Does this mean anything, re: Plame, the firings, the emails, Gonzo, Ashcroft, Rove, Fitz, etc.?

[Skip Intro]

Recently I remembered that back on '03, the order was given for emails to be preserved, and that there was a 11 hour "delay" in the WH being told of the order. Couple of snips from a quick google search:

Bump and Update: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appeared on CBS's Face the Nation this morning and responded to Frank Rich's column about a connection between his delay of 12 hours in notifying white house officials of their need to preserve e-mails and records in the Plame investigation and Bush's decision to pass over him for the Supreme Court. In doing so, he disclosed for the first time that the night he got the order, he passed it on to White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card. Crooks and Liars has the video.

”After getting notification from the Justice Department about 8 p.m. that night, he asked if he could inform staffers at the White House early in the morning , and that was okayed. Schieffer then asked if he at least informed anyone at the White House that first night to “get ready” for the order. Yes, Gonzales said, he told the president’s chief of staff that night, and then the president himself “first thing” the next day.

and...

Update: Steven Brant at HuffPost writes:

"I wish you could have seen Bob Schieffer's face as he came back from commercial break to his next guest, Senator Joe Biden, who he then took up this issue with. Bob Schieffer said to Joe Biden (I'm paraphrasing here...I'll post the transcript when it's available) "You know, everyone in The White House has these BlackBerrys. And you have to wonder what sort of message Andrew Card emailed at 8pm to the other people in The White House...what sort of documents could have been shredded in those 12 hours."

That from this http://www.talkleft.com/story/2005/07/24/874/70853">link.

Then there's Conyers on Ashcroft's recusal and the appointment of Fitz:

Rep. John Conyers, Jr. issued the following statement in connection with the decision by Attorney General Ashcroft to recuse himself from the investigation of the leak the name of the wife of Ambassador Wilson:

"I believe today's decision by the Attorney General to recuse himself from the CIA leak investigation constitutes a case of 'too little too late.'

It is too late because the action should have been taken months ago, when it was entirely obvious that the Attorney General investigating the White House presented a blatant conflict of interest. As a result of this delay, actions like the Department's giving the White House 11 hours notice before the investigation was officially started on September 30, can and should be called into question.

It is too little, because the Department has failed to appoint a Special Counsel as required by the Department's own regulations. 28 CFR Sec. 600. As respected as the U.S. Attorney who has had the case assigned to him, Patrick Fitzgerald, may be, he still works for the Attorney General and serves at his discretion. It would be far better to appoint an outside person with a 'reputation for integrity' as provided for in the Special Counsel rules. Appointment of a true Special Counsel would also mean that he or she would be free to seek whatever resources are necessary, and could only be fired for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, or other good cause. Both of these vital safeguards are missing when a simple recusal and delegation of authority is made.

Certainly, it is preferable that the Attorney General recuse himself than he remain in charge. But when we have an investigation of a leak which involves the White House concerning a matter that goes to the integrity of our foreign policy, the American people deserve the most independent review possible."

That from Buzzflash, http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/03/12/ale03004.html">link

What I can't help wondering, at this point, because I'm very suspicious, is - is there a chance that Fitz maybe was picked because of some hidden loyalties to the bush regime? Is it possible that's why Rove wasn't indicted, and the investigation went no further, and that Libby was just a sacrifice to save the team? Its hard not to be cynical.

While that may be jumping the gun, I wonder, does any of this mean anything in relation to where we are today with buscho and the scandals? I mean, they had a heads up before the preservation was to have started.

Just wondering. It seems significant, but I don't know how.

[sam sarrha]

1. i wouldn't be in the LEAST surprised if that wasn't the plan.. NOT AT ALL surprised

[jaysunb]

2. It was the ONLY plan !

And further, Gonzo should never have been allowed to become AG becuase of this, if nothing else. :evilfrown:

[hang a left]

3. Anatomy Of Deceit by Marcy Wheeler is the definitive

book on this case to date. She doesn't agree with your sentiments. You can purchase it at www.firedoglake.com

All of her archived blogposts on this case are at www.thenexthurrah.typepad.com

She is the Plame expert to date.

