Powered by TypePad

« A Teachable Moment | Main | Lebanon / Israel / Gaza »

July 13, 2006

Comments

topsecretk9

Verner

--We don't know who Fitz has cut loose. Remember, he's not suppose to tell.

Who knows if Harlow was ever in trouble? ---

Cosmic Conservaative above sited a fox reports that said when they reached Harlow for comment he couldn't because he was still involved in the investigation...

lurker

These are indications that Fitz has found NADA in his investigations. He probably has learned alot from these investigations, though. No, Fitz wouldn't be the one to sell out and part of the totalitarian coverup.

Redcoat

Tollhouse

So Fitz has the Pony?

topsecretk9

--Btw ts, I did my part and sent your questions to both Hannity and Hume.---

YOU are a very good little owl! Good work.

PeterUK

No Jerry,nobody has been charged,subpoenaed,indicted,given a parking ticket,made to stand in a corner or write lines,or are you second guessing Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald?
This case has gone on longer than Rock and Roll litigation,and where has the SP got with his original assignment? A few secondary charges trumped up by perjury traps.
Fitzgerald's reputation is hanging on this,if he had anything he would be all over it.Forget the Sealed v Sealed fantasies of a form petty crook and junky,there is a real life Elliot Ness on the job,he is watching his case come apart like a suit made of fog.

Tollhouse

Fitzmas is clearly a casualty of Bush's War on Christmas. O'Reilly is writing a book.

Pete

cathyf - except that Harlow denies that he gave Novak the name (nor have I seen Novak making that claim).

Furthermore Novak said then that he did not dig the name out. Now he is claiming that he did dig the name out.

red

The fact that Novak's story doesn't align with either Rove or Harlow - or even Novak's original story - suggests multiple people are lying and obstructing.

Why is it so confusing to people that Fitz might suspect a conspiracy and cover-up at play?

lurker

Just because Harlow is under investigation doesn't mean that he's in trouble. Rove and Novak were under investigation and neither got indicted.

What's left of this investigation? Not much.

topsecretk9

--This investigation was over before Novak testified before the grand jury on Feb. 25, 2004. That's over 2 fringin years ago.--

NRO Editorial

--....The CIA-leak investigation began in September 2003, and in December of that year it came under the leadership of prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who continues in that job today. Two months from now, we should all take a moment to commemorate the probe’s third birthday. Perhaps there will be a fourth, and a fifth, and, well, who knows?---

lurker

Does it matter whether Novak said he did or did not dig the name out? Novak said that Who's Who was not the original source.

Think the poster meant to say that the real investigation was over long time ago but the fake investigation still continues???

lurker

"The fact that Novak's story doesn't align with either Rove or Harlow - or even Novak's original story - suggests multiple people are lying and obstructing."

Well, this is alot like Cooper v. Libby or Miller v. Libby.

So why Novak wasn't indicted but Libby was?

Carol Herman

Tell me, Clarice, is it NOT a crime for a prosecutor to indict an innocent man?

I read your wonderful piece up at the American Thinker, today. Fitzgerald's smear job is easy to recognize. He took full advantage of his "presser." And, even before that, he took full advantage of his position to fool a judge into putting Judith Miller in jail for 85 days. All in an effort to INDICT LIBBY, AN INNOCENT MAN.

I also gather, from your piece, that what's forcing Fitzgerald to pull down his "tents on this circus," is Hoekstra's warning to the White House; that there were CIA rouge agents working to tear apart the Executive Branch's team on the War on Terror. Where they were hoping to replace the White House, and grab the President's ear (under his small hat, I presume?)

No punishments? Everybody walks? Nothing ahead but "mov.on" folks? This makes me sick.

jerry

Red Coat, it's secret! I don't know/can't know... neither do you.

I guess the comfort in being confronted with secrecy is that it's possible to imagine a variety of possibilities, I clearly think some harm was caused. I'll look at the articles that lurker suggested/threw at me.

clarice

Thanks, owl.
With this new information, is it time to revive operation razzle dazzle, our effort to craft a letter to DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility asking they investigate Fitzgerald for breaching his responsibilities? Any hands?

