Talk:Patrick Fitzgerald
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Contents |
[edit] Speculation about Fitzgerld's removal
Sunday morning online editions of Newsweek and Time are reporting that the President is planning to fire Chicago's U.S. Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and replace him with a Bush classmate/Skull and Bonesman from Yale.
Following on the heels of these reports, we have learned from U.S. intelligence sources that federal agents are prepared to immediately arrest Mr. Bush if he fires Fitzgerald and seeks to obstruct justice and commit additional treasonous acts regarding ongoing grand jury proceedings against his administration and himself.
TomFlocco.com reported last week that Fitzgerald's grand jury voted out perjury and obstruction of justice "True Bills" or federal criminal indictments against President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former CIA Director George Tenet, Presidential Senior Advisor Karl Rove, Presidential Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff I. "Scooter" Libby, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Vice-Presidential Senior Advisor Mary Matalin.
On Friday, federal whistleblower Tom Heneghen reported that the true bills also listed Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia as unindicted co-conspirators.
According to sources close to the grand jury, Fitzgerald's citizen panel is now able to prove that George W. Bush was not legitimately elected president in the 2000 election; but more importantly, it has fingered the United States Supreme Court for fraud, obstruction of justice and treason, making the Bush terms totally illegal.
The scope of the indictments and investigations indicates that the grand jury's indicted criminal acts reaching back to 2000 will lead to further legitimate assumptions that Bush-Cheney involvement in the 9.11 attacks and sending American young people to war based upon lies orchestrated by Mr. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are both squarely in the sights of the grand jury
- Talk pages are no more of a place for nonsense like this than the articles themselves. Since you are citing to "online editions of Newsweek and Time", perhaps you could provide a link or two? Otherwise, I'm afraid it would be inappropriate for the above to remain on this page. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 04:01, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Talk pages are for talk and what's on them is appropriate as talk, removal of such would actually be much more inappropriate. Also, if you have issue with this, why not look up the links yourself and see whether such reports exist or are just rumors. That would be better than just whining about someone else's comment. Calicocat 04:31, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
- The anon poster of the above discussion has provided no links to look up except for TomFlocco.com, which you are free to evaluate. Of course, I have searched diligently for actual news sources, and can find nothing of the sort anywhere from Time, Newsweek, or any other new source. The above therefore seems to be sheer nonsense, and just because this is a talk page does not mean it is a safe harbor for a hoax or a joke. -- BD2412 talk 04:59, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- To BD2412, the diligent searcher:
-
-
-
- Bush Co. in chains if not a noose, for what? Treason. Sorry, no joke or hoax in that. What the anon is talking about is as serious as a heart attack. This goes a bit further too..... not only are agents prepared to arrest Mr. Bush, should he try to have Fritzgerald removed, but that an informed Grand Jury is free to pursue the case wherever it may lead them. Remove every single AG you like... it's already in the hands of a jury.
-
-
-
- Let's repeat that; a jury, not just a Grand Jury, but any jury under the Constitution of the United States, may at any time, dispel with the judges limiting "instructions", and thus pursue a case wherever it may lead them in efforts to administer justice. The jury, not the judge, is ultimately responsible and fully empowered under the United States Constitution. We've seen plenty of horse-shit Tee Vee and Hollywood crap about some boogyman "run-away" jury.... but in this case, where corruption may actually run through three branches of government, a free and informed jury may be this countries last honest chance at redemption.
-
-
-
- BD2412, your attempts to brush aside a most important dynamic in the case parented by Fitzgerald may work on some, but not on me. 3chester4 05:17, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- You're all talking about a future event, and thus I see nothing here but rumor, speculation, and conjecture. It's a moot argument all the way around, until such time as the grand jury releases their findings, or Fitzgerald makes a public statement (don't hold your breath for that last one). Eclipsed 08:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
- What am I trying to brush aside, exactly? The (unsigned) original post states that "Sunday morning online editions of Newsweek and Time are reporting" something that they were, in fact, not reporting. The post also says that the grand jury has returned indictments against "against President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former CIA Director George Tenet, Presidential Senior Advisor Karl Rove, Presidential Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff I. "Scooter" Libby, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Vice-Presidential Senior Advisor Mary Matalin," and has "listed Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia as unindicted co-conspirators." The preceding are statements of fact which are simply not backed up (or even mentioned) by any reliable source, beyond speculation that Rove and Libby will be indicted. I have no objection to the reporting of actual provable facts (e.g. that Halliburton received $8 billion for work that no one can prove was performed, or that the Department of Education was using taxpayer funds to pay a news commentator to say positive things about the administration's education policy), but flights into non-reality discredit legitimate reports. -- BD2412 talk 22:04, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
- You're all talking about a future event, and thus I see nothing here but rumor, speculation, and conjecture. It's a moot argument all the way around, until such time as the grand jury releases their findings, or Fitzgerald makes a public statement (don't hold your breath for that last one). Eclipsed 08:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
It is indeed speculation. This link may be of interest in regard to whether it's legally possible for Fitzgerald to be removed. Rd232 15:46, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
- Sure. This is the right place for insane commentary with no connection to reality. I personally read a story in The Interstellar Herald (look it up yourself, not my responsibility to cite my sources) that aliens from the planet Tralfamadore are controlling the US government through implants in politicians' kneecaps and are the ones actually responsible for the behavior anon described. In a related story in The Interstellar Herald, there seem to be an unprecidented number of cases of monkeys unexpectedly flying out of asses. M. J. Cooper 10:35, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Personal section?
The newly added personal section seems at best muddled and out-of-place in this type of article (what is the relevance of the cat story?). I also wonder about the sources mentioned but not cited. Perhaps the section should be removed or at least cleaned up. Splungist 13:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
- The information in this section was heavily borrowed from one of the recent news articles about Fitzgerald–I believe that it was in the New York Times, but I'll look around. NatusRoma 02:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'm pretty sure that New York Times, October 22, 2005, "Leak Prosecutor Is Called Exacting and Apolitical" is the correct reference, but registration is required to view the article. NatusRoma 02:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
I am going to research the cat story and some other personal details and re-add them to this article. I'm asking that you please not delete personal details, as the "legend" of Pat Fitzgerald is very much a part of his public identity. The press has treated him as a modern-day eliot ness, and his personal details in many ways make this an easier story to promote. The fact that the man sleeps in his office and is too absorbed by his job to be qualified to own a cat is indeed relevant. The quirks of other characters in american politics are relevant, why aren't they with this guy?
- Where are the references or sources? List some or this section WILL be removed again! --JohnDBuell 11:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
as stated above, there is an NYT article that mentions many of fitzgeralds quirks. There are others as well, but it is the major source. Question: if a media site requires registration to view a source, does wikipedia consider it a valid source?
- In this case it's simply not just registration that's required, it would be payment required to read the full article online. Wikipedia requires verifiability, and I don't know how many editors will a) have access to other sources of copies of the New York Times from 2005 or b) be willing to pay US$5 to read the article online. But such references MUST be added when material is added, especially in biographies of living people (though that's true for every article). Under policies for biographies of living people, unreferenced statements will be the first to go, because of the potential that they can be construed as 1) unverifiable 2) original research or worst yet 3) potentially libelous. Please read over WP:BLP. --JohnDBuell 03:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Here is a magazine article which tells what I assume you are referring to as the "cat story". --Padraic 19:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Alleged Yellowcake involvement
This section is not supported by any newsmedia source. I have searched both LexisNexis and Yahoo! News and have found nothing apart from Counterpunch to support Fitzgerald's alleged involvement with the yellowcake forgery. Please provide further verification. NatusRoma 07:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] George Ryan
I live in Illinois, and as much as we need Patrick Fitzgerald, he did not start the investigations of George Ryan. Operation Safe Road started in the mid-late 1990s. When I can find sourceable material, I will post it. However, it was under Patrick Fitzgerald that George Ryan was prosecuted and convicted. Wat Tyler 00:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image
Does anyone have another copyright free, fair use or government image of Patrick Fitzgerald? I added the one that I took from a DOJ website a year or two ago but the link is no longer active and so it will be deleted. --Daysleeper47 17:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
