Reflections on Fitzmas

Patrick Fitzgerald did exactly what I expected him to do.

He brought an indictment that he can prove and will keep looking until he gets to the bottom of this. He is a remarkable man.

I have heard some remarkable spin coming from the right on this case, spin that reaches the heights of absurdity. First of all, can we dispose of the "he didn't indict on the underlying crime" issue? For one thing, he still may. The main point is, though, that the crimes charged are quite serious. Fitzgerald was hired to INVESTIGATE potential criminality.

That investigation may have come to nothing, not because there was no wrongful conduct but because the statutes involved are rather technical in nature and are composed of several elements that can be difficult to prove. Mr. Fitzgerald was entitled under the law to complete a fair and thorough examination of the facts, however, and Scooter Libby, among others, intentionally interfered with that investigation into very serious matters of national security. That interference is criminal. Period. The fact that the criminality would not have occurred "but for" an investigation is irrelevant. The investigation did not cause criminal conduct, Scooter Libby did.

I also did something that I generally regret--I turned on Sean Hannity for a moment. I know, I know, I shouldn't, but I shouldn't look at wrecks on the tollway either, and I do. He was trying to minimize this by ripping Fitzgerald. Bad move, as Elliott Ness could have learned from this guy. Hannity was criticizing Fitzgerald's conduct in the investigation of former Illinois governor george Ryan. In that case, Fitz got the already-convicted right-hand man, Scott Fawell, to open up by enticing him with an offer of a reduced sentence for his fiancee.

Three things, Sean.

1. This is the oldest prosecutorial tactic in the world;
2. Fawell is a sleaze who deserves no sympathy and
3. His fiancee is a criminal too, not an exploited innocent.

Merry Fitzmas!