Month: October 2005

So Fitzmas came and Fitzmas went.  Not only that, Fitz is both a trick and a treat depending upon your perspective!

However, my passionate friends left of center, as I am not a Southern Catholic boy, I do not feel compelled to follow the ancient tradition of twelfth night.  Therefore, let it be heard far and wide that I intend to toss my Fitzmas tree out on the curb today.

Or, in the case of some of you Crushies for Fitzie, you can put your walmart specials back in the drawer only your grand jury knows about!

To be sure, I love fun and games.  For me, Fitzmas Eve was about the anticipation, the snark, and the entertainment value of a floundering President and his Party.  Fitzmas itself was deadly serious and humbling as both an American and a human being.  While my diary has opened with playtime, it is about to get immensely serious.  Let’s get significant!

Gadfly is Marty Aussenberg, a columnist for the weekly Memphis Flyer. Marty is a former SEC enforcement official, currently in private law practice in Memphis, Tennessee. (A full bio is below the fold.)

[editor’s note, by susanhu] See Martin’s Nov. 2 article, “No Crime, No Foul.”

The indictment of “Scooter” Libby, ONLY Scooter Libby, and ONLY on investigation- related charges (perjury, obstruction of justice, lying to investigators), is bound to be misinterpreted (read: spun), by ideologues on both sides of the political spectrum. Lefties (in addition to being disappointed that their favorite bête noire, Karl Rove, has seemingly evaded the prosecutor’s net) will feel like some of the wind has been knocked out of their sails because no crime was charged in connection with the underlying revelation of Valerie Plame’s identity (a key element in their assertion that such revelation was motivated by the need to discredit a vocal critic of administration’s casus belli for the war–Iraq’s possession or acquisition of nuclear weapons capability). And righties will revel in that same fact (i.e., since no crime was committed by the Plame outing, the outing was nothing more than a legitimate defense against the attack on the motivation for the war–in other words, politics as usual).

But, to continue Patrick Fitzgerald’s somewhat tortured baseball analogy, there is no reason either for joy or sorrow in Mudville. Mighty Casey (a/k/a Fitzgerald) has, in essence, taken a base on balls, four (or, in Libby’s case, five) lousy pitches, none of which he could really swing at, much less hit out of the park. And, just like a base on balls does’t count as an at-bat, in some ways Fitz still hasn’t stepped up to the plate. But, I suggest that what he may have done is to cork a bat for his next up.

Yesterday’s indictment was dictated by time more than anything else. With the grand jury’s term expiring today, if any indictment was going to be returned, this was the day, and I, for one, don’t question Fitzgerald’s statement that Libby’s obstruction of the investigation prevented him from getting to the truth about the so-called “underlying” charges (e.g., those associated with outing a CIA operative). Indeed, the obstruction charged against Libby prevented the prosecutor from furnishing the one element of the underlying crimes that may be the most difficult to prove: mens rea, as it’s known in the criminal law (i.e., a culpable state of mind). But, be assured: the last out in this game is still to come, and the indictment is a shot across the bow for a whole host of characters in this unfolding drama that should indicate to them sighs of relief would be premature.

First, we know that Fitz intends to continue the investigation, albeit with a new grand jury. That’s no big deal, since the evidence that was presented to the first grand jury will be available, word-for-word and page-for-page, to the next one for their examination and, if necessary, for further elaboration or elucidation either by the prosecutor or by additional witnesses. In other words, the new grand jury won’t be starting from scratch—not by a long shot.

Second, even the fact that Libby wasn’t indicted for any of the possible classified-information-related offenses does’t mean he still can’t be, since the special prosecutor has the prerogative of getting a superseding indictment from the grand jury which is to follow (not unlike what the prosecutor in Texas did in Tom Delay’s case). Thus, Libby is still, technically under the gun, and the indictment itself is rife with indications that there is another shoe yet to drop, something Fitz also strongly foreshadowed in his responses to reporters’ questions during his press conference. And, of course, neither Rove nor any of a variety of other characters whose participation was described in shadowy terms are, as yet, off the hook.

Continued below:

Cross-posted at Daily Kos

Yes, why people lie may seem obvious, but then, in these days of spin, particularly Republican Right Wing Conservative Movement spin, stating the obvious is sometimes necessary.  

A great deal of media attention has been, and will continue to be, focused on GOP pundits attempting to downplay the seriousness of Mr. Libby’s alleged crimes in Fitzgerald’s indictment: false statements, perjury and obstruction of justice.  We will be repeatedly told that these are crimes that don’t count, that somehow lying to the FBI and the Grand Jury is merely  business as usual in Washington, and that Fitz’s failure to charge the “real crime” of unlawfully outing Valerie Wilson as a covert CIA agent somehow makes the charges in the indictment frivolous and/or mean spirited harassment of a hard-working public servant such as Mr. Libby.

Well, let’s take a brief refresher course in why people tell lies and see what light that sheds on these GOP talking points, shall we?

This last week has been a real eye-opener for me.   As many of you know, my husband and I took our names off the rolls of our Southern Baptist church because they supported the Iraq War from the pulpit. They called us unpatriotic.    I thought that would be apex of my disillusionment with the religious community.  

No, it was not the apex.  This week, while my husband was in the hospital I encountered something new.  

Groups of young people roamed the halls of the critical care units, and they all wanted to pray with me.  I pray in my own way, and I told them no.  That led to their attempts to fill me with guilt over my lost soul.     I was very upset and rather sickened at their numbers.   More came along after they moved on.  One man came carrying a bible with a flag stuck in it.  He wanted to pray as well, I said no.   I then said are you a minister approved by the hospital, he said no, he was doing God’s work.  

When the man who delivers our bottled water came he was very nice, he put the bottles inside for me, very kind.  Then he wanted to pray with me.   I said ok, and he did.  It was quite long, and very emotional.   Then he gave me a huge hug in the name of Christ.   I guess I should not disapprove, but it sort of bothered me since I don’t know him.  

I was really not prepared for all those people roaming the hallways and wanting to pray.   It apparently happens all the time. I know the water delivery man meant well, but that is mixing his religion with my grief and my needs.  It is just not quite right.