[aquart]

4. No. There is no prosecutor more respected.

For crying out loud, he's Jesuit trained. So, no. There is no chance.

[Missy Vixen]

5. Oh, my GOD

>is there a chance that Fitz maybe was picked because of some hidden loyalties to the bush regime? Is it possible that's why Rove wasn't indicted, and the investigation went no further, and that Libby was just a sacrifice to save the team? Its hard not to be cynical.<

I'm going to put this on a macro and just leave it there, so I can stop wasting my time posting, posting and re-posting.

First of all. Patrick Fitzgerald was recommended for appointment by James Comey, the acting Attorney General. James Comey is as squeaky-clean as PJF. I would be VERY happy to have Mr. Comey serve as Attorney General, because he is the only man who refused to accept unlimited wiretapping by the NSA, and stood up against it. They couldn't get his freaking signature on the paperwork, so they went to Ashcroft's hospital room (where he lay suffering from pancreatitis -- look it up. He was as ill as one can be and NOT be dead,) and tried to get him to sign off on it.

I detest Ashcroft on principal, but he also refused to sign. For once, he did the right thing.

If you'd like to read a bit more about Mr. Comey, who is now the general counsel of Lockheed-Martin, please go to the following. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11079547/site/newsweek/ I don't care if he and his co-workers call themselves conservatives. They're patriots. They stood up for all of us, and this is what they get in return?

Patrick Fitzgerald was recommended for the job of special counsel by his friend Mr. Comey because he cannot be bought, he has intestines of steel, and he does the right thing (and has continued doing that right thing,) at great personal risk. What is it that people here think the Bush administration bribed him with? Fame? Fortune? A date with a Playboy centerfold? WHAT? I'd like to know. You believe he was a plant by the Bush regime? Have you been listening to the news over the past three weeks or so? He's proven repeatedly that he's not one of "them". They are desperately trying to smear him, professionally and personally.

We don't know why Rove was not indicted. I would tend to believe that he accepted a plea in return for possible testimony. I don't think it's an accident that Mr. Luskin has not seen fit to publicize the letter he allegedly received from Patrick Fitzgerald announcing his client would not be indicted. According to the attorneys who've done analysis of the situation, one has to be what's called a "target", and receive a letter stating such, to receive a letter stating you're now released from suspicion in the case. I think the letter outlines the plea agreement, which is why it's not been widely disseminated. Considering the fact that Mr. Luskin announced yesterday that his client "didn't mean" to delete e-mails he'd already been told to leave untouched, I'd tend to judge whatever he said with skepticism.

If you listened to the post-verdict press conference, the investigation is "inactive" unless "new information comes to light". In other words, if Libby finally decides to talk, we'll have game on. One man stands between the White House and the continuance of the investigation. One man continues to throw sand in the eyes of the umpire. If you want to wonder if someone's in the pocket of the Bushies, how about someone stupid enough to be staring down a possible 30 years in prison -- and who still keeps their secrets?

Julie

[annabanana]

6. It's amazing to me how often this "suspicion" pops up. .

You're right... keep that text handy for the next time Fitz' name and reputation get questioned. And NEVER let it go by without reminding people!

honestly

[Jackpine Radical]

7. 30 years in prison...or a pardon.

Jut what IS Scootie-boy facing?

[hang a left]

9. I think the most he can get is 3 and half years.

He was looking at 30 originally but the in the obstruction charge he was found not guilty.

[H2O Man]

10. Actually

Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice, among other crimes.

[H2O Man]

11. He faces up to 25 years ....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17479718/

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was convicted Tuesday of lying and obstructing a leak investigation that reached into the highest levels of the Bush administration.

Libby is the highest-ranking White House official to be convicted of a felony since the Iran-Contra scandal of the mid-1980s. The case brought new attention to the Bush administration's much-criticized handling of weapons of mass destruction intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war.
......

Libby, who was once Cheney's most trusted adviser and an assistant to President Bush, was expressionless as the jury verdict was announced on the 10th day of deliberations. His wife, Harriet Grant, choked out a sob and lowered her head.

