Been meaning to mention: one thing that seemed clear during Patrick Fitzgerald’s press
conference on Friday — and which is even clearer if you review the transcript — is how careful the man is to stay within the limits of what he is legally allowed to say. For example:
I can’t give you answers on what we
know and don’t know, other than what’s charged in the indictment. It’s
not because I enjoy being in that position. It’s because the law is
that way. I actually think the law should be that way.
know and don’t know, other than what’s charged in the indictment. It’s
not because I enjoy being in that position. It’s because the law is
that way. I actually think the law should be that way.
Let’s look, though, at what he also said, quite plainly:
[A]ll I’ll say is that, look, we have
not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a
covert agent. We have not charged that. And so I’m not making that
assertion.
not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a
covert agent. We have not charged that. And so I’m not making that
assertion.
Notice the "and so" part, which, given the confines of the situation, is explanatory: I am not making that assertion because we have not charged that.
Add the word "yet" (which of course may not apply), and you see the point. In no way is this the same as saying they won’t.
If and when they do, there will be plenty of assertions appropriate to that indictment.