Will Plame vs. Cheney, Libby & Rove Unearth New Info?

Several years ago, I was talking to a Democratic senator on the intelligence committee about the CIA leak case. I asked if Democrats had any intention of pushing for a congressional investigation of the administration leak that appeared in Robert Novak's column and that outed Valerie Wilson as a CIA operative. The senator noted that a special counsel (Patrick Fitzgerald) was already on the case. That's true, I said, adding that it was not Fitzgerald's job to tell the public about his findings. His task was to investigate (secretly) a crime and then mount a prosecution if he could. Any information he would unearth would only become public were he to mention it in an indictment or a subsequent prosecution. He would not be issuing any report. And at the end of Fitzgerald's inquiry, I said to the senator, there might no prosecution (or merely a limited prosecution) and that the public might not learn all there was to know about the case. So, I asked this legislator, if Democrats cared about the leak, shouldn't they push for a non-criminal investigation? The senator replied in an exasperated manner: "You want us to investigate everything?"

Well, why not? But it was clear he wasn't interested in a congressional probe of the CIA leak case. Nor were many other Capitol Hill Democrats. Many were satisfied by the Fitzgerald appointment. But after investigating the case for over two years, Fitzgerald, has only indicted one Bush official, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and that was not for the leak but for lying to the FBI and Fitzgerald's grand jury. (Libby disclosed Valerie Wilson's employment at the CIA to New York Times reporter Judy Miller and confirmed it for Time correspondent Matt Cooper.) In the course of the indictment and pretrial process, Fitzgerald has made some critical information available--such as the fact that it was Cheney who first told Libby that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA's Counterproliferation Division, a unit in the agency's clandestine operations directorate. But Fitzgerald has not--and cannot under Justice Department guidelines--share all that he knows about the leak with the public. Thus, much of the story remains untold. And George W. Bush and his White House still refuse to answer any questions about the leak case, continuing a stonewalling strategy that has served them well.

Enter a new lawsuit. On Friday, Valerie and Joseph Wilson filed a lawsuit against Cheney, Libby and Karl Rove. (Prior to the Novak column, Rove leaked information about Wilson's classified employment to Time correspondent Matt Cooper; he also confirmed this information for Novak. Fitzgerald, though, was not able to bring a criminal case against him.) In the suit, the Wilsons accuse the three Bush officials--and unnamed coconspirators--of having violated their various rights, such as Valerie Wilson's privacy rights and Joe Wilson's right to express his opinions, which he did in a New York Times op-ed piece that criticized the Bush administration's Iraq policy. That article led White House officials to assail him.

The lawsuit is based on the Bivens case, in which a man named Webster Bivens was arrested in 1965 by agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. He later sued, complaining that the agents had searched his home and arrested him without a warrant and that he had suffered humiliation and mental suffering as a result. He argued that he could directly sue the narcs to remedy an unconstitutional invasion of his privacy rights. The Justice Department, representing the six unnamed narcotics agents, argued that Bivens had no right to bring a federal claim and could only initiate a tort action in a state court. A federal district court and then a federal appeals court tossed out his suit. But in 1971, the Supreme Court reversed those decisions. Writing for the majority, Justice William Brennan declared this sort of lawsuit was needed to check a federal official who was "unconstitutionally exercising his authority."

I'm no lawyer--though I occasionally play one on television--and cannot comment on whether Rove secretly sharing classified information with Cooper (or Libby doing the same with Miller) is the legal (and constitutional) equivalent of narcs busting into someone's home, throwing him into manacles in front of his wife and children, threatening to arrest the entire family, and searching the entire apartment, all without a warrant. And if Joe or Valerie Wilson had asked my advice, I might have suggested that they skip the suit, so Valerie Wilson can focus on writing her I-was-a-suburban-mom-spy memoirs--which is sure to land her on Oprah's couch, the bestsellers list, and (probably) a movie screen. (Angelina Jolie playing a real-life Mrs. Smith?)

But if the Wilsons can get their lawsuit to the discovery stage--and that might be a big if--they will be able to take depositions and demand documents from their targets and others. (Will they go after journalists?) Such action could yield information beyond what Fitzgerald has disclosed to the public. A private lawsuit is often an imperfect device to dig out the full story of any controversy. But this one is a reminder that the public has not yet received a full and official accounting of the leak case.

Comments (78)

1. "And if Joe or Valerie Wilson had asked my advice, I might have suggested that they skip the suit, so Valerie Wilson can focus on writing her I-was-a-suburban-mom-spy memoirs--which is sure to land her on Oprah's couch, the bestsellers list, and (probably) a movie screen. (Angelina Jolie playing a real-life Mrs. Smith?)"

   Wouldn't it sell BETTER...with a "lawsuit promotion"?

   And speaking of books on the Plame-Wilsons.....???

   (Seriously, Ned Lamont will be the US Senator from Connecticut, before "Plame/Wilson v Cheney, Rove, Libby" gets to discovery).

   Posted by Mask at 07/17/2006 @ 4:20pm

2. (Seriously, Ned Lamont will be the US Senator from Connecticut, before "Plame/Wilson v Cheney, Rove, Libby" gets to discovery).

   That's pretty bold MASK, any grounds for such prediction?

   Posted by BlueTexan at 07/17/2006 @ 4:24pm

3. I don't think this suit will ever make it to trial...there seems to be nothiong there, if there was Fitzgerald would have already be into it from another investigation...I think it is a publicity stunt...It would be as valid a suit as say. Clinton suing Monica for defamation of character for keeping the dress...

   Posted by john maasch at 07/17/2006 @ 4:35pm

4. Posted by BLUETEXAN 07/17/2006 @ 4:24pm | ignore this person

   Joke (though I said "seriously"), BLUE....not the Lamont part, even the "hopeful of the hopeful" know Lieberman will win, either as a Dem or Independent (Barbara Boxer endorsed him just yesterday).

   Naw...referring mostly to the lawsuit. The "dubious, but hopeful" comments I've heard from those who love Joe and Val, make me think that everybody knows this thing will "go nowhere", but it will "keep it alive" until November.

   Seriously (seriously), I think Mr Corn's obsession with this is either based on not being able to just "Move On"...or the fact that he's got his own "Plame-gate" book due out in the fall, and if it drops off the radar screen...so do his sales.

   Posted by Mask at 07/17/2006 @ 4:36pm

5. Mask,

   Don't forget the beg-a-thons for legal fees by these two...my guess there is no risk if uber lib Bush haters fund the suit all the way to the trash bin..for political purposes against the Bush White House...but they seem to forget Bush ain't running.

   If I were a left wing party hack I would sue everyone including Jesus in order to keep the "story alive until Novemebr"...too.

   I really don't think anyones really cares anyway..Plame and Wilson appear to be doing fine with the TV talk show and book appearances...prospering nicely ,in fact....should be able to fund their own suits, one would suspect..

   Posted by john maasch at 07/17/2006 @ 5:09pm

6. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 07/17/2006 @ 5:09pm

   Let's not get too critical of the legal fee "beg-a-thons"...Tom DeLay's name comes to mind. Repubs and Dems alike have