying, deal-making, spineless Democrats either.

[dweller]

29. thanks

i was just wondering about Fitz's request, and the simultaneous move by the repugs.

:tinfoilhat:


dp

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GreenPartyVoter]

17. I agree. They are trying to sink the investigation, which means

Fitzy's really on to something.

------------------------------------------------------
URGENT yet easy! Hold the government accountable for Katrina's aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4736062

Save the gulf, then save the nation! http://www.geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/electionreform.htm

[annabanana]

18. this seems most likely..

I expect the administration and their minions on the hill will try to derail this investigation by any means available....

I will stick with Fitz..

[annabanana]

19. this seems most likely..

I expect the administration and their minions on the hill will try to derail this investigation by any means available....

I will stick with Fitz..

[enough]

16. kick

[maine_raptor]

20. Remember what happened to Ollie North?

He went to trial was found guilty and then had the conviction overturned. Why? Because of his testimony before Congress.

Same old, same old, this time. Repug Congress hold investigation and ruins trial, thereby allowing perps to walk.

Nope, I want Fitzy to hold his cards close to his vest and lock Rove et al tight into a cell.

If he doesn't, then AFTER the 2006 congress-critter election, when there is a Dem majority back in charge, they can go get'em.

[emulatorloo]

21. thanks for your post . . . eom

[annabanana]

22. kick . . . n/t

[Beetwasher]

23. Fitz is Smart: NO CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS MEANS NO IMMUNITY!!!!

He's trying to preempt the move by congressional Repubs to grant immunity (see Iran Contra) to people who are going to be indicted.

If the Congress holds hearing, they can grant immunity to all the key players in order to get them to testify, including Rove. Fitz is trying to stop this from happening.

[Carolab]

24. If that's true he is one hell of a chess player. n/t

[Beetwasher]

27. Yup This is FANTASTIC NEWS, This Tells Me There WILL BE INDICTMENTS!!!

n/t

[Imagevision]

26. "Fitz is Smart: But getting no help from Dem senators...!

"Congressional Democrats have so far failed in their attempts to pass legislation that would force President George W. Bush and the departments of state, justice and defense to provide Congress with documents relating to CIA operative Valerie Plame".

[seabeyond]

25. bring it on, tis time. did cindy and katrina, now plame's turn

again..............