PeterUK

"My position is that this whole investigation exists because some serious harm has already occurred - despite the protests of those involved, the accused, and their defenders."


This is very Kafkaesque Jerry,

"Why am I on trial?"

"Because you are accused of a crime".

"What is the crime"?

"As yet that has not been determined,but there must have been a crime,why else would you be on trial"?

cathyf
Furthermore Novak said then that he did not dig the name out. Now he is claiming that he did dig the name out.
Looking up something in Who's Who is "digging" ?!?!? What are you smoking, and don't you know it is extremely impolite not to at least offer to share?

cathy :-)

Gabriel Sutherland

Isn't it Libby's fault that Judy Miller spent so much time in prision?

Libby essentially admitted that he thought Miller was aware that he had cleared her to reveal his name as source and to share their conversations with the grand jury. Miller replied along the lines of, "Libby said that? I didn't get that impression that I could talk about our conversation."

So, ok, not entirely Libby's fault. Shared guilt is relevant, but I don't think Fitzgerald can do differently if the witnesses misunderestimate eachother's statements.

topsecretk9

--Isn't it Libby's fault that Judy Miller spent so much time in prision?

Libby essentially admitted that he thought Miller was aware that he had cleared her to reveal his name as source and to share their conversations with the grand jury. --

Yes this drama....especially Coopers performance (I recall just this year? a wonkette bit about this Waiver confusion that further made Cooper look stupid...something like the so-called drama call came way before his drama performance, like a day before or something)

jerry

Come on PeterUK, a grand jury investigation is secret by nature (remember protecting the innocent?) - well maybe not if Ken Starr is leading it....

Additionally, topics involving the CIA are also secret by nature (remember all those Biggies in DC spouting off about leaks and national security? the ones who are also most likely to leak to the press?).

So the idea that we don't know much about what Fitz is doing seems quite normal, correct, and American, dammit!

:)

cathyf
Isn't it Libby's fault that Judy Miller spent so much time in prision?

Libby essentially admitted that he thought Miller was aware that he had cleared her to reveal his name as source and to share their conversations with the grand jury. Miller replied along the lines of, "Libby said that? I didn't get that impression that I could talk about our conversation."

Miller spent all that time in prison getting an agreement from Fitzgerald which protected her from having to tell the grand jury how she found out about Wilson's wife. Nothing to do with Libby at all. And if Walton dismisses the one count having to do with her, she gets to keep that secret forever.

The longer time goes on, the more respect I get for Judy Miller. I think the "Ms Run Amok" schtick is mostly an act which she exploits to disarm people.

cathy :-)

Neo

Whilst everybody dissects Novak's words, bear in mind that Novak isn't a bureaucrat or lawyer. Novak doesn't see any real difference between "Joe Wilson's wife" and "Valerie Elise Plame" when it comes to identifying her.

In the conversation that probably imparted this "classified" "nation endangering" knowledge, "Joe Wilson's wife" probably worked better. The phrase "Joe Wilson was recommended for the trip by his wife" says a lot more than "Joe Wilson was recommended for the trip by Valerie Plame" which would lead to "WTF is Valerie Plame ?".

Great Banana

Jerry,

It would be easier to take the left's outrage at the Plame leak, and the belief that some "serious harm" occurred, if they had ANY outrage or cared at all about the leaks where real harm has in fact occurred - such as the "secret prisons" leak, the wire-tapping leak, and the swift leak.

I guess that would be asking too much though.

In this case, if the special counsel had concluded that Plame was covert, and that her "outing" was a crime, I would support prosecution. It seems he determined such is not the case however. Yet, despite that, you cling to the idea that simply b/c the special counsel was appointed in the first instance, a crime was done.

Ultimately, none of us are likely to ever find out the full truth regarding Plame's status - whether she was covert or not. I personnally suspect she was not, thus the reason that Fitz failed to indict anyone for "outing" her. But, maybe she was in some form of "covert" status each and every day when she drove from her suburban home to CIA headquarters. That is certainly possible. Not likely, but possible.

