You are herecontent / Nadler: Fitzgerald Must Broaden Investigation

Nadler: Fitzgerald Must Broaden Investigation



8th Congressional District of New York

CONTACT: Reid Cherlin

September 20, 2005

Nadler: Fitzgerald Must Broaden Investigation

"Did the Bush Administration deliberately mislead Congress about the war?"

Senior Judiciary Committee member's letter to Acting Deputy Attorney
General McCallum makes first demand for Fitzgerald to

explore key new question

WASHINGTON, D.C. - In light of recent developments in the CIA leak
investigation and other recent revelations, Congressman Jerrold Nadler
today called for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to expand his
investigation to include a criminal investigation to examine whether the
President, the Vice President, and members of the White House Iraq Group
conspired to deliberately deceive Congress into authorizing the war in
Iraq. This is the first call from a member of Congress for the Fitzgerald
investigation to be expanded to look into whether the White House engaged
in a conspiracy to lie to Congress.

"The CIA leak issue is only the tip of the iceberg," Congressman Nadler
said. "This is looking increasingly like a White House conspiracy aimed
misleading our country into war - in part by manufacturing now-refuted
evidence in support of its rationale, in part by smearing and silencing
critics, and in part by manipulating media complicity. There is mounting
evidence that there may have been a well-orchestrated effort by the
President, the Vice President, and other top White House officials to lie
to Congress in order to get its support for the Iraq War."

It is a crime to lie to Congress under several federal statutes.
Congressman Nadler requested that Special Counsel Fitzgerald follow the
leads he has already discovered and broaden his investigation to include
charges of lying to Congress. In his letter to Acting Deputy Attorney
General McCallum asking for a broadening of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's
investigation, Nadler cited the President's infamous reference to African
Uranium in the 2003 State of the Union Address, reports of the White House
Iraq Group's singular mission to sell the war at all costs, assertions
in the "Downing Street Memo," and reporters' own accounts of media

"Honest, if mistaken, reliance on faulty intelligence to convince Congress
to authorize a war is bad enough," Congressman Nadler wrote in his letter
to McCallum. "But, if, as mounting evidence is tending to show,
Administration officials deliberately deceived Congress and the American
people, this would constitute a criminal conspiracy against the entire

"We are no longer just talking about a Republican culture of corruption
cronyism," Nadler added. "We now have reason to believe that high crimes
may have been committed at the highest level, wrongdoing that may have led
us to war and imperiled our national security."

Congressman Nadler demanded answers to the following questions in his
letter to McCallum:

--> Was the CIA leak incident merely one part of a larger illegal
effort by the Administration to deceive Congress about a matter of war and

--> Who was involved?

--> Were any of their actions criminal?

The text of Congressman Nadler's letter to Deputy Attorney General

October 20, 2005

Acting Deputy Attorney General Robert D. McCallum, Jr.

Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building

Room 4111

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

Dear Deputy Attorney General McCallum:

I urge you to use the powers granted to you, under the regulations
promulgated by the Department of Justice in June of 1999, to expand the
framework of the investigation currently being conducted by Special
Patrick Fitzgerald.

It is now clear that the key reason cited by the Bush Administration - the
imminent acquisition by Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction - to
persuade Congress and the American people of the necessity of invading
was not true. There is new and mounting and evidence, stemming in part
from the current investigation, that members of the Bush Administration
have deliberately, and, therefore, illegally, misled Congress. Since
Special Counsel Fitzgerald is already investigating the CIA leak, it seems
appropriate that he be empowered to expand his investigation to examine
whether the leak itself was part of a broader conspiracy knowingly to
mislead Congress into authorizing a war.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee who opposed the extension of the
independent counsel law, I do not take this matter lightly. I believe
these types of investigations should be reserved for only the most serious
of alleged crimes, but I have to believe that lying to Congress in order
obtain its support for a war meets that test.

Some of the evidence that members of the Bush Administration may have
deliberately, and, therefore, illegally, misled Congress is as follows:

1) We now know that during the summer of 2002, at a time when the
White House maintains that no decision had been made about going to war,
the Bush Administration created the "White House Iraq Group" whose sole
purpose appears to have been to market and sell a decision to go to war to
Congress. It appears that this group specifically sought to deceive
Congress about the intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction.
(New York Daily News, Oct. 19, 2005.)

