There’s one other thing we know besides that Libby is in deep doodoo – namely that Fitz is not done, and we’re going into extra innings.

Only one question asked during the presser really touched on the recent flurry of activity, and Fitz sidestepped it with the same deftness that he sidestepped everything else. But I’m left with the impression that (to mix metaphors madly) Fitz just threw out an appetizer to show everyone that he’s playing serious hardball. He knew that everyone was expecting *something*, so he delivered something – confirmation that Libby lied through his teeth, without showing his hand on the underlying facts.

– Rick

oh, they’re there. He’s been called an Ivy League Elliot Ness (squeaky clean, etc.) for a while.

Reading the indictment again, it’s just so crystal clear. To Cheney’s people, the press is a joke and/or a tool to be used to satisfy their goals. Laws are a joke. An oath taken before a grand jury is a joke, everything’s a joke to them. They have things they want to do and they set about doing them no matter what. It’s a miracle that the system is still in place enough to hold them accountable at all.

Just posted at the WSJ:
4:05 p.m.: Anne Marie Squeo reports from Washington. Described as Eliot Ness with a Harvard law degree, Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor at the heart of the case that has ensnared White House officials, is a lot like the legendary law enforcer who brought down gangster Al Capone for tax evasion: While investigating bigger wrongs, he’ll settle for easier-to-prove charges to get his target. Read the full report.

From TomDispatch, prosecutor Elizabeth De La Vega about Fitzgerald:

Obviously, Fitzgerald is taking a â€big picture†approach to this case. This mirrors his approach to previous cases. In December 2003, for example, Fitzgerald announced the indictment of former Illinois Governor George Ryan on corruption charges in Operation Safe Road, which began in 1998. In that year, the investigation of a fatal accident revealed that truckers were purchasing commercial licenses from state officials. Indictments were announced in stages, culminating in the indictment of Ryan, who was the 66th defendant in the case.

Of course, that was back at his full-time job where he had no real time limitations. Still.

park –

He has no REAL time limitation here, either; he’d plainly like to get back to Chi-town, but made clear that today wasn’t The End Of It All, as everyone had been pretty much assuming.

Didn’t Luskin put out a carefully-worded statement last night that Rove’s legal status was unchanged? That would imply that Rove dodged the bullet today, but is not off the hook.

– Rick

We DO know a few things.

1) Libby is gone.
2) The story continues which is paralyzing to the WH.
3) Fitzgerald can use any grand jury he wants (the whole empaneling thing is a non-issue).
4) Fitzgerald has NOT gone home and is still investigating.
5) Speculating…Fitzgerald looked pissed and determined to me. He takes the protection of national security quite seriously.
6) Finally. Anyone who tries to trash this guy is in for it. He’s good in front of the cameras in a Paul-Hackett-kind-of-way.

Not a bad days work IMO.

I’m increasingly less confident that Matalin has cooperated, I will say that. Although I think I’ve been right all along when I’ve been guessing that Ari cooperated.

Eh. One for two. Batting .500.

Kim–

Interesting idea. If Matalin did this, did she do this on behalf of the â€conspiracy†or was she acting as a lone wolf?

And would Russert seriously consider perjuring himself to save Matalin’s butt?

Plus, there’s still that bit about Novak and his source (where presumably the whole investigation began), which is totally unanswered in the indictment, except in relation to Official A.

Maybe Matalin is official A? Would make sense if she’s trying to hide her cooperation with Fitz.

There are 2 things I take from Fitz’s indictments:

1. Fitz KNOWS A LOT and has REVEALED A LOT. But,THERE IS MORE INFO THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVEALED. This indictment is a killer and if Fitz can back up everything he reveals in the indictment (and I’m betting he can), Libby is a dead man walking.

2. Now if you’re Rove or someone else who is in legal jeopardy, Fitz is sending them the message. Come in and cooperate or I will indict you with the information I HAVE NOT REVEALED YET.

My take: FITZ is like a Jedi master. He could go after a lot of people NOW but has deliberately chosen not to do so. Why? By doing it in pieces, he insulates himself and his office and investigation as being seen as a partisan witch-hunt, a la Kenneth Starr.

Fitz is also trying to induce others to flip. I think Fitz is after the VP and Prez, and he wants every single high-level flipper he can get to pursue those cases.

Fitz indicted Scooter because Scooter refused to flip on Cheney.

My guess is Rove offered something to give Fitz pause (Cheney, Bush?) and that’s why Rove was not indicted because based on the info revealed, Rove could have been indicted as well.

emptywheel:

Thanks again for your insights.

Re: Russert.

Did you happen to catch him on MSNBC just a few minutes after noon Eastern time?

The veracity of his comments is very suspect.

At first, he emphatically stated that he had told Fitzgerald that Libby had called him to complain about a commentator on MSNBC, and that they had never discussed Valerie Wilson.

A minute or two later, Russert implied that Libby had discussed Valerie Wilson with Cooper, Miller and himself.

I don’t have a transcript, but I’d love to see one. A video clip would be even better because Russert got this sheepish look on his face after that second remark, a look that seemed to reveal his own self-awareness that he was fucking up his own alibi.

My head is spinning, and I’ve found the day so stressful that I can’t think clearly. But I do have a few random thoughts to offer.

Reading the indictment, two things struck me. First, Fitzgerald has Libby on the charges; there is no way a jury wouldn’t find him guilty. Second, the Bush administration absolutely cannot afford to have this case go to trial. Can you imagine all this testimony being given in court? So it seems that Libby will have to plead guilty to something to escape trial, or Bush will pardon him (hard to imagine that he would dare to do this), or the administration will claim executive privilege to prevent officials from testifying and take it all the way to the SC, which by then they will have well-stacked.

I was also struck by how tired and nervous Fitzgerald appeared. I was surprised at the nervousness, because he is certainly accustomed to trying high-profile cases and being â€on stageâ€. I wonder whether he is strung out and exhausted from last-minute negotiations, and whether something has been thrown at him at the last minute that threatens his case.

Scientist Mom

I agree about Fitz’ nervousness. But imagine how little sleep he has probably gotten of late. Plus, he strikes me as a naturally shy person (I can’t believe I’m saying that about an Amherst Rugby player, but he reminds me of one I knew once, so I guess it’s possible).

But remember, there’s always the possibility of a civil suit out there. Bush has to consider that. The information–at least about the primary leak and the plot against Joe Wilson–will come out anyway, thanks to Paula Jones.

Roosevelt Dem

I think that’s very plausible.

I’m increasingly convinced that NYT gave Fitz some information on Judy attempt to write a story.

Consider. The story is Judy said she had no significant conversations with Libby except in July. Then Fitz showed her the sign-in log, and she realized she’d been caught. So she testified.

But there is no way Fitz could have known Libby and Judy talked about Plame on June 23 from the sign-in log. There had to be another reason to believe it was important. Important enough to win a face-off with Judy to get more testimony out of her.

So I think someone at the NYT told Fitz that the June 23 meeting was important.

But Novak would really avoid that, both because he kind of sort of testified on his own. And because he’s got so many editors (or did, before CNN put him on leave) that you’d not know who to ask. Chicago Sun Times? Town Hall? CNN? Who is Novak’s editor?

So no one would have known if Novak were working on this in June.

Can the following line in the indictment cited above–â€State Department personnel were saying that Wilson’s wife was involved in the planning of his tripâ€â€“be referring to Bolton, Fleitz, Wurmser, and Hannah? Maybe Grossman WAS the Undersecretary who talked to Libby, but the information he was provided was from the propogandists (Bolton, et al) and he just passed it on (unwittingly?) to Libby?

Ryan Lizza says that he confirmed with Fitzgerald that Grossman was the â€undersec of State†in the indictment.

But there are still the unnamed and undesignated State Dept gossips that were talking about Valerie Wilosn, and they could have included Bolton and/or Fleitz.

Libby was quoted on the news that he would be exonerated. That seems highly unlikely, given the specificity of the charges and the large amount of info backing them up. So he is facing at least a few years in prison almost certainly, plus a trial that drags on with testimony by the VP and everyone else, and immense legal fees. (Note: See who is paying for his defense now.)

That is a large incentive to plead, and he has to have something or someone to give up, unless he has accepted the role of fall guy willingly.

On the IIPA charges, it isn’t a crime, as Fitz noted, to discuss CIA agents, even classified ones, around the office if you have clearance. The crime is in telling unauthorized outside people. Fitz seemed clear this is a serious crime and the public interest ought to be vindicated, even if it is a prosecution for another charge, like perjury. Rove seems to me to be the most vulnerable to this charge.

We know of the leak to Novak from one or two people, one of whom was almost certainly Rove; the leak to Miller, but she didn’t write about it–did she tell someone else? Is the fact that she didn’t write about it enough to get Libby off the hook? Maybe there is more info we need here. Remember the language in the filing in support of the subpoena about â€what she might do with the informationâ€. The leak to Cooper as well, from Rove.

I am not so sanguine that Fitz is really going after a lot of other people. Rove, certainly. But I’m not discounting all his â€don’t get your hopes up†and â€No one wants this over more than I†language. Unless he has more sources than we know. The people he would be going after are those who leaked the info to outsiders. And he will use whatever charges he can. But more? I’m inclined to think not, unless it is for lying and/or obstruction.

On the grand jury question, there is always a grand jury sitting in DC. Fitz can go to any grand jury with the testimony and statements he has, plus any new evidence or additional testimony, and get further indictments. It doesn’t have to be a specially empaneled grand jury. They don’t do a new one for every case. It’s just that if a prosecutor is going to interview a lot of witnesses, he needs continuity. But once you have transcripts of statements and testimony, you can go to another grand jury that happens to be sitting. Or their could be sealed indictments, or he could accept deals from people under which they provide additional testimony.

Raw Story is confirming Karl Rove as â€Official A†and says that several papers will report on this tomorrow, including perhaps the Times. Karl isn’t out of the woods at all.

Mimi,

My question was somewhat different. Could he be using two or more grand Juries simultaneously? With the one in DC acting as a front (an intelligence gathering operation,) while the real indictments come from a second or third GJ being run out of Chicago?

In re: Fitz’ nervousness, as remarked upthread…I had the distinct impression while watching him that Fitz was entirely aware that this was historic and could have wide-ranging far-reaching repercussions extending forward through our country’s future. This wasn’t just a high profile case; it’s a case that requires complete and utter certainty beyond that he might ordinarily expect under the law. I think his demeanor reflects the intensity he expects a case of this import to possess. I also believe he was making a statement to the other targets at the same time. He had every reason to appear tightly wound; no prosecutor who is certain of a crime in his head and in his heart wants to risk the loss of a case through lack of focus. I think he saw some really bad stuff that he knows to be criminal all over the place in the White House, but he’s compelled to be absolute in certainty. Look what Starr’s lack of seriousness, intensity and focus did to this country, after all.

Rayne, you raise a good point about Fitzgerald’s awareness of the importance of his actions. This reminds me of his discussion of the 1917 Espionage Act. I found some of Fitz’ statements difficult to understand, but I gathered from what he said about this law that although the criteria were met, he hesitated to apply it because he didn’t want to have an â€Official Secrets Law†as they do in England. Perhaps he was threatening a target by this discussion, but my impression was that he was trying very hard to do the right thing – is he ever the good Irish Catholic boy – and he didn’t want to set a damaging precedent. (By the way, I’m Irish Catholic myself, so I feel free to use this particular ethnic label.)

One statement that I found impossible to understand was his answer to the question of whether the investigation was over. He said something unintelligible. I watched the clip at Crooks and Liars a couple of times and still couldn’t make sense of this particular answer.

ScientistMom, good speculaton. Fitz is handling himself with such class. If I were Irish Catholic, I’d be proud to claim him as one of my own.

I don’t know what the J. stands for, but if you named your son after Patrick J. Fitz accidentally, it’s a great choice.

If I have another son, I will be tempted to name him after Patrick J. Fitz myself.

Fitz for Prez! The integrity, discretion, professionalism, judgment and intelligence he’s shown thus far (in contrast to Bush) is what this country desperately needs.