Fitzgerald's Lost Opportunity

There are many of you who think that I am trying to burst your bubble with regard to my opinion that Fitzgerald may not indict any more people involved in the Valerie Plame outing. I am not. I just want to pass on to you my experience regarding criminal investigations. While I am not an attorney, I am admitted to practice before the U.S. Tax Court and I spent 4 years with the IRS in Chicago working on criminal investigations with the U.S. Attorney's office. I have been hired many times by criminal attorneys in the Chicago area to give expert opinions regarding criminal tax investigations. Invariably, criminal tax investigations also involve related criminal violations under Title 18 of the U.S. Code including perjury, false statements, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy. I probably have more knowledge about this subject than most attorneys.

The part that Fitzgerald failed to pursue is the CONSPIRACY aspect of this case. Here is the way the law reads regarding conspiracy:

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 19--CONSPIRACY

Sec. 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Furthermore, here is a commentary about this statute from one court case:

"The statute is broad enough in its terms to include any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful functions of any department of government."

The CIA qualifies as an agency of the U.S. Government. Libby constitutes "...one or more of such persons" who "...do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy..." The object of the conspiracy does not have to be successful for the Government to indict under the aforementioned act. The underlying crime may not even have been completed and yet this act can make one guilty of a conspiracy. Section 371 is a lot easier to prove than the outing of a CIA agent. And Libby took that necessary first step in a trail that led from someone at the CIA to Cheney to Libby to Rove etc. etc. Furthermore, there is no indication that Cheney or Bush testified under oath as Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton had to do during the Ken Starr investigation.

My point is that the Democrats should be bold in making this scandal an issue to win back the House and Senate so that they have subpoena powers to get to the heart of this criminal conspiracy. We should not put all of our hopes into a prosecutor who was appointed by the Bush Administration. It is time to let the Democrats know that they should be pushing this every day by pointing out the cronyism, corruption, and incompetence of this administration.