The CIA officer whose identity was leaked to reporters sued Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide and presidential adviser Karl Rove on Thursday, accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, accused Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of revealing Plame’s CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration’s motives in Iraq.

This should get to be fun in a civil court.



  1. Johnny-Cakes says:

    Why must that guy always be referred to as “Lewis “Scooter” Libby”? Why not just Lewis Libby? Shouldn’t the “Scooter” have dropped off back when he was 12 or something?

    She also should sue Robert Novak too. And Robert Novak had the GALL to badmouth “Deepthroat” and Woodward and Bernstein. What a hack. A no talent hack.

    What do no talent hacks do when everyone discovers they have no talent or insight at all? They become conservative talk-show hosts. What do conservative talk-show hosts do after that’s over and people catch on to the bullshit? They become UFO weirdos (read up on Art Bell sometime).

  2. malren says:

    Oh this will be rich, considering she conspired against the President. What a fat waste of court time this is going to be.

  3. moss says:

    You tell ’em, mal — no reason to let the Byzantine politics of the Beltway out from under lock and key. Good grief! Someone might lose their scepter.

  4. rwilliams254 says:

    Those three weren’t on the list that “outted” her, were they?

    Again, more about the scandal than the issue.

  5. Miguel says:

    This will be fun. Libby, Cheney and Rove’s attorneys probably can’t wait to put Joe Wilson under oath. He will have to admit he lied about who sent him to Niger, what he found, and that he told many people his wife was with the CIA.

  6. A_B says:

    I honestly don’t know what lies Miguel is referring to. Wilson has been repeatedly validated. I’d love to see some support for his claims that Wilson lied or that he told people that his wife worked for the CIA. Regarding the latter, I remember a NRO report early on that said this, but it was thoroughly and repeatedly debunked by numerous media sources. If he has something undebunked, I think he should share it.

    Here is Wilson’s recent statement regarding the suit. He says that the facts are undisputed. Miguel, please feel free to dispute:

    ” Joe Wilson sent out this statement:

    “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 setup 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. As the CIA itself has officially confirmed, Valerie Wilson did not send Ambassador Wilson to Niger and she neither suggested him nor recommended him for the trip. rthermore, the Ambassador agreed to travel to Niger pro bono with only his travel expenses being paid.””

  7. A_B says:

    Also:

    “Libby, Cheney and Rove’s attorneys probably can’t wait to put Joe Wilson under oath. He will have to admit he lied about who sent him to Niger, what he found …”

    Based on the form that the suit is likely to take, those claims are completely irrelevant to the suit, regardless of whether or not their attorneys want to make Wilson look bad and assuming that Wilson did in fact lie. If the attorneys bring it up in court on cross-exam of Wilson or via deposition, the statements are unlikely to be admitted.

  8. malren says:

    Discovery is going to be so much fun…honestly, this is the best Fitzmas present *ever*

  9. AB CD says:

    >claims are completely irrelevant to the suit,

    Not so. The entire thing happened in response to what Joe Wilson wrote in the Times. That he was wrong about these things and they wanted to expose that is very relevant. Plus in civil suits, don’t they take depositions about everything? Isn’t that how Clinton got impeached?

  10. AB CD says:

    >honestly don’t know what lies Miguel is referring to.

    How’s this:

    The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article…which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.'” Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong and the names were wrong” when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports.

    This is from the report by the Senate Intelligence Committee that analyzed Iraq intelligence.

  11. AB CD says:

    It’d be fun if you actually reported on the trial each day. Any chance you’ll link to Bob Novak’s recent statements on the story? He basically took the air out of the whole Karl Rove outed Valerie Plame story.

  12. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    I have a real sneaky feeling that:

    1) This will be postponed until after the mid-term elections.

    2) The case will be thrown out by the government intervention on National Security grounds.

    3) After the mid-term elections, win or lose, all this will end up superclassified and then Plame’s Lawyers will be unable to see the evidence, even if they already possess it.

    4) Just before the end of Bush’s term, he will pardon EVERYONE connected with his screw ups, illegal wiretaps, torture programs, violations of the telecommunication laws, and every other illegal activity done during his administration.

  13. AB CD says:

    So you’d rather go with media summaries instead of the actual source? That Wilson had to backtrack from his lies is evidence that Wilson wasn’t lying? What else would he say when it’s pointed out that he couldn’t have seen the documents? He told people he had said they may be forgeries, that these were his conclusions. Then he says oh the CIA knew about these documents, and they wanted me to go to NIger to check it out. Except the CIA didn’t have the documents yet either! So now he’ll have to come up with something else.

    There’s really 2 separate things. There was Iraq trying to buy uranium, which the British Intellignece agencies reported, and there were these documents of Iraq buying uranium. The documents were forgeries. The Brits stand by their intelligence claims(look up the Butler Report).
    The Senate Committee Report also mentions that Wilson himself spoke with an official in Niger who thought Iraq was trying to buy uranium from them.

  14. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    Oh this will be rich, considering she conspired against the President. What a fat waste of court time this is going to be.
    Comment by malren — 7/13/2006 @ 12:24 pm

    still trolling, what a waste

  15. Frank IBC says:

    Hahahah… argument you can’t refute = “trolling”.

    Loser.

  16. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    AB CD, do you get paid by someone to come up with this stuff?

    The forged documents were passed to Italian Intelligence in Italy

    The Italians suspected it was a forgery right away. They passed it on to the American and British Intelligence communities anyway, because they cooperate.

    The Downing Street Memos plainly point out the British Intelligence clearly thought they were forgeries.

    Wilson has publicly said no Niger official was aware of any attempt by Iraq to obtain yellow cake. He has publicly stated that his sources all scoffed that Iraq had made contacts to purchase the yellow cake.