Even so, the fact that Fitz determined no crime was committed pretty much destroys all of the left's conspiracy theories regarding this. And, based upon Novak's writing, it seems it was not even likely to have been the administration who first brought this up to Novak. Thus, even if it was "bad form" to "out" Plame, it looks like it wasn't even the administration who did it.

Where does that leave the left on this matter? At some point, you (the left) have to give up on a losing cause. The public at large never cared about this so it was never really a winning issue for the left anyway. Now, there is no chance of the President being impeached over this, so what is the point of losing all of your credibility on this matter?

SunnyDay

I thought Miller was refusing, not because of Libby, but because Fitz would not agree to exclude asking about the other FBI investigation, where she tipped off the Muslin charity that they were about to be raided.

PeterUK

Fitzgerald has allowed reputations to be sullied by implication and inference,either the man has evidence which will stand up in court or he has not.If he has not,after nearly three years,he should close the case,it is indubitable that if Fitzgerald were under supervision that his superiors would have pulled the plug.
You live in the United States not a banana republic,it is not fitting that the trial be conducted by innuedo,forget the guff about the secrecy of Grand Juries,it is obvioius that Fitzgerald is hiding behind this to intimidate somebody into bieng a sacrificial victim,either hold a trial or pull the plug.
The left may get its jollies from the opportunity to generate overheated insinuations,but this is making your country into a laughingstock.
It ain't normal and it ain't justice.

Neo

Where does that leave the left on this matter?

They either can get amnesia or add this to the long list of atrocities of the VRWC.

Pete

Great Banana - your argument can be turned the other way around too. Those have long denied that there was any harm in the Plame leak, so what is their credibility in decrying the other leaks.

Similarly if you argue that no crime was proven in the Plame case, which crime has been proven in the other leaks?

owl

Think throwing Miller into the mix might be what screwed Fitz's head. Don't you suppose he said to himself 'yeah, yeah, I finally gotcha'? He gets 85 jail days, Miller thrown under the bus at NYT, and will settle for Libby to make the entire thing look legit. Mercy. How else can 2 1/2 years be explained over Joe's drama?

Neo

The real question that has not been asked, and I'm sure some editor in NYC is biting his/her nails over is ...

what is Valerie Elise Plame going to put in that book that reportedly got a 7-figure advance ?

Maybe she can tell us about VIPS or such.

Pofarmer

"(I recall just this year? a wonkette bit about this Waiver confusion that further made Cooper look stupid"

All Cooper has to do to look stupid is be on a TV interview. The guy just sounds like a total Doofus. I can't imagine putting him on the stand and expecting his testimony to stand up against Libby and his lawyers. I'm wondering when the case against Libby is dropped.

Michael

I don't have a source to cite but I seem to remember watching Novak on television saying that "operative" was a standard word he used for things like "political operative," etc. He maintained that he didn't mean anything by it.

Neo

Pete:
I realize that most people think that the laws are written to cover all cases. Unfortunately for those who side with Ms. Flame, the law doesn't read the way the "crime" was committed.

As for the other leaks, each will have to be considered as to how or if they apply.

Personally, I think the NYT is screwed. Their activities fit very nicely with a crime as decribed in

US code 18 Section 798. Disclosure of classified information

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes,
transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person,
or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or
interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign
government to the detriment of the United States any classified
information -

(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code,
cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any
foreign government; or

(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or
repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or
planned for use by the United States or any foreign government
for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or

(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the
United States or any foreign government; or

(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence
from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the
same to have been obtained by such processes -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten
years, or both.

clarice

I don't know if Comey or the FBI misled Fitz, if he was impelled by press pressure or ego. But at base, I think he is a prosecutor who's made his reputation by going up against not terribly god defense counsel prosecuting people for whom the public has little sympathy and is a master of all the tricks in the prosecution quiver--like making many, many vague allegations of obstuction and conspiracy which are difficult to refute. I think he's gotten sloppy and careless and met his match this time in a world of Washington politics not Chicago garbage contracts or blind sheikhs.