Libby could face up to 25 years in prison when he is sentenced June 5 but under federal sentencing guidelines is likely to face far less. Defense attorneys immediately promised to ask for a new trial or appeal the conviction.
......

[hang a left]

12. I apologize H20

I could have sworn I read in a number of places that the most he could receive is 3 and one have years. I am sure of it. I had no idea that it was that amount of time. If I am wrong, I stand corrected.

I have thought since reading that, maybe he would get 18 months. I just remember thinking that is not a heck of a long time to risk your life and spill. I know that people around here think that J. Miller did a lot of time. I have a little bit of personal knowledge on the subject and if I was looking at 18 months, and a secure future (ie kudos for taking the hit), I would do the time.

If I was looking at 10 years or my life being endangered, I'd have to take the time.

The time Judy did was NOTHING. Compared to what she should be doing.

[Garbo 2004]

15. The references you're thinking of are based on sentencing guidelines

which are at the lower end, not the max penalties under the law.

So yes, you have seen those kinds of numbers in the press. I have too. Judge Walton's not known IIRC for light sentences. Given that Libby was a lawyer and high gov't official and Walton apparently a straight arrow in this case, I'd think Walton would be inclined to higher numbers as much as he's reasonably free to do so.

Here's Jeralyn Merritt of Talk Left on the applicable sentencing guidelines http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/3/6/215613/4042

[H2O Man]

19. You probably did read

that or something very like it.

While there is the possibility of a total of 25 years, he will not be sentenced to that, either. Judge Reggie Walton is known for handing down rather harsh sentences. Libby will most likely be sentenced to about 5 to 7 years. He will serve 42 months. On one hand, that is a small penalty for what he did -- destroying several people's careers in intelligence, including people outside the US who were connected to Plame; purposefully manipulating intelligence; and pushing a war that has caused the suffering and deaths of so many human beings. On the other hand, he will be in a place that is not a "country club" setting. He will not have an easy time being incarcerated.

Many people, myself included, believe that Mr. Fitzgerald had the evidence needed to charge, prosecute, and convict VP Dick Cheney. Yet, as pointed out in another DUer's insightful post here, a case against Cheney may well have hinged on Libby's testimony. A jury may well have refused to convict Cheney without Libby's testimony confirming his role in meetings where only those two were present.

Others have suggested that Mr. Fitzgerald should have listed Cheney as an "unindicted co-conspirator," much like Nixon was identified years ago. Yet this would have required that Libby or others be indicted for conspiracy. Think how long it took the jury to decide that Libby was guilty of four of the five counts against him.

And some here wish that Mr. Fitzgerald had attempted to charge a greater number of those who he had to have recognized were indeed involved in a conspiracy -- the operation to damage Joseph Wilson and destroy Valerie Plame. The issues involved in that were seriously considered. Was there the risk of being defined in the public's mind as the new Jim Garrison? Of facing so many roadblocks that such a larger case would have been tied up in the federal courts, and having the Supreme Court support the administration's attempts stall and grey-mail the cases?

I do wish he had charged VP Cheney. But I can respect his reasoning for not doing so. It is an action that the House of Representatives may actually be in a better position to move on. Congress has its greatest ability to force the executive office to turn over evidence when it is investigating impeachable offenses.

[Missy Vixen]

17. Thank you, H20 Man

My mistake on the 25 years instead of 30.

Somehow, though, I'm thinking that Judge Walton will not be in a charitable mood at sentencing.

Julie

[hang a left]

13. he was convicted of 4 out of the 5 charges.

I thought that he averted the big hit. I am getting old, and all of these scandals run together sometimes.

[H2O Man]

8. Gosh.

And maybe Joseph Wilson was a plant, too. And Valerie Plame caused us to go yo war in Iraq.

[Garbo 2004]

14. Fitz wasn't Bush/Rove's choice for US Attny in Chicago & certainly not for Special

Counsel in the Plame leak investigation. The investigation they had "rolled the earthmovers over" one WH official (Rove?) told the Financial Times in Fall 2003. And so it would have been.

