home

Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt

Crooks and Liars reports that U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's reappointment as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois may be hitting some snags. He's up for re-appointment next month, and his sponsor for the job initially, former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, says he's receiving opposition due to Fitzgerald's playing hardball in Chicago corruption probes.

Let's hope he's playing hardball in RoveGate as well.

< 45 Bodies Found at Hospital in New Orleans | Roberts Speaks >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:43 PM EST
    I think that story that C&L is referring to is more than 6 weeks old.

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:43 PM EST
    It seemed clear that when Comey left Fitzgerald's days were numbered. Some questions: What happens if he charges Judith Miller with criminal contempt? Will it be a fixed amount of time? Can he charge her even if he is finished with the Plame case? Does his replacement have authority to release Miller from the criminal contempt charge?

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#3)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:43 PM EST
    Saturday Night Massacre II: Nixon Lives!

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#4)
    by Strick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:43 PM EST
    I think that story that C&L is referring to is more than 6 weeks old
    Looks like it to me, too. I couldn't pull up the article it linked to, dated July 28, because it couldn't be found on the Chicago paper's server. I note that Rove isn't really featured as the reason this might happen. Makes sense. If there's anyone with more pull and more to fear from a Federal investigation than Karl Rove, it's the Daley Machine in Chicago.

    Oh boy (rubbing my hands together): I see another Saturday Night Massacre in the making, and Alberto Gonzalez gets to show what he is made of, or whether he has a spine.

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:44 PM EST
    From the Chicago Tribune article: U.S. attorneys don't leave their posts when their nominal four-year terms expire. If a U.S. attorney doesn't resign, he or she serves indefinitely--with no new White House nomination or Senate confirmation process--until the day, perhaps several years later, when a president chooses a replacement. Also, his appointment as special prosecutor in the Plame investigation is independent of his poistion as US Attorney in Chicago.

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:44 PM EST
    ITAL-but his term as special prosecutor expires in Oct the same time as his US Attorney position expires. My undertanding was that he wasn't being reappointed to either post.
    WASHINGTON - (KRT) - Former U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald said Wednesday he believes there is mounting political pressure to oppose the reappointment of U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald this fall, given his aggressive prosecution of government corruption in Illinois.... But Hastert, who often battled with Sen. Fitzgerald while the two Republicans served together in Congress, quickly shot down the ex-senator's claims. Hastert's office said the decision rests entirely with President Bush and Hastert has no role whatsoever in whether the prosecutor keeps his job.
    link

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:44 PM EST
    Murray Waas is certain that he will be reappointed.
    I did speak to the people (at a high up enough level to know these things) at DOJ who say the likelihood of Fitzgerald not being appointed to a second term are between zero and slim. If any prominent Republican, or Democrat, for that matter, were to lobby the White House that Fitzgerald not be reappointed, the move would appear to be (and might very well be in actuality) a blatantly political maneuver. But there is just no evidence that anything like that has been going on.
    Murray Waas And this:
    The main stream media mantra announcing that Fitzgerald's term as US Attorney expires in October is completely irrelevant to the ongoing, plenary mandate he has while wearing the hat of "Special Counsel" for purposes of prosecuting Treasongate matters. Not only was it Comey's intention to prepare Fitzgerald for the coming assault on his legally mandated plenary authority by vesting him with complete autonomous rule, but the GAO, through their approval of "permanent indefinite appropriations" to perpetually fund Fitzgerald's office, at the request of the Justice Department, has made a strong legal argument, in Decision B-302582, that Fitzgerald has all of the protections and authority normally granted to an independent prosecutor under the expired independent counsel law....
    link  Sounds too good to be true.

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:44 PM EST
    With respect to Mr. Waas, he means that Bush has no power IN A DEMOCRACY to fire Fitzgerald. In Bush's Amerika, it's Guess Again, 24/7. He certainly can fire him. Can anyone do anything about it? We need our impeachment powers back, but Bush's abrogation of the Constitution is just danced-around in Waas' description of what supposedly can be done, and survived politically just through preponderance of power.

    Re: Fitzgerald's Re-Appointment in Doubt (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:44 PM EST
    sorry, IGNORES what can be survived politically just the way he has survived a MOUNTAIN of scandals and scandalous behavior. Not a pretty sight.