MUST READ: An Open Letter To Patrick Fitzgerald From John Dean

[DemsUnited]

I respect & admire Mr. Fitzgerald, but John Dean is right to encourage him to go further and dig deeper in this must read letter. I hope Fitzgerald gets a copy.

-------------

An Open Letter To Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald From Former White House Counsel John W. Dean
By JOHN W. DEAN

Friday, Nov. 18, 2005

November 18, 2005
The Honorable Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Special Counsel
Bond Federal Building
1400 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Dear Special Counsel Fitzgerald:

Excuse my being so presumptuous as to send you this open letter, but the latest revelation of the testimony, before the grand jury, by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward has raised some fundamental questions for me.

In your post as Special Counsel, you now have nothing less than authority of the Attorney General of the United States, for purposes of the investigation and prosecution of "the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity." (The employee, of course, is Valerie Plame Wilson, a CIA employee with classified status, and the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.) On December 30, 2003, you received a letter from the Deputy Attorney General regarding your powers. On February 6, 2004 you received a letter of further clarification, stating without reservation, that in this matter your powers are "plenary." In effect, then, you act with the power of the Attorney General of the United States.

In light of your broad powers, the limits and narrow focus of your investigation are surprising. On October 28 of this year, your office released a press statement in which you stated that "A major focus of the grand jury investigation was to determine which government officials had disclosed to the media prior to July 14, 2003, information concerning Valerie Wilson's CIA affiliation, and the nature, timing, extent, and purpose of such disclosures, as well as whether any official made such a disclosure knowing that Valerie Wilson's employment by the CIA was classified information."

If, indeed, that is the major focus of your investigation, then your investigation is strikingly limited, given your plenary powers. To be a bit more blunt, in historical context, it is certainly less vigorous an investigation than those of your predecessors who have served as special counsel -- men appointed to undertake sensitive high-level investigations when the Attorney General of the United States had a conflict of interest. (Here, it was, of course, the conflict of Attorney General John Ashcroft that led to the chain of events that resulted in your appointment.)

<snipped middle part -- discussion of Teapot Dome & Watergate Precedents>

The leak of Valerie Wilson's status did not occur in a vacuum. Republicans in Congress do not want to know what truly happened. You are the last, best hope of the American people in this regard.

I can tell you, as someone who travels about the country, that Americans -- regardless of their political disposition -- are deeply troubled by this case. And, increasingly so, by the limits you have apparently placed on your investigation.

To right-minded Americans, the idea that Administration officials have betrayed their national security obligations, yet remain in their jobs, is nothing short of appalling. Beyond politics is patriotism: Patriotic Americans want to see you not only prosecute those who compromised and endangered Valerie Plame Wilson, but also force the Administration to clean house with respect to those who did this, which you can accomplish through appropriate civil action.

As one who does know something about the way Washington works, I hope you will actually use the plenary powers you have been granted to implement what I understood to be the announced policy of the Department of Justice for which you work -- a zero tolerance policy for leaks.

----------

Read the snipped middle part of this letter, please, at http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051118.html

[Halliburton]

1. he might have a point

Fitz decided to hold off on indicting Rove because of some flimsy email he provided.

[zann725]

13. My guess is Woodward's "timely" testimony, underminining Libby's Indictmnt

...has no doubt more than slightly annoyed Fitz. And there's nothing like annoying 'the fightin' Irish.' So if I was Dough Boy, or Dirth Vader, I'd be smurking a lot less, and instead start 'ducking' that baseball 'pitch' of ambiguous intent Fritz referenced in his News Conf.

[Toots]

16. I still don't understand how Libby's indictment for Lying is undermined by

Woodward saying he also had been told by Administration officials of Plames covert status. Libby committed Perjury and Lied and misled and for those hings he was indicted. He was not indicted for leaking classified information although I do believe he should be. Maybe you could explain in a little more detail how his Lying has been mitigated by Woodward?

[rfkrfk]

25. Libby's contention, will be something like this...

a reporter told me something, so the cat is out of the bag.

later, with investigators, and the Grand Jury,
I said a reporter first told me something,
but I got some personalities mixed up.
That was an untruth, but not an intentional effort
to lie or mislead.
Later VP Cheney told me the same thing.