OTOH he gave us the Miller precedent which should come in handy soon against the very media at the heart of this matter.

Piranha

One FReeper last night suggested that the first, inadvertent, leaker was Alan Greenspan, and that the third party whom he sent to Novak to tell him that the leak was not intentional was his wife, Andrea Mitchell.

Greenspan certainly matches the description of a senior government official in the Bush administration not working in the White House who is not a hired gunslinger.

This also would explain why Novak and Mitchell both used the word "operative" to describe Plame. It also would explain why she blurted out that everybody knew that Plame worked for the CIA -- it simultaneously expanded the list of possible suspects and diminished the importance of her husband's leak (if her husband was the leaker). Finally, it would explain why she suddenly drew back from her comment -- her husband probably told her that he was nervous about her becoming a focal point of attention in the case, and that he didn't want her to tell names of people who knew.

Makes logical sense.

jerry

Great Banana, FWIW...

the secret prisons have been moved according to Dana Priest, so the only damage is to our national pride

the wiretapping leak was both more harmful and a more serious abuse of legal guidelines IMO (I don't think we know the half of what the NSA is doing BTW)

and lastly, I just read something yesterday saying the SWIFT story didn't cause any real damage, despite World Cup worthy whining by the WH and parts of Congress:

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/07/the_real_secrets_of_our_terror.php

(in addition, remember my comments earlier regarding how al Queda has apparently been avoiding financial surveillance for some years using means like the African diamond trade)

I do believe leaks can cause damage but I am probably in the minority here in thinking that the US press makes a great effort to act responsibly in this regard.

I think the Administration is using leaks, and "national security," as a way of stifling dissent in government and blunting criticism on all sides.

Gary Maxwell

Lynne Stewart was not a formidable match? Who knew!

Lurker

"I clearly think some harm was caused."

Harm? Yeah, Libby's reputation and legal fees.

Even if there was no damage caused by the Plamegate, there can be damages inflicted by other types of leaks. The NYT leaks were damaging enough, read Stuart Levey's testimony given yesterday.

cnj

BREAKING NEWS:

Valerie Plame to file civil suit against
Libby, Cheney and Rove.

paulv

But not UGO. What counterclaims do we expect her to face

paulv

Guilty on South Korean Park in Oil for Food scandal

Charlie (Colorado)

Valerie Plame to file civil suit against
Libby, Cheney and Rove.

Oh, now you're just teasing. Plame and Wilson open themselves up to discovery? Too good to be true.

cathyf
One FReeper last night suggested that the first, inadvertent, leaker was Alan Greenspan, and that the third party whom he sent to Novak to tell him that the leak was not intentional was his wife, Andrea Mitchell.
No way. "Greenspan" is too long to fit in all of the spaces left by the redactions of UGO's name, while "Armitage" fits, to quote Goldilocks, "Just right."

Without the forensic evidence it would have been a promising theory, though!

cathy :-)

mariner

Clarice,

... our effort to craft a letter to DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility asking they investigate Fitzgerald for breaching his responsibilities? Any hands?

I have two hands. Alas, neither of them clutches a law degree or an admission to the bar.

Is there anything I could do?

Charlie (Colorado)

It's twue, it's twue!

topsecretk9

Constitutional law scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, who is Of Counsel in the Wilson lawsuit, will be available for interviews

Hugh Hewitt will have a field day!

topsecretk9

from Scary Larry

"Robert Novak, some other commentators and the Administration continue to try to completely distort the role that Valerie Wilson played with respect to Ambassador Wilson's trip to Niger. The facts are beyond dispute. The Office of the Vice President requested that the CIA investigate reports of alleged uranium purchases by Iraq from Niger.

"The CIA set up a meeting to respond to the Vice President's inquiry. Another CIA official, not Valerie Wilson, suggested to Valerie Wilson's supervisor that the Ambassador attend that meeting. That other CIA official made the recommendation because that official was familiar with the Ambassador's vast experience in Niger and knew of a previous trip to Africa concerning uranium matters that had been undertaken by the Ambassador on behalf of the CIA in 1999.

"Valerie Wilson's supervisor subsequently asked her to relay a request from him to the Ambassador that he would like the Ambassador to attend the meeting at the CIA. Valerie Wilson did not participate in the meeting."

-- Ambassador Joseph Wilson

cathyf

Wow. The discovery is going to be awesome. Forget Fitzmas; this is Christmas, New Years, Easter, 4th of July and the Rapture all rolled up in one!!!

cathy :-)

Patrick

The left is currently going nuts about the news that Wilson and P/Flame are suing Libby. Any attorney worth his/her salt would give their left arm to put Joe Wilson under cross examination. He has made so many inconsistent, unsupported and unsupportable statements, it would be a dream come true. That will be far more fun than even a perjury charge against Rove would have been.

Charlie (Colorado)

Clarice thinks they can sell tickets to the depositions.

Tollhouse

The CIA set up a meeting to respond to the Vice President's inquiry. Another CIA official, not Valerie Wilson, suggested to Valerie Wilson's supervisor that the Ambassador attend that meeting.

Probably Valerie Plame.

Charlie (Colorado)

Patrick --- Yeah. Consider, for example, the quotes above compared to the Intel Committee report.

clarice

Some tidbits from this highpoint in American jurisprudence (Seneca wants to know he's funding it..I'm sure Verner has the answer)
"Excerpts From the Complaint in Wilson v. Libby, et al.:

"The lawsuit concerns the intentional and malicious exposure by senior officials of the federal government of one such human source at the CIA, Valerie Plame Wilson, whose job it was to gather intelligence to make the nation safer, and who risked her life for her country."

"The Defendants reached an agreement to discredit, punish, and seek revenge against the Plaintiffs . . . . Said agreement was motivated by an invidiously discriminatory animus towards those who had publicly criticized the administration's stated justifications for going to war with Iraq."

"The Defendants chose not to address publicly, directly, and on the merits why they may have thought Mr. Wilson was wrong or unfair in his statements on the President's misstatements. Rather, they embarked on an anonymous 'whispering campaign' designed to discredit and injure the Plaintiffs and to deter other critics from publicly speaking out."

"But for Mr. Wilson coming forward, it is unlikely that the Administration ever would have acknowledged its error. The fact that the administration had to admit its mistake is one likely reason why the Defendants chose to attack the Wilsons"

"The Defendants fraudulently concealed the existence of the Plaintiffs' cause of action . . . by, among other things, giving false or misleading testimony to federal law enforcement personnel and/or the federal grand jury empanelled to investigate the unlawful publication of Plaintiff Valerie Plame Wilson's classified CIA employment . . . ."


verner

If Joe and Val trying to save face, it won't work. But considering the stink they've thrown, they absolutely have to at least file. What would their cultists think if not?

Have they set up a legal defense fund on KOS yet?

maryrose

VP's office NEVER requested that WILSON go to NIGER. That was and continues to be WIFEY PLAME'S idea....

Jane

>Constitutional law scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, who is Of Counsel in the Wilson lawsuit, will be available for interviews

The last thing they need in a civil lawsuit is a constitutional law scholar. They need a civil litigator. I'd volunteer but I'm biased toward the other side.

I bet that this announcement is an attempt to deflect the press from the Novak announcement yesterday. They would be complete and utter idiots to go through discovery. My mouth waters when I think of the depositions. So I bet the case is "settled" probably for a non-financial amount before one person is deposed.

And if I represented Libby, I'd begin discovery the very minute the complaint was filed, and throw in about 5000 requests for admission for good measure.

Around here the statute of limitations for the things they will be suing about (defamation, loss of business opportunity, hmmmm, what else?) is 3 years. What is it in DC Clarice? And the cause of action accrues when they knew or should have known the thing claimed occurred. So that would be the date Rove spoke to Novak, and hell, what did Libby and Cheney do?


Now they are talking my language!

topsecretk9

Victimhood...redefined...they were denied their civil rights (but no cable air time of retirment)...chuzpah--- here is the filed claim

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/13/152357/107

Redcoat

Anyone know the grounds for the lawsuit?

What did they do,and what damage is Plame/Wilson claiming?

maryrose

Wilson and Plame have been out of the news cycle for about a month so they need to focus our ATTENTION back on them again hence;the lawsuit filed on the very last day. I hope their lawyer bills are steep because they are going to get whomped in court. They can't prove any of this and are just trying to deflect attention now that the REAL TRUTH is coming out about them.

topsecretk9

---The Complaint specifies that each of the Wilsons has been deprived of their First and Fifth Amendment rights; each has suffered a gross invasion of their privacy; each has been impaired in pursuing professional opportunities; and that they fear for their safety and the safety of their children as a result of the wrongful public disclosures. In addition, the Complaint alleges that Valerie Wilson was impaired in her ability to carry out her duties at the CIA, and to pursue her career at the agency in further service to her country, as she had planned. While no specific dollar amount is requested, the suit seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorneys' fees and costs.---

topsecretk9

Filed Claim here

Neo

Sure look like we get to find out who UGO is.

cathyf
Around here the statute of limitations for the things they will be suing about (defamation, loss of business opportunity, hmmmm, what else?) is 3 years. What is it in DC Clarice? And the cause of action accrues when they knew or should have known the thing claimed occurred. So that would be the date Rove spoke to Novak,
So, wait a minute... People have been throwing around statute of limitations chatter as if the clock started when Novak published. It sounds like the clock started when Wilson's "friend on the street" who accosted Novak reported back to the Wilsons. Which, if it is 3 years, would mean that the statute of limitations expired last week, right?

Ah, man, this is gonna get thrown out before discovery even starts. Now I know how the lefties felt when all their Fitzmases turned into Fizzlemases...

cathy :-)

JohnH

I would imagine that Wilson gets 10 to 20K for a speaking gig. His income has probably sky-rocketed since his op ed.

So how can they show loss of income or other "career damage"?

Redcoat

topsekret 9

The Plame/Wison's need to read a biography of Oscar Wilde.

Or at least the last few chapters.

This is going to be hilarious.

topsecretk9

--Wilson's "friend on the street" --

July 8, 2003 according to Wilson's book. Wilson spoke to Novak July 10th, 2003.

b

Dead thread but I can't help responding to this:

"the secret prisons have been moved according to Dana Priest, so the only damage is to our national pride"

Or maybe ya think just maybe the nations who were cooperating with us might be a little more reluctant to cooperate with us in the future because of the firestorm they found themselves engulfed in at the EU/EC? Willed ignorance.

"and lastly, I just read something yesterday saying the SWIFT story didn't cause any real damage, despite World Cup worthy whining by the WH and parts of Congress:"

Oh, well as long as you read it somewhere... Again, jerry, buddy, international cooperation with allies...suffers... Difference between 'what' and 'how' etc. This remedial stuff is exhausting.

topsecretk9

the Complaint was stamped the July 13th.

ordi

they fear for their safety

HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!

Their fear must be why they posed in VF and were at this years WH correspondance dinner!

Looks like Val's book deal flopped and Joe didn't get the answer he wanted from Fitz! They are both hebetudinous but hilariously so.

HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!

topsecretk9

in DC

Neo

The 1st and 5th amendments, Oh Please. They are already on their 17th minute of their 15 minutes of fame.

The only thing in the laundry list that may have any legs is "wrongful public disclosure," but when was Novak told ?

Otherwise, let the depositions begin !!

Charlie (Colorado)

the Complaint was stamped the July 13th.

Sounds like it's either about the last day, or they somehow managed to miss the date by a few days.

topsecretk9

I bet they are going by published date of July 14th...huh?

Enlightened

Right - VP prefers to be a desk jockey at the CIA to - Vanity Fair articles/photo shoots, high scale parties and a million dollar book deal....and of course going to these events, and writing an expose are not endangering them or their children.