    Both the US Senate Report and especially the British Butler Report have been decried as patent fabrications by those with any objectivity. The Senate Report was not allowed to interview everyone nor were they allowed to totally investigate the ten areas of concern they publicly wanted to.

    For reference, read the report itself. http://tinyurl.com/jnfq6

    Next time you quote Limbaugh, try providing a link to the comments.

  17. doug says:

    #13. 2) The case will be thrown out by the government intervention on National Security grounds.

    you are right – this Administration is impervious to irony! the leakers (and part-time leak-hunters) invoking the very secrecy they violated to quash a lawsuit intended to punish those who violated it.

    it would be too rich.

  18. Eideard says:

    Ease up on the flaming, folks. Snip-snip!

  19. Todd Henkel says:

    “The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children’s lives at risk by exposing Plame.”

    Umm – when you join the CIA as an operative, don’t you put your life at risk by default?

    Not that you expect your own side to reveal your cover as more than a politician or ambassador, but does seems to me to be part of the risk.

  20. AB CD says:

    I read the report, I even quoted from it to point out Wilson’s lies. I even explained the 2 different things that you are confusing. Yes the documents are forgeries, but that’s not the basis for British Intelligence claims, or for the State of the Union sentence. Wilson himself met a Niger offical who said he thought Iraq was trying to buy uranium a few years back. You claim both the Senate Report and the Butler Report are fabrications(and patent ones at that!), but the views of 3 liberal Democrat Senators is objective?

    Joe WIlson said he declared the documents forgeries himself. Then it’s pointed out that the US didn’t even have the documents yet, so he changes his story. Yet I’m supposed to take his word for it over the bipartisan Senate Committee. The only patent fabrication is Joe Wilson.

  21. joshua says:

    The reason Fitzgerald has not indicited anyone for the leak itself is that during his investigation he found that Ms. Plame had *outed* herself long before this event occured. The CIA has said that she was no longer an undercover operative by this time and probably wasn’t covered by the rules on outing.
    The CIA has also stated that the idea to go to Niger wasn’t hers, but when informed of it she did suggest her husband as the one to go and lobbied quite hard for that to happen.
    Mr. Wilson was forced to backtrack on more than one occasion in the Senate hearings. And the British and the Germans still say that Iraq was *attempting* to buy yellow cake through Niger. But the documents that Wilson referred to were forgeries.

  22. joshua says:

    Sorry….I forgot to add this….they will lose the suit, because Fitzgeralds information on Plame having been already known as a former undercover operative and that she still worked for the CIA will be used to kill her suit.

  23. Odyssey67 says:

    “….they will lose the suit, because Fitzgeralds information on Plame having been already known as a former undercover operative and that she still worked for the CIA will be used to kill her suit.

    Comment by joshua”

    I find it hard to believe that they would have even brought the suit if it was that cut & dried. They would have more to lose in terms of credibility (even if only with half the country) than they’d have to gain in publicity (which would be the only other logical motivation, if you’re assessment were correct).

    From Fitzgerald’s own statement, he hasn’t indicted anyone for the leak because the principals refuse to come clean, NOT b/c Plame’s identity was already known or her status w/in CIA had changed. Remember his baseball umpire analogy (throwing sand in the eyes of the ump to obsucure his vision)? The prosecution has necessarily devolved to pursuing purjury & obstruction of justice (as I recall the charges) against Libby specifically b/c they suspect he is blocking the investigation.

    Moving on, it seems fairly obvious that Bush will use his presidential powers to pardon anyone involved who is close to jail time, and they in turn will forever keep their own mouths shut (out of gratitude if nothing else) to cover his butt. It is thus that this whole sorry affair will go unpunished. Wilson & Plame surely realize this is the likely scenario too, no matter how strong their case. Therefore, their objective can only be to use an otherwise strong case to crack open the facts during discovery for public scrutiny. The only gamble they are taking is whether any court will allow the government to shut the case down by invoking national security, thereby derailing the whole thing. But given the nature of the charges against the government, I doubt even this usually heeded argument will carry water this time (how do you claim you are protecting NS if the evidence indeed shows you did something in direct contraction to protecting NS), and so I suspect the case will go forward more or less ‘as is’.

    I think Wilson & Plame are simply content to lay the groundwork for a future that Bush & Co won’t be able to escape. The administration may be able to rig the system to ensure they all walk free, but if the evidence against them is strong enough they won’t be going anywhere without the truth hanging over their heads for the rest of their lives. Shredded reputations can be a heavy punishment for people used to commanding respect & living in the public eye.

    Just ask O.J. 😉

  24. Smartalix says:

    What the Bush defenders forget is that there is a big difference between knowing that he had a wife (which nobody disputes) and that she was working for the CIA.

  25. GregAllen says:

    Won’t the Whitehouse just have everything declared classified, making a civil lawsuit impossible?

    That’s what they’ve done before when faced with lawsuits.

  26. AB CD says:

    This probably gets dealyed until the criminal case is over, pushing the story past the elections.

  27. Mike Voice says:

    I love civil suits.

    For a couple hundred bucks, you can file anything you want – to get “your day in court”.

    http://tinyurl.com/m3b6v

  28. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    While I think the White House will interfere to some degree, it will backfire on them. If Bush decides to pardon everyone or call for dismissal on National Security grounds, the Republicans will be toast. There would be no way they will recover from that for years. If the Democrats win Congress, as they very well might, I think any hint of interference will bring impeachment against both Bush and Cheney.

    Wouldn’t that be a glorious end to their careers. Shamed for all history. Looked upon even less favorably then Nixon.

    And the Wilsons just might have enough dislike for the Bushites to help topple the King.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5809 access attempts in the last 7 days.