But Ashcroft was basically forced to recuse himself and Deputy AG Comey chose Fitzgerald to run the investigation. A grand jury and subpoenas soon followed.

Think Rove went before the grand jury 5 times just for fun? In an extraordinary move to save his client, even Rove's lawyer gave a deposition to Fitzgerald on his conversations with Viveca Novak of Time mag.

Libby's not just a fall guy (as Libby's attorney tried to portary him) or a mere "sacrifice." The Administration would have much preferred no indictment at all. Info was made public in the course of the investigation, indictment and subsequent proceedings that they would have much preferred did not come out at all.

It became very clear that Cheney was directly, hands on involved in the campaign against the Wilsons. And Libby was his right hand man. Libby didn't just suddenly turn loose cannon and leak to reporters on his own. But Libby lied and obstructed justice. Even when encouraged to flip and turn state's evidence by advisers, Libby refused to do so.

As far as "cover up" investigations, as some have claimed this one was, this one managed to reveal enough evidence that clearly led straight to the WH, in particular the VP's office. Libby is not a small fish. His involvement in the BS case for the Iraq war, pressuring the CIA to change its analyses of intel wasn't a small one. As some have said, "Libby was Cheney's Cheney." As much as many of us would love to see Rove before the bar of justice, it's not a small thing that the VP's Chief of Staff was indicted and convicted of anything. As for the appeal of his conviction, I don't think there's much grounds for reversible error in his trial. He's probably just trying to run the clock.

Perhaps Scooter's counting on a pardon, but I wouldn't be too sure about his getting one. Scooter f'd up: he got caught. And created problems for the WH. (Recall Rove's reported anger at Libby and Cheney when he learned that leaking Plame's CIA identity may have been a federal crime.) Libby's Cheney's guy, not Bush's. And Bush is not a compassionate guy. I think it would not be Bush's natural inclination to pardon Libby. Libby's supporters were told to cool it on their criticisms of the WH and requests/demands that Bush pardon Libby. It's not such a sure thing, IMO. FWIW, Novak recently cited a "credible source" (Karl, is that you...again?) stating that Bush will never pardon Libby.

Anyway, for those thinking that the Fitzgerald tanked the investigation intentionally I'd suggest that if that were the case, there would have been no subpoenas for journalists (with appeals all the way to the Supreme Court), revelations that Rove was Cooper's and Novak's source, no charges against Libby, no trial and no documents/testimony pointing directly to the VP's hands on involvement in the campaign against the Wilsons.

[H2O Man]

18. Thank you.

People despise Rove, and for good reason. But he was of little significance in the years of planning and advocating for an invasion of Iraq that began in 1992. Those who are most responsibile are a small core group of neoconservatives, and none played a more significant role than Libby. From 1992 to 2003, if one compares both Libby and Rove's focus on Iraq -- including knowledge and purposeful manipulation of intelligence from global sources -- it is clear that Rove was of little significance.

More, while Joseph Wilson used colorful language to attract attention to the case, in saying he wanted Rove "frog-marched" from the White House, in his book he makes it clear that he believes Libby was the responsible person: "The man attacking my integrity and reputation -- and, I believe, quite possibly the person who exposed my wife's identity -- was the same Scooter Libby .... He is one of a handful of senior officials in the administration with both the means and the motive to conduct the covert inquiry that allowed some in the White House to learn my wife's name and status, and then disclose that information to the press." (442-443)

[KoKo]

16. Hopefully with the new Email Info Fitz will take another look. CREW has asked

him to and since he can reconvene a Grand Jury maybe he will be able to go further if something turns up related to the Plame Case in the emails. If it isn't related to Plame he probably can't do much but who knows what will turn up now that the emails from 17 Government Departments have been told to be saved by Waxman. Anything could turn up in those.

And if Fitz can't do anything more for whatever reason, the missing e-mails might give ammunition to the Wilson's lawyers for their Civil Case going forward. :shrug:

[rodeodance]

20. hey, I remember that now (with your post as a cue). thanks

[rodeodance]

21. RECOMMEND.

[redacted]

22. Yes, absolutely, it's significant