This is beyond hilarious. It's priceless.

Pete

Fore once I see that both sides agree about something in the Plame matter.

Redcoat

Lawyer Types,requet for enlightenment,

Since they are claiming her C.I.A career was damaged,the Defense can depose pretty much anyone there,can't they?

Can they also depose Fitz as well?

Neo

This suit sure answers the question I posed yesterday morning.

cathyf

Ok, what they have done is f***ing brilliant evil. They are deliberately filing suit after the statute of limitations has run out so that they don't have to go through the discovery that would prove them liars. Then all of their friends can say that Cheney, Rove and Libby were guilty but "got off an a technicality."

So, what happens if the lawyers for Cheney, Rove & Libby "don't notice" the whole statute of limitations problem until after Joe and Val and Scary Larry and Grossman and Armitage and all their other little friends are crowded together in their perjury trap? Can the plaintiffs get their own suit thrown out on statute of limitations grounds or are the defendents the only ones with standing to do it?

cathy :-)

Bob

Here's the complaint posted over on http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/13/152357/107>Kos

clarice

Do you reallt suppose, the CIA is going to provide her peronnel files? Or if they do they will leave out her medical records?

clarice

DC S of L (last I saw) is 1 year for libel.3 for personal injury.

verner

I guess Val will be wearing Armani to court, thanks to the pennies scraped together by the KOS kids.

What disgusting flim flam artists they truly are.

Coinciding with the filing of the Complaint, the Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust has been established. Funds from the trust will help the Wilsons pay the substantial legal costs forced upon them by the unlawful leaking of Mrs. Wilson's covert CIA status. The objectives of the trust include:

* Counseling them in connection with their potential witness testimony during the upcoming trial of Scooter Libby; and
* Helping them to prepare the civil suit that will uncover the truth surrounding the leak, ensure all relevant public officials are held accountable for actions depriving the Wilsons of their privacy and constitutional rights, and serve as a deterrent to similar wrongdoing being committed in the future.

The Trust was established with the Wilsons' approval and provides that should the suit result in a payment to the Wilsons in excess of their legal costs, they will reimburse the Trust for all legal costs paid by the Trust. That money will then be distributed by the trustees to a charitable organization(s) that works to protect the rights of government whistleblowers.

Contributions to the Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust can be given at www.wilsonsupport.org or sent to P.O. Box 40918, Washington, D.C. 20016-0918.

Redcoat

Clarice,

I would surmise if she is claiming her career was damaged because of disclosure,the defense could claim her depression,as well as other factors would have been contributing to effecting her career prospects,in a negative fashion equel to,or greater than publicity.

Lurker

I'm willing to bet that tomorrow at ten am, the world would be focused on the Israel / Gaza war. Last I looked, this case is NOT on Drudgereport.

Am sure this will be discussed by Brit Hume's show tonight. And the panel will definitely say that they won't have a chase in winning this case.

Wonder what Rove, Cheney, and Lewis will think about this case. Course, they won't be able to talk much about it. And they probably won't agree to a settlement. They will get a huge legal fund.

Kos will probably raise a legal fund for the Wilsons.

I wonder if Fitz knew about this deadline so he called Novak yesterday to time it with Wilson's filing of the claim.

None of their claims have grounds.

arrowhead

from Clarice: "I think he's gotten sloppy and careless and met his match this time in a world of Washington politics not Chicago garbage contracts or blind sheikhs."

Well said!

BTW: Does anyone remember Fitz's diatribe repleat with baseball analogies at the time of "the indictment"? If he knew of Mr. Novak's source(s) at the time, WTF did he think he was doing!!!

Sara (The Squiggler)

There is something missing from this entire story and I'd like to know what. Why does the left and now Plame/Wilson give UGO a free ride? If UGO is Richard Armitage, why is he protected from their wrath? Val and Joe are a couple of narcissitic freaks, IMHO, but those behind them are extremely dangerous. Hoekstra wants the rogue CIA cabal investigated, we've been calling for this type of investigation here for what two years now?

Yesterday on Media Blog, Stephen Spruell, in writing about Dan Rather said:

It couldn't be that a few bloggers suspicious of his motives stumbled onto an enormous journalistic fraud. That's far too quotidian for a journalist of Rather's self-proclaimed importance. It must have been a shadowy conspiracy — the fruition of all the plots and schemes of Rather's enemies.

Doesn't he realize that if we were that good, the New York Times would be out of the secrets-publishing business by now?

I say to Stephen and to all, WE HAVE TO BE THAT GOOD or better. The entire blogosphere should be banning together to find these leakers, prosecute them and throw away the key to their jail cells. This Plame/Wilson B.S. is a diversion designed to keep pulbic attention away from the truly dangerous activities being carried out by this rogue CABAL.

Neo

Then all of their friends can say that Cheney, Rove and Libby were guilty but "got off an a technicality."

I suppose the next question to Joe and Val will be .. who was your lawyer ?

I wonder if Fitz held back on clearing Novak until the statue of limitations had run out ? Would there be a problem deposing anybody while the Libby case was in progress ?

topsecretk9

--Coinciding with the filing of the Complaint, the Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust has been established. Funds from the trust will help the Wilsons pay the substantial legal costs forced upon them --

Okay, forced upon them! Looooovvvvveee it....but do recall the disgust and hand wringing that evil Libby established a defense fund? EVIL they said...EVIL.

ordi

So as not to drive up KOS' traffic here is the complaint via NRO

http://www2.nationalreview.com/pdf/WilsonvLibby.pdf

topsecretk9

* Counseling them in connection with their potential witness testimony during the upcoming trial of Scooter Libby; and

this is what it's ALLLLLL about!

owl

Plame sues Cheney.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060713/ap_on_go_ot/cia_leak_lawsuit

Redcoat

verner

That clears things up.


Patrick

Charlie (CO)- yeah. Even if you just look at the hogwash he wrote in the op-ed that started this all. He can finally be made to explain how his sipping tea in Niger and talking about how a uranium sale never took place in Niger proves that Saddam never tried to purchase uranium. In Africa. Or, how he never saw fit to mention that Saddam's top nuclear guy had been visiting. And where is that report anyway? And why wasn't he required to maintain confidentiality? Yeah. I'm pretty sure this will be fun. I hope they don't try to dismiss until after discovery.

topsecretk9

If the statue of limitations is truly constraining, then I'm thinking the only way they could set up a legal defense fund in any uncontroversial way for themselves was to mount a phony lawsuit effort....


to just come out an set one up for Libby trial would look a little deperadoly worried like

larwyn

So wonderful to be somewhat back. Would have been dreadful to miss all this.

Mac says it perfectly:

There is a God! This is their final onslaught and they have miscalcuated greatly. In the three years since this began we have gained a lot of information about who Plame really is, and who she is connected to.

If they thought their lives were miserable now - just wait.

owl

Okay....I see this is old news..

Barney Frank

"Why does the left and now Plame/Wilson give UGO a free ride?"

Virtually all lawsuits, this one included, contain a "John Does 1 through 10" clause that would cover UGO should they decide to attack him as well.

Whoever said they're narcissists is right. If they actually plan to get this to trial they definitely have personality disorders.

Neo

Wowie Zahawie!

$5 for the first person who can name one thing, anything, Joseph Wilson found on his 2002 trip to Niger that proved "false" President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union statement, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

sad

Tops

******* Counseling them in connection with their potential witness testimony during the upcoming trial of Scooter Libby; and

this is what it's ALLLLLL about!******

You are absolutely right!!!! Where the Wilsons are concerned, all you have to do is follow the money.

maryrose

Everybody tries to sue Cheney and all end up with egg on their face. The left has this new cause to rally around -two California grifters trying to make a quick buck. Those who contribute to their fund will have less money to give to dem candidates-in my book that's win/win.

Charlie (Colorado)

Hell, I think we should all contribute. $5 or $10 --- discovery will be worth it in entertainment value alone.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame