Breaking on GEM$NBC :Fitzgerald seeks more time for indictment of Blagojevich

[malaise]

he wants 90 more days. WTF is going on here?

[kentuck]

1. He doesn't want to resign on January 20th, like all other US Attorneys..

It appears...

[malaise]

4. Velly interesting

Hadn't thought of that

[Dennis Donovan]

7. I think, as a formailty, all US attys HAVE to resign on Jan 20th...

...of course, the incoming admin reserves the right to re-hire or not to re-hire them.

[napi21]

2. I'm sure he wants more time to conduct interviews with a lot more

people.

[camera obscura]

14. There you go, using that "Earth logic". That just won't do.

The real answer is that Fitzgerald is attempting to bring the Democratic party to its knees by indicting, um, a governor with a 4% approval rating. HOW DARE HE.

[Dennis Donovan]

3. It's sounding like he might've jumped the gun a bit...

...in the effort to stop Blago from selling the Senate seat. Only now is he admitting he needs more time?:shrug:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

5. Fitzgerald fucked up

He announced the charges against Blago prematurely, before he had his case completely put together. The theory is that he freaked, afraid that Blago would do exactly what he did yesterday - appoint a Senator to replace Obama.

Sloppy on Fitzgerald's part. Quite unlike him. Something seriously slipped here.

And now Blago's outplayed him - for the time being, at least - by appointing a new Senator, which is, legally, his responsibility.

A nice can of worms, even by Illinois standards.

Fitzgerald just might have hurried himself out of a job with this one.

[Are_grits_groceries]

6. He jumped waaaaaaaay too early for some reason.

That's not like Fitzgerald. He made just enough of a splash to throw Illinois Democratic politics into an uproar. He sure didn't prevent Blago from messing with the Senate seat.
He just succeeded in dragging a lot of important names through the mud.
Something smells.

[MiniMe]

8. He tried to prevent something from happening

Unfortunately, imho Blago didn't do anything wrong in this case. He talked about it, he may have planned on it, but he never committed the crime. Burris is not the person he would have appointed if Fitz hadn't stepped in. They were investigating him for other things, I wonder what the status of that is?

[TomClash]

9. Maybe his case isn't as good as advertised

. . . and he needs to search for more evidence.

Or perhaps he wants to keep the controversy going as long as possible to help his repuke buddies.

I don't trust this guy. He's a rat.

[camera obscura]

12. Yeah, Patrick Fitzgerald is just the darling of those Republicans, don'tcha know...

:eyes:

[TomClash]

17. Yeah, a fine job he did prosecuting the Bush Administration

He must have been a darling of a lot of Republicans to get a US Atty post in a major city. :eyes:

[camera obscura]

20. You think prosecuting a current administration is so easy? Really?

its not like Bush taped his own conversations as Nixon did. How exactly would you have improved on the case?

[TomClash]

21. Let's start with having another 20 people testify under oath nt

[malaise]

13. I trust him but he may have blown this one

If he was a rat Scooter Libby would never have been sentenced.

[TomClash]

18. Maybe - maybe not

But Scooter Libby was a farce - a fall guy who knew he would be pardoned. That investigation was absurd.

[amandabeech]

10. Maybe the tapes are not enough for everything he wanted to do.

It's also possible that some witnesses have lost their memories and others have suddenly recovered theirs.

It is very odd timing to make this request today--the day after Blago's very slick move.

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. Desperate, the Mighty Fitzmas flails in a monumental public disgrace

All the poor Fitzmas fanboys and girls must be so sad that the Mighty Fitzmas appears, after all, to be a bit of an incompetent.

[Hidden Stillness]

15. Fitzgerald is Certainly No Carol Lam...Oh, That Explains It

I am very unimpressed with Fitzgerald generally, except as a grandstanding, press-conference speaker; seems to wow the corporate media, anyway. I am still baffled as to how anyone could manage NOT to indict and convict Cheney. Exposing the identity of an active undercover CIA agent used to be considered as grimly treasonous and dispicable an act--because of the threat to the lives of all connected to the person--as defecting to a Communist country and spilling all your secrets would be; not anymore. I even remember seeing, (I think from the work of Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson, as part of their lawsuit), a paper with instructions on how to go ahead with this plan, exposing the agent Plame and destroying her career, okaying the plan, and written on the edge of the paper, IN CHENEY'S HANDWRITING! How can you manage NOT to "trace it back" to Cheney's office, as an order to Cheney's employee--which I believe was actually another clue as to the origin--when you have evidence of the crime itself? What are you waiting for--unless it is for the "R" after the name, to become a "D."

I am old enough to remember when they gathered all kinds of evidence showing bribes, illegal preferential treatment on Government contracts, tax evasion, and other corruption charges against the hated Nixon Vice-President Spiro Agnew, who was run out of office and faced criminal charges; I think Agnew went to prison. Why can't it happen here, with much clearer evidence, and an even worse charge, (not to mention all the other crimes Cheney has committed)? Fitzgerald is either incompetant--unlikely here, when everybody knew the evidence going back to Cheney's order--or is a "good Bushie."

Please explain how Fitzgerald managed not to charge Cheney, with anything.

[McCamy Taylor]

16. I told you so. He had his chance. Let him go. This was all about saving his job.

He rushed the indictment to save his job.

[Rhiannon12866]

19. He has to listen to hours and hours of tapes.

He just needs more time... :shrug: