If Fitzgerald didn't think he had a case would he still present to a new

[Quixote1818]

Grand Jury? Was O'Donnell's article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/roves-lawyer-an-onther_b_11871.html written before Fitzgerald announced he was presenting evidence to a new Grand Jury?

I know this seems like a stupid question but O'Donnell's article made me nervous. Just looking for some words to give me hope.

[rodeodance]

1. see this earlier story on DU

Wed Dec-07-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
18. Fitzgerald Back Before CIA Leak Grand Jury





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cia_leak ;_ylt=AktJv1qJJPM52.rtxx5wk0Gs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
Fitzgerald Back Before CIA Leak Grand Jury

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer 18 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald was back before a federal grand jury on Wednesday in the CIA leak case, with deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove still under investigation.

Since the Oct. 28 indictment of Vice President
Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, two more reporters have been pulled into the investigation — The Washington Post's Bob Woodward and Time magazine's Viveca Novak.

[madrchsod]

2. fitzgerald started with one indictment in illinois

and i think he`s over 60 indictments and convictions and he`s not done yet....never fear there is alot more to come

[sendero]

3. It would sure seem pointless..

.... to present anything to the GJ that you didn't think would result in at least 1 indictment.

[Quixote1818]

4. Thats what I was thinking. Thanks

nt

[applegrove]

5. What amazes me is how easily people are fooled if surrounded by

Kool-aid. I mean woodward sounded absolutely convinced that the whole plame thing was irrelivant and just about some kids out having political fun "gossiping".

Never fails to amaze me how an adult can have their "thinking changed" given good enough surround sound by nefarious types.

President Bush of all people said "if the leaker is found they will be dealt with". But still it never occured to Bob that something bad was happening.

Seems to have given some juice to Fitz investigation.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Woodward was fluffing up the 'its no big deal' meme

because he was involved, deeply involved, in the whole mess. He was strictly working in his own self interest, and he should have been fired on the spot if the WP had any guts.

[Athame]

10. Here is **'s exact quote--very revealing

From Fox News in Oct '03, note the interpretation before the quote.

Nearly two years ago, Bush said those responsible would be held accountable. "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is and if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of," he said in September 2003.

The interpretation of accountability is what is constantly referred to, but the actual words could be taken very differently.

[Justice Is Comin]

6. Not a chance with this man.

Even though the grand jury system is a prosecutor's playground and indictments can be gained quite easily, reputable prosecutors will not go forward unless the evidence is overwhelmingly compelling. The reason, it has to meet extremely high standard for determination of guilt, ie beyond any reasonable doubt.

This man would bend over backwards to avoid presenting the evidence if it wasn't prosecutable. Remember he leased more office space just before the indictment announcement. He has only rolled out the entree. He hasn't even gotten to the main course yet.

[Quixote1818]

7. Thats what I like to hear! Thanks. nt

[Igel]

8. The grand jury is the authority, ultimately, for the subpoenas.

The testimony that's commanded is for their benefit, not Fitzgerald's. Completely voluntary things, like depositions, can be requested. But unless the requests are granted, the prosecutor's stuck. His authority is derivative.

You don't know you have a case until you get the evidence and question the witnesses. For that, apart from exceptional cases in which the witness wants to give testimony and freely answer the questions--and the prosecutor's convinced that the answers were, indeed, complete--you need the GJ.

Fishing expeditions are fine and dandy things for a grand jury, as long as there's some suspicion that a crime took place. But 'suspicion' is far from 'thinking you have a case'.

Fitzgerald may well already know exactly what indictments he'll be requesting. He might have an inkling as to what the indictments might be. He might be acting the part of a thorough prosecutor, and making sure indictments aren't in the works.

Remember the great flurry of reports, almost all of which were completely wrong, before the first indictment was handed up? When he has something to say, he'll say it.