[ewagner]

2. Interesting letter

I think Fitzgerald is thorough but also cautious. Perhaps too cautious. My instincts tell me to "wait and see" but the obvious pitfall to that is if we wait there may be, in the end, NOTHING TO SEE.

I seriously doubt if Fitzgerald follows the press in this story, with the possible exception of seeing what Rove and Libby's lawyers leak out of the Grand Jury room, so I doubt if this "open letter" will come to his attention. Therefore, I expect the focus of his investigation will remain narrow.

[MadisonProgressive]

4. I thought he was an 'over zealous thug'?

[Halliburton]

6. fitzgerald will probably read it

he read the letters that the dems in congress sent him

[rateyes]

7. My bet is that John Dean mailed that letter...

before "opening" it to the public. I would bet that Fitz read it. I hope he thinks hard about it, too. If, indeed, Fitz does not do as Dean suggests, then IMHO, he is NOT doing his job and is being unpatriotic. We will see. The address is in the letter. Nothing prevents us as "average citizens" from writing similar letters.

[Mme. Defarge]

8. The last thing we need is

a sequel to the Kerry campaign.

"My instincts tell me to "wait and see" but the obvious pitfall to that is if we wait there may be, in the end, NOTHING TO SEE."

[PurityOfEssence]

18. Amen to that

Enough of this "playing chess" in the middle of a bar fight.

These guys are gangsters, and they weaken the country externally and internally with every raspy breath they draw.

[Mme. Defarge]

36. Exactly!

These thugs don't play chess -- they play hardball.

[EVDebs]

19. While Fitz fiddles Rome burns. Op Mockingbird is at center of this

Operation Mockingbird, the CIA's illegal domestic media-manipulation project, is at the very heart of WHY Wilson's wife's name was released in retribution on a whistleblower.

The 'war in Iraq' was done illegitimately and obsconds with Congress' authority to declare wars--congressional war powers--and delegates that authority to Chimpy & Company.

A nut-faction of the CIA favored that and had a rogue element in place funneling bogus 'intel' to the President as needed.

A media favoring this bogus intell was needed too in order to report the lies to a gullible public and Congress, who would drink any kool-aid given them.

Miller, Woodward, the bogus intell sources, 'Curveball', 'Slam dunk', are all part of the media circus created by Bush & Co to avert the dark heart of what has happened the past 6 years.

It is Fitzgerald's duty to investigate ALL of it. As Murtha stated yesterday, the Republic is at stake not to mention our own military.

Operation Mockingbird
www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm

Why domestic operations are illegal, relating to Op Chaos surveillance
www.serendipity.li/cia/lyon.html

Domestic abuse of federal agencies, also as with military PsyOps and CNN within the United States itself undermines 'free' press
www.counterpunch.org/cnnpsyops.html

Is undermining the free press something Fitzgerald wants to support ?

[AuntiBush]

33. Media Circus is right!

The Republic is at stake & those stakes have never been higher.

Here's hoping & praying Fitzgerald is sincere with his investigation and keeps this investigation close to his dutiful heart. Obviously, Dean is doing a "check & balance" on the Woodward event.

[EVDebs]

52. How you 'investigate' the disclosure w/o Op Mockingbird is beyond me

To totally ignore the obvious, that the media was being used for propaganda purposes by the administration domestically --illegally-- tells me that Fitz is either looking into this or he isn't.

If he isn't, the Republic is finished.

[BR_Parkway]

24. Fitz knows he's got one shot, no more - and to pull it off without any

mistakes - because if he makes even one, they will be all over him and totally wash it under the rug. He knows what he's doing, he's got a Grand Jury in an 'ongoing investigation' - there will be plenty more.

[dalaigh lllama]

27. I agree with your take on this

This guy does know what he's doing. Look at just one case he's pursued -- in Illinois, the case against Governor Ryan's minions started in 1998 and culminated in December 2003 with the Governor himself being indicted, along with 70+ others, and there have been NO ACQUITTALS!
Have faith in Fitz -- he may proceed slowly, but by God he's sure.

[Dhalgren]

3. What an excellent letter! John Dean knows what he is talking

about. Will Fitz step up?

[0007]

5. Holy Moley, a wake up call. John Dean is right on! I hope that every

one takes time to read this blistering article.

While I have no reason to believe you are easily intimidated, all I can say is that your investigation, thus far, is falling precisely within the narrow confines -- the formula procedure -- that was relied upon in the first phase of the Watergate cover-up by the Nixon administration.

So narrow was your investigation that it appears that you failed to learn that Bob Woodward had been told of Valerie Wilson's CIA post until after you had indicted Scooter Libby. While I have no doubt you know your way around the Southern District of New York, and the Northern District of Illinois, Washington DC is a very different place.

With all due respect, Mr. Fitzgerald, I believe you are being had. I believe that you were selected with the expectation that you would conduct the narrowest of investigations, and it seems you have done just that.

The leak of Valerie Wilson's status did not occur in a vacuum. Republicans in Congress do not want to know what truly happened. You are the last, best hope of the American people in this regard.

[sallyseven]

9. Am I the only one that thinks that bob woodward is a

lying sack of manure? That this is a red herring thrown into the mix to free libby? Make Fitz look incompetent? Throw woodward in jail and the make him tell the source. I think it is all bs.

[0007]

11. 0h God no! 70% of the folks paying attention have written Bob

Woodward off. He's pissing off what credibility he ever had.

[sunnystarr]

14. You have company ...

I've already posted twice that I think Woodward and the Sr. WH official are lying bags of shit.

I believe that Woodward was part of the WHIG conspiracy to attack the Wilsons, as Judith Miller. It's the only rational explanation of his attacks against Fitz and the investigation.

This was cooked up to distract from Libby and put doubt in the minds of the public of his guilt.

Woodward was coordinated with latest WH attack on Dems. That says it all.

[bunny planet]

10. None of us know what Fitzgerald is planning on investigating or is in

fact investigating. He is ethical enough not to telegraph exactly what he is pursueing, and keeps everything on the down low. I personally think this is smart, although sometimes of course, the suspense is maddening. John Dean is being presumptuous in assuming Fitz is being 'strikingly limited' in the scope and 'narrow focus' of his investigation. He just isn't informing John Dean or anyone else of what he is focusing on prior to revealing it when the time is right. If he does end up only narrowly focused, ultimately, I doubt it will be for lack of trying to uncover further transgressions on the part of the people he's investigating, but rather because these criminals will have been successful in throwing enough sand and muddying enough waters to prevent Fitz from getting to the whole truth. I'll put my faith in him though, he seems like 'the real deal' so far.

[stillrockin]

12. You are right.

Since he's not talking, we do not know what he's doing. That leaves us to project our many fears upon him.

[PurityOfEssence]

21. Fair enough, but I don't think Dean's the least bit out of line here

Maybe Fitzgerald is the Diogenes he generally seems to be, but this HAS taken forever, and it's remarkably timid in its scope. His mandate allows him to rip open the whole underlying methodology of this mob: they lied us into a war and fired or intimidated anyone who got in their way. Their needs to conquer Iraq and not hear any guff out of their own people were such that they betrayed a very important bulwark of our national security without batting an eye.

Our ability to track WMDs was severely hurt by this nasty little personal attack, and that just shows the deep hypocrisy of the administration.

The bottom line is this: I don't think Fitzgerald is moving fast enough or broadly enough. He's definitely brilliant and seems to be quite honest; the guy simply hasn't made ANY missteps that I can see, including using meticulous wording like "known" to defuse whatever crappy spin these thugs want to use against him.

As we "wait and see", more civilians and soldiers die, more career intelligence people retire or are forced out, the fascistic grip of this bunch grows ever stronger and the hopes of reversing this suffocating tyranny grows more remote.

Fitzgerald needs a fire to be lit under him, and I hope we hear more about this fairly soon. His very statement that he was pretty much ready to wrap things up over a year before he actually did errs WAY too much on the side of caution and doesn't promote much confidence.

[0007]

22. Excellent summation! n/t

[bunny planet]

23. I too, wish the investigation was proceeding faster. I just think that

Fitzgerald probably wants to have everything air tight if and when he brings out more indictments. I think it is more likely to be when, not if. It would be disastrous to make a move too soon, regardless of how tempting that would be, because this cabal has slithered out of more tight spots than any of us would've thought possible many times before. They would do it again if anything less than a firm case was brought against them. I think Fitz's first move was exactly what he had ironclad proof of at the moment. He did not rule out anything else, in fact, it is his lack of leaking information that is making others slip up, make mistakes, or come forward with new information. I think that's what Fitzgerald counted on happening, he is very familiar with what dirtbags do when they are rattled. It was clear from what he said in his press conference that he was pissed Libby had obstructed him from determining even the initial charge he was given to investigate. I would be shocked if he wasn't, as we speak, zeroing in on the next indictment and making sure it too, will stick in a court of law.

[dalaigh lllama]

28. But the only reason he couldn't wrap it up last year

was the cute little stalling game Miller et al were playing in the courts with their "noble journalist protecting source" crap. They tied his hands for a solid year with that load of manure.

[lyonn]

44. I like your analogy

It seems there were plenty of reporters that gave testimony. Only one did time for refusing. If the whole case was or is built on the reporters it makes one wonder how shaky his investigation is. He has interviewed, had white house personnel before the grand jury answering questions and still Libby can't be charged with outing an agent. I do wonder if many of us are to unrealistic about what will come of this investigation. To me it looks like from Cheney on down they are guilty of outing Plame, conspiracy thingy. What was the deal on the airplane with cheney & Libby discussing how to handle the Wilson/Plame situation. Stories may not be true. I lke the idea of John Dean prodding him.

[renate]

50. to be fair to Fitz,

I doubt that ANY indictments would result in a pullout of the troops.

It's probably not fair to lay any more soldiers' unnecessary deaths on his shoulders.

I have, almost literally, infinite confidence in him, because he's bipartisan and scrupulously fair. Although in the short run I would prefer to have a feverishly partisan Democrat doing this investigation, in the long run his approach will lead to rock-solid indictments and a much greater acceptance of his findings in D.C. and in America.

[Auntie Bush]

38. You forgot to add these criminals know how to use the shredder.

[ClayZ]

15. "last bulwark of protection for the American people" YIKES!

Two Years is a long time to wait for Fitzmas.

Hope we are not going to get a lump of coal!

[IndyOp]

17. Good Deal! Am I the only person who thought there was a 3rd Dean brother -

upon seeing this post? Howard, Jim, and John? It took me until near the bottom of the letter to realize it was THAT John Dean - the guy from the Nixon Administration...

Ex-Nixon Aide John Dean Tells Bill Moyers that Bush Should Be Impeached
Published on Friday, April 2, 2004 by NOW with Bill Moyers
<http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0402-16.htm>

[foreverdem]

20. No one really knows

As thorough as Fitz is, I doubt he is limiting his investigation. We don't know how many irons Fitz has in the fire. I doubt he will leave any stone unturned, and if he feels and the evidence shows a wide spread cover up going in many directions, he'll keep digging until he nails everyone involved. Just my 2 cents.

[Der Blaue Engel]

26. Okay, I'm confused

So today, we're not liking Fitzgerald? It's so hard to keep up around here.

[dalaigh lllama]

29. Still lotsa love for Fitz here

I think everyone is just so tired and terrified of Bushco that patience has been stretched to the max. Fitz's Gov. Ryan investigation took five years total, but in the end he got them all, all the way to the top. The question is, can we wait three more years for Fitz to get the goods on these crooks?

[willing dwarf]

35. Like Fitz is quoted as saying in Chicago yesterday,

"if we indict, we're fecked." "If we fail to indite, we're fecked." "Either way, we're fecked to hell."

[incapsulated]

30. Good for him

I don't know what Fitz plans to do but I think I know what we all want him to do. Friendly encouragement is not a bad thing, imho.

[PhilipShore]

31. I am no legal expert but Dean may not be seeing the bigger picture

Though I am happy that Dean writes Fitz a letter, about his critical opinions about the cover-up of the Republicans, and the role of the Feds in bringing them to justice, can only help in the long run.

However, I think Fitz is doing a top notch job--giving the fact--that he is investigating; what most intuitively believe to be the knowing lies of the Bush administration.

I am no lawyer--but I know that an unwritten rule exists when going to court, which is only say all that is needed to prove your point. If Fitz presents his case in to broad of a way--he more then likely would plead himself--out of court from his original charges, as well as any future charges, that could be brought against the big dogs in the Bush administration.

I personally think Fits strategy is brilliant mainly because if I was in his shoes, I would do exactly what he is doing, which is to focus on one Bush Administration official at a time, and let other State courts or other Federal District courts take up issues like Delay etc.

Let Fitz do lots of discovery, which can be used by others in the future.

I also personally think fits has already won the major battle for the Democrats, even if no one is ever convicted. Why? Because in the court of Public Opinion, Polls etc., it has been proven that the Bush administration are lying to the American people, so therefore, they will be voted out of office. Then if Fitz can somehow prolong it until 2006 and 2008 when the Democrats are in Office, the Democrats can then unseal, all the court records, and then reopen the investigations.

Court battles generally take 4 or more years to go thru the courts anyway.

[T Roosevelt]

32. While it feels good to read these words...

I would recommend this posting by Jane Hamsher at firedoglake:

Gimme a Break

Here's the money paragraphs:

Fitzgerald is trying to gracefully waltz through landmines. The moment any of the foaming lunacy of Joe DeGenova and his fingernails-on-a-chalkboard wife Victoria Toensing threaten to gain traction in the media and turn public opinion against him, there will be all manner of obstruction thrown in his way. Being quite humble, quiet and crafty has served him well, and what Dean is suggesting has the potential to completely derail his efforts to land the Great White Cheney. Dean's offstage urging of him into the role of Ahab risks dooming him to Ahab's watery fate.

I think these kind of suggestions are better laid at the feet of members of Congress. Fitzgerald has his hands quite full at the moment, and I see no reason to believe that he is not handling all the players with considerable skill as he maneuvers them into unleashing all their worst impulses on one another unfettered by any restraint.

[PhilipShore]

34. Dean: The master manipulator of the cover-up of the Nixon Administration

Strange. Why is the master minuplator (liar) from the Nixon era trying to help liberal Democrats? My philosophy is to never trust a Republican.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dean

John Wesley Dean III (born October 14, 1938 in Akron, Ohio) was White House Counsel to U.S. President Richard Nixon from July 1970 to April, 1973. As White House Counsel he became deeply involved in the Watergate scandal cover up, even referred to as "master manipulator of the cover up" by the FBI.1, and went on to become the star witness of the Watergate prosecution.

Watergate trial

Dean pled guilty to obstruction of justice before Watergate trial judge John Sirica on October 19, 1973. He admitted supervising payments of "hush money" to the Watergate burglars, notably E. Howard Hunt, and revealed the existence of Nixon's enemies list.

On August 2, 1974, Sirica handed down a sentence of one to four years in a minimum-security prison. However, when Dean surrendered himself as scheduled on September 3, he was diverted to the custody of U.S. Marshals and kept instead at Fort Holabird (near Baltimore, Maryland) in a special "safe house" holding facility primarily used for witnesses against the Mafia.

He spent his days in the offices of the Watergate Special Prosecutor and testifying in the trial of Watergate conspirators Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Robert Mardian, and Kenneth Parkinson, which concluded on January 1, 1975. Dean's lawyer moved to have his sentence reduced, and on January 8, Sirica granted the motion, adjusting Dean's sentence to time served.

[grasswire]

37. keep up, would ya?

John Dean has long ago redeemed himself.

[PhilipShore]

39. It just says he received limited immunity.

I was not able to vote around that time (Watergate), and I really am not now nor was I then into politics. I am just giving my personal opinion about Republicans. From the limited research I have done into Dean, he is not much of anything but the former lawyer for a Republican crook called Nixon.

I just don’t buy that he redeemed himself. I look at his bio and I cannot convince myself that that is the kind of person—that all the sudden changes his ways, and does the right thing.

In fact I picture him laughing that he got away with some secret trust fund—in some offshore account-- all because he made a deal with the Feds or the CIA and/or because he just stole a bunch of money—and got away with it by getting limited immunity.

He has had more then 30 years to become what I would called redeemed, and become another sort of Gandhi (whom was a lawyer as was or is Dean), but he has not-- he just simply wrote a few books, about corruption, that I never even heard of before. He probably wrote them—because-- it was the only was he could work not because he changed his character.

[incapsulated]

40. You don't have to trust Dean

All you really need to know is that he hates the Bush admin. and is far from stupid. He knows what he's talking about, here. He's not the enemy, anymore.

[PhilipShore]

41. But I thought the letter was from Howard Dean

Even if he does hate the Bush administration. He has an inherent-- conflict of interest--in giving opinions about corruption—even if he hates Republicanism -- because he was the lawyer for Nixon.

And frankly his writing style is terrible. It seems rushed, as if he was forcing himself to write it.

And to be frank, when I first read it- and I wrote my first counter argument; I thought I was addressing a letter from Howard Dean, then when I realized it was John Dean, I actually then understood why I naturally—had to strongly disagree with his letter to Fitz.

[incapsulated]

42. In a sense, it makes his argument more convincing

Someone who knows corruption from the inside out calling a spade a spade, so to speak. Dean has nothing to gain here, if he was defending BushCo. then the argument is weak, but he isn't. He isn't addressing the Nixon admin, which he has admitted was corrupt. He believes that this admin is even worse and I agree.

It really doesn't matter what you think of Dean, it's what you think of his statement. Obviously you disagree with him, but I think there is nothing wrong with some friendly prodding, just in case.

[PhilipShore]

43. I did sense that he seemed to have good intentions…

but that was because I thought it was Howard Dean.

And to be blunt--if he came up with that sort of strategy, that he advises Fitz to do for my legal issues, I would feel obligated to fire John Dean as my personal lawyer based upon his proposed strategy.

[incapsulated]

45. What proposed strategy?

That he expand the investigation within his rights as Special Counsel? As someone who has expressed skepticism about just how far Fitz is going to go with this, I am happy to hear Dean state this openly. I think most people here have the expectation that Fitzgerald will dig far more deeply into this matter than I or it seems, Dean, are seeing any evidence of. At this point, I'm in wait and see mode, I can't read his mind and all I know is what we all do. The rest is guesswork and personal opinion.

[PhilipShore]

47. Perhaps the laws have changed from when he was Nixon's lawyer

I read the letter a second time; he seems to be advising Fitz to start a civil proceeding in behalf of the Justice department for Plame. I am not a lawyer, but Reagan’s deregulation; has caused the government (including the Justice Department) to mostly stop doing civil lawsuits.

I think the Justice Department has a civil division, but I think most of it is just for responding to lawsuits against government agencies.

What if Plame decides to sue the CIA, or the Washington Post? Which I think she can do, and then the Justice Department is the lawyer for the CIA and not Plame.

Also he is asking agencies—I am assuming the FBI to conduct the Investigation, which John Dean wants to expand. Has the FBI been considered--much in the arena of public opinion-- as nothing more then a political arm of the President?

Did the FBI investigate Watergate officially? Did the FBI investigate vote fraud in the 2000 elections?

And he cannot expand the investigation too far-- when he is dealing with CIA issues because he is limited by Republican laws that limit his ability to discover facts from the CIA based upon secrecy laws.

I am not a politician but as a voter, I am of the opinion that the Democrats won big time with Fitz. All the news stories coming out all the time--about indictments—-the longer prolonged help the Democrats. I actually enjoyed voting the Democatic ticket in 2005, and, I am happy about the the new democratic coach for the DNC Dean.

Fitz asked for another Grand jury--the last one lasted for 2 years--all these could fall on election days when the new batch of Republicans are indicted or investigated in the future.

[incapsulated]

48. I think he is making the suggestion

That Fitzgerald act creatively and aggressively. Whether the specifics that Dean laid out as examples are followed isn't the main point, to me. What he is arguing is that Fitzgerald is falling into a trap of which he has firsthand knowledge and is urging him to break from. He gave numerous examples of how this could be achieved and the necessity, for the sake of justice, that he take that initiative. It has been done before, it is not without precedent. I think his arguments about the security breach have merit.

As to the possible conflict of interest, he wouldn't be accusing the FBI or the CIA of any wrong doing. This would be an indictment of the individuals involved, those in the White House, since they were responsible for the breach in security. I don't think he needs the FBI to do this. If Plame decides to take any action there will be an appearance of contradiction regardless of what Fitzgerald does at this point. That is not his problem, nor is it any hinderance that I can see at this stage. He will not be representing the Justice Department in that event.

I think the most salient part of his letter was the comparison with Watergate and the alternate outcome as a cautionary warning:

"Even more troubling, from an historical point of view, is the fact that the narrowness of your investigation, which apparently is focusing on the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (making it a crime to uncover the covert status of a CIA agent), plays right into the hands of perpetrators in the Administration."

"Indeed, this is exactly the plan that was employed during Watergate by those who sought to conceal the Nixon Administration's crimes, and keep criminals in office."

"The plan was to keep the investigation focused on the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters -- and away from the atmosphere in which such an action was undertaken. Toward this end, I was directed by superiors to get the Department of Justice to keep its focus on the break-in, and nothing else."

"That was done. And had Congress not undertaken its own investigation (since it was a Democratically-controlled Congress with a Republican President) it is very likely that Watergate would have ended with the conviction of those caught in the bungled burglary and wiretapping attempt at the Democratic headquarters."

"Now, with a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican President, you (a Republican appointee) are the last bulwark of protection for the American people. We must hope you will keep faith with them."

It's a dramatic few paragraphs and they are the core of his argument. Fitzgerald has a great responsibility, here, and a difficult and complicated case. But to do anything less than to utilize his position in the most fearless and inventive way to achieve some real justice and get at the truth would be a serious dereliction of his duty.

At this point, my own hopes for this investigation are far more limited. It is clear that both Rove and Cheney are implicated in the leak. If they walk away from this unscathed it will truly be a damn shame. Anything that can help to put a fire under Fitzgerald about all of this, since I have no idea where he is going, is fine with me.

[PhilipShore]

51. Republicans lie so therefore they will be investigated

Republicans have an inherent skill at lying. Woodward, I think was the spark that got the new grand jury investigation for Fitz.

I am of the opinion that when Fitz goes to the FBI or the CIA with a task to investigate, that they just throw it in the trash.

Can the DNC hire some Private Investigators? Could the PIs then pressure the local or state or Federal investigatory agencies to discover the facts, which Fitz needs?

I am not even a lawyer, I sued some Republicans in Florida, and you would be amazed at how the Repubicans--just routinely--lie about everything from rules of laws to facts.

I was lucky I was--better prepared then they were--and presented my case better then they did so I won.

All of them were lawyers for Republican politicians, or corporations and are some of the largest fundraisers for the Republican Party in Miami.

I sued them for something other then politics or them being Republicans, but when I looked into their bios etc. after they would lie to me--they would have phony addresses creating corporations together (right around when they were on the court papers, enemies) doctor court records, say records were destroyed that never were, lie about their involvement in actual events that they were involved in-- not just briefly-- but for perhaps more then 50 or more years etc., They were all connected to the Republican Party.

I won on the facts and I had current case law, all they had was a high powered lawyer, who also lies so much, that they became to lazy and fat.

The only way Fitz can win against the Republican corruption beast, is to do better research then them-- but again I doubt his researchers are helping him at all, and I don’t think Fitz has 18 hours a day 7 days a week to research this himself.

[laugle]

46. This letter makes me think we all should

write letters to Fitz and implore him to get to the truth and that it is very important to the American people!

[NVMojo]

49. Good idea!