2) We now know from the so-called "Downing Street Memo," that it
appeared to senior members of the British Government who had conferred
senior Administration officials, that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam,
through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and
But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
(Emphasis added.)

3) We now know that President Bush included in his State of the
Union Address in January of 2003 an already discredited reference to Iraq
seeking uranium from Niger.

4) We now know from Special Counsel Fitzgerald's investigation
itself that there was an orchestrated campaign to smear and discredit
Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who attempted to tell the truth about some of
faulty "evidence" used by the White House to make its case for war.
Although Mr. Fitzgerald's investigation has yet to determine whether a
crime was committed by any Administration official(s) in leaking the
identity of Wilson's wife as a covert CIA operative, it is abundantly
that the White House Iraq Group was engaged in an effort to discredit
revelations of the falsity of the Administration's justifications for the
war, and to intimidate and punish those who would reveal the truth.
According to sources quoted by the New York Daily News, this group of
House officials was "so determined . . . to win its argument that it
morphed into a virtual hit squad that took aim at critics who questioned
its claims." (New York Daily News, October 19, 2005.)

5) We now know that top Administration officials, including Vice
President Cheney's

Chief of Staff, I. Lewis Libby, misrepresented to the media the scope and
nature of what the U.S. intelligence community knew and didn't know about
Saddam Hussein's weapons programs before the war. (, Oct. 19,
2005.) Manufacturing of media complicity, if achieved through a
plan to provide false information, would have played a key role in
misleading Congress. And indeed, we need to know more about the
relationship between Administration officials and certain media outlets in
view of details emerging from this investigation regarding the special
access to Administration officials and, perhaps, to potentially classified
information afforded to Judith Miller of The New York Times, which led to
clearly erroneous stories supporting the Administration's false claims
regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

With this growing body of evidence that the White House may have
deliberately misled Congress into authorizing war, a broader independent
investigation is clearly necessary.

Special Counsel Fitzgerald has done a great service to the nation thus far
by investigating the CIA leak, but real questions remain. Was the CIA
incident an effort to enforce discipline as part of a much broader
conspiracy by members of the Bush Administration to deceive Congress about
a matter of war and peace? Who was involved? Were any of their actions

These questions go to the core of the functioning of democratic
self-government in the United States. Honest, if mistaken, reliance on
faulty intelligence to convince Congress to authorize a war is bad enough.
But, if, as mounting evidence is tending to show, Administration officials
deliberately deceived Congress and the American people, this would
constitute a criminal conspiracy against the entire country.

It is self-evident that the Administration cannot investigate itself in
this matter. I therefore urge you to expand the Special Counsel's
investigation to include these matters crucial to our national security
national integrity.

I look forward to your response.


Jerrold Nadler

Member of Congress


Jerrold Nadler has served in Congress since 1992. He represents New
8th Congressional District, which includes parts of Manhattan and


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Was the Bush administration's case for war fraudulent? In legal terms fraud is defined as, in addition to the deliberate imparting of untruths, the selective use of facts to bolster one's position. Consider the following (caps added by me for emphasis):

DEFINITION OF FRAUD: All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by FALSE SUGGESTION OR SUPPRESSION OF THE TRUTH. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way which another is cheated. (Source: Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.)

and also to consider is this definition....

FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT: n. the use of deceit or trick to cause someone to act to his/her disadvantage, such as signing an agreement or deeding away real property. The heart of this type of fraud is MISLEADING THE OTHER PARTY AS TO THE FACTS UPON WHICH HE/SHE WILL BASE HIS/HER DECISION TO ACT. Example: "there will be tax advantages to you if you let me take title to your property," or "you don't have to read the rest of the contract--it is just routine legal language" but actually includes a balloon payment. (Source: The People's Law Dictionary)

To any who followed the run up to the war in Iraq and in light of ongoing revealations it is clear that the Bush administration made a fraudulent case for war to the American people as well as to the Congress. The selective use of intelligence to bolster its case for war alone constitutes fraud, not to mention the many half-truths and untruths proffered the American people and Congress (remember Saddam's direct connection to al Qaeda, mobile biological labs, Niger uranium, ect..?) In an era where a sitting President can be impeached for lying about a sexual affair with an intern it would be the hieght of national hypocracy to hold the Bush administration to a lower standard, especially on a matter of such grave national and international security. The deaths of nearly 2000 of our brave soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens demands an investigaion and an actionable accounting into the run up to this debacle of an invasion and occupation we find ourselves in today. HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!!

Bring Fitz on. For Mr. Nadler: where have you been? Any boob with access to the internet knew that the Bushies were lying from the beginning and that the war was planned before W was appointed by the Supreme Court.

Uh, excuse me for asking, but do you think that Congress itself has any role left at all in "the greatest democracy in the world"?

First, you vote to hand over war-making powers to this imperial presidency, including the claimed and court-supported power to incarcerate citizens without legal recourse of any kind.

Now, you want to hand over all of the responsibility for dealing with administration "high crimes" to a special prosecutor appointed by that same administration's Department of Justice.

I'm not saying that Patrick Fitzgerald is not a man of integrity and a fine fellow. He may be all of that and more. But, just as the constitution specifies specifies sole war-making power, it also specifies the sole power of impeachment:

"Section 2, Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Are there any other congressional duties that you plan to "delegate" to others in the near future? If so, would you consider passing them on to the people themselves? The people you allegedly represent, I mean.

It may be slightly humilitating for Mr Nadler and colleagues, but some Canadians at least seem to understand the solemn nature of governmental responsibility to their own country and to the world:

"Many Canadians don't realize that we have not only the right but the responsibility to pursue these charges, it is a responsibility that the Canadian government owes not only to the people of Canada, but to the people of the world. The 1987 Convention Against Torture [And Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment] binds us to this action."

Read more.

I applaud Nadler for bringing it up in the first place. We are moving forward here, and I think progress is good. Let me know how soon you think the Republicans who run the House would like to begin impeachment proceedings.

When enough people make the effort to educate themselves and take political action in sufficient numbers.
It may or may not happen
Skepticism, negativity, sarcasm feed right in to the Bushco
control of our country.
They want us to feel that there is nothing we can do so we do nothing.

This is the bridge to truth back through the lies about a CIA Leak
Back through the lies of the MillerMaze. Back to the lies about WMD and terrorists in Iraq.
Back to the lies about a stolen election
Back through all the lying of the busch admin.
We must go back and uncover the Big Lies. The Criminal Lies.
Oh what a tangled web they weaved; but now its coming undone.
The truth will out. It has a way of shining through.
Some recognized the real evil the day it took office.
Some knew what was happening the day bush stood on the burning pile.
Some woke up the day the war started;Some the day their child died.
Now there is a growing movement of truth.
Each day more and more people are waking up.
Some wake up when gas hits 4 dollars.
Some when they see old people gasping their last
Parked alone in wheel chairs; dying in the blazing sun.
Some awaken when New Orleans looks like Calcutta
For some it’s the picture of a child burned to death in Iraq.
Let’s see the photos of war. Where are the photos?
Many would wake up with the photos of war.
That’s why Herr Busch has refused to allow photos.
We don’t see photos of the coffins of the dead Americans.
They are dead, not fallen. They are dead. Killed in war.
We don’t see their funerals. Busch does not allow us.
Where is our freedom of the press? Where is our right to know?
Did we outsource that too? They don’t want us to know the truth.
That is why reporters are being shot in Iraq.
Did you ever wonder what was going on over there?
What is really going on? The media blackout is complete.
If things are going so well and freedom is on the march:
Why is there such a complete media blackout?
All we ever see is the smoking car bomb sites. Why is that?
Is it to terrorize US on the home front?
So we continue supporting this war ??
Like most of the democrats?
Where are the smiling children? Where are the new schools?
Where is this “democracy on the march

Expand the focus to the most important issue which is bushco lying about the reasons for going to war. If the war is shown to be illegal and immoral; then it must stop??
Could Congress continue to fund a war shown to be illegal?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Find the perfect Purple Bridesmaid Dresses for your bridesmaids from




Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.