Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I've just read the entire Response filed by Fitz - interesting items

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:26 PM
Original message
I've just read the entire Response filed by Fitz - interesting items
This is my favorite portion:

"According to defendant, at the time of his conversations with Miller and Cooper, he understood that
only three people – the President, the Vice President and defendant – knew that the key judgments
of the NIE had been declassified. Defendant testified in the grand jury that he understood that even
in the days following his conversation with Ms. Miller, other key officials – including Cabinet level
officials – were not made aware of the earlier declassification even as those officials were pressed
to carry out a declassification of the NIE, the report about Wilson’s trip and another classified
document dated January 24, 2003."

So the declassification was like "Super-Secret Probation" in "Animal House". And it basically goes to show that Bush wanted to keep his "declassification" secret from everyone. If what he was doing was legitimate, then why not just release it straight out? He and Chney knew damn well that what they were doing was dead wrong.

I also found it interesting that Fitz doesn't intend to use Rove or Hadley as a witness. I think that should make Rove and Hadley very, very nervous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. The Declassification Was Classified
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. And according to Fitz, that classification was consciously maintained
"As part of his effort to justify in essence “open file” discovery concerning the NIE, 8
defendant notes that “Mr. Hadley was active in discussions about the need to declassify and
disseminate the NIE . . . .” Defendant fails to mention, however, that he consciously decided not to
make Mr. Hadley aware of the fact that defendant himself had already been disseminating the NIE
by leaking it to reporters while Mr. Hadley sought to get it formally declassified."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissWaverly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. isn't it true you don't call witnesses if you are going to indict them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yes, and that could be a hint
of what is yet to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Excellent review of Fitz's brief at Firedog Lake
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 02:30 PM by Jersey Devil
http://www.firedoglake.com/

Read part I & II on the main page
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMillie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. I don't suppose you have a link to it, do you?
that would be nice.

I heard on the TV that the fact that Rove and Hadley are not being called as witnesses means it is likely that there will be some charges brought against them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Here's the link from Smoking Gun
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. also see the links at firedoglake.com (nt)
x
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. Fine. Then they should be able to produce the Declassification Guide
that predates the leak. Otherwise they can put on the orange jumpsuits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Well, I'm not sure how any of them are going to look in orange.
They've evidently just decided that if Bush/Cheney says it isn't secret any more, then it isn't. They don't have to tell anyone, it just is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Well they can say that but Bush signed an Executive Order
that says otherwise. So unless they produce the Declassification Guide, as per Bush's executive order of 2003, they have broken their own laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. I sincerely hope that we get to see all this in a court of law. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Well, you see, it was Sunday and * didn't know where the 'Declassified"
stamp was. That's why it wasn't "officially" declassified until July 18, when Bush found the stamp under a pile of unread newspapers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
12. Waas: The key judgements of NIE specifically excluded the uranium claim!
http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003972.html

Furthermore, blogger eRiposte writes, "...The NY Sun is reporting that Libby had permission from Cheney and Bush to leak portions of the key judgments of the NIE because it bolstered the uranium claim. But as I have discussed before, the key judgments of the NIE specifically excluded the uranium claim. This is very interesting in terms of its implications. I’ve discussed this further here."

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007296.php


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
13. Another interesting section:
Can't really tell from this exactly who knew what, and when, but I'm reading it that at least Cheney knew what was going on while Bush was insisting that he would find the leaker.

"During this time, while the President was unaware of the role that the Vice President’s Chief
of Staff and National Security Adviser had in fact played in disclosing Ms. Wilson’s CIA
employment, defendant implored White House officials to have a public statement issued
exonerating him. When his initial efforts met with no success, defendant sought the assistance of the
Vice President in having his name cleared. Though defendant knew that another White House
official had spoken to Novak in advance of Novak’s column and that official had learned in advance
that Novak would be publishing information about Wilson’s wife, defendant did not disclose that
fact to other White House officials (including the Vice President) but instead prepared a handwritten
statement of what he wished White House Press Secretary McClellan would say to exonerate him:

People have made too much of the difference in
How I described Karl and Libby
I’ve talked to Libby.
I said it was ridiculous about Karl
And it is ridiculous about Libby.
Libby was not the source of the Novak story.
And he did not leak classified information.

As a result of defendant’s request, on October 4, 2003, White House Press Secretary
McClellan stated that he had spoken to Mr. Libby (as well as Mr. Rove and Elliot Abrams) and
“those individuals assured me that they were not involved in this.” Memo. Exhibit I.
Thus, as defendant approached his first FBI interview he knew that the White House had
publicly staked its credibility on there being no White House involvement in the leaking of
information about Ms. Wilson and that, at defendant’s specific request through the Vice President,
the White House had publicly proclaimed that defendant was “not involved in this.” The President
had vowed to fire anyone involved in leaking classified information. In that context, defendant
proceeded to tell the FBI that he had merely passed information from one reporter (Russert) to other
reporters while disclaiming any knowledge of whether the information he passed was true, and
certainly unaware that he knew this classified information from government channels. Once that die
was cast, defendant repeated the story in a subsequent interview and during two grand jury
appearances."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caledesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
15. * cannot declassify THIS information.
The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, for example. It has no exemption for the President.!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Covert_Agent...

<read 'em and weep>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
17. They declassified in order to leak
They outed a CIA agent for political purposes. We really should put aside our intellectual natures and just hammer away at this simple fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burried News Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
18. The original document is well worth the read. It goes very fast
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 03:01 PM by Burried News
and uses almost no jargon. Straight and to the point.
Right about now the scooter looks like a moped that got hit by a cement truck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Yes, Fitz seemed to write it knowing that the public would be
interested in reading it as well. I work for an attorney who does federal work, and this was one of the clearest, straightforward filings I've seen in quite a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Scotty's Begging To Spend More Time W/ His Family At This Point
"Please fire me."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. Or it was never really declassified
And they're (Libby, etc.) just saying it was now to cover their asses?

Does that make any sense?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
22. Why let Judith Miller sit in jail?, why let Libby get indicted?
Why fuck over the American people with lie after lie after lie after lie? One can only conlude that this is JUST MORE BULLSHIT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC