home

Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation

On Thursday, House Democrats serving on an Intelligence committee wrote a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales inquiring about the status of the Valerie Plame investigation and seeking an explanation for the lack of Indictments.[Via Buzzflash.]

The Democrats' letter noted that Fitzgerald wrote in March court filings that the factual investigation "was for all practical purposes" completed in October, yet no charges were filed.

"Nearly two years have elapsed, and nobody has been held accountable for this serious violation of law," the Democrats said in a letter to the attorney general, adding that they were "writing to express our grave concern."

In addition, the letter asked that Gonzales appear before the committee to provide a briefing. Gonalez answered on Friday with this non-response:

In response to the Democrats, Gonzales said he is confident that Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney from Chicago who is the lead prosecutor on the case, is "proceeding on a basis that he thinks is appropriate and that at the appropriate time the matter will come to a head."

Murray Waas, who has been reporting on the investigation for American Prospect, (see his latest article here, explains Gonzales non-answer:

Gonzalez, however, knows no specifics as to what Fitzgerald might or might not have uncovered: During his Senate confirmation hearings, Gonzalez agreed to recuse himself from anything to do with the Plame investigation. While White House counsel, Gonzalez had advised senior Bush administration officials how to respond to initial requests from the Justice Department.

The only people who seem to know anything are the two reporters battling contempt citations to protect their sources, and the columnist Bob Novak, who isn't talking about anything, including whether he's cooperating with the feds.

Stay tuned to Murray, if details break, he'll have them.

< Michael Jackson: Status of the Prosecution's Case | Judicial Extremism and the Constitution in Exile >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#1)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sun Apr 17, 2005 at 01:53:07 PM EST
    You and the dems' committee are going to have heart attacks when Gonzales tells the truth: The get-Phillip-Agee law is so narrowly constructed that in the Plame case nobody broke it. Despite your howls, that seems to be the case. In fact, the NYT, now that its journos are in jeopardy, are wondering if their fate isn't premature, considering there's no firm evidence a law was broken. When the NYT drops you, you've been well and truly dumped. Enjoy.

    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#2)
    by chupetin on Sun Apr 17, 2005 at 09:45:18 PM EST
    In other words, 'as long as none of my Republican buddies gets in any trouble, I'm cool with outing CIA agents especially if Democrats dont like it.'

    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 17, 2005 at 11:55:14 PM EST
    Will Gonzales have the people who don't want to do so called service beaten to death for discord or disagreement or conflict. after all we do live in the new third world.

    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:40:13 AM EST
    I do wonder what Fitzgerald is doing. He is a prosecutor, when is there going to be an indictment or is he caving to political pressure? Even if the law in question is too narrow to support prosecution in this case, an investigation should be able to determine where the leak originated and the leaker should be sent packing. Well, back to the lobbying industry, anyway...

    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 02:19:56 PM EST
    How is it 'Gonzales speaks' to the issue? He got a letter requesting him to. Treason is treason, Richard. Since you don't actually care about national security, but are rather an ardent partisan, you don't care that a big chunk of our INTELLIGENCE-gathering network was destroyed for partisan (and coercive) reasons. It's too bad you don't care, but it's still treason.

    Re: Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation (none / 0) (#6)
    by Richard Aubrey on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:00:04 PM EST
    Chup. You must be a lefty. If you like something, it's supposed to be legal, and if you don't, it's not, and to hell with any actual written-down laws. I said nothing about whether I was cool with it. I said it appears the law hasn't been broken. But, it being a possible tool against Bush, you believe (in this case, I'll say you really believe instead of fibbing) that it really happened as you desire. Paul. Wrong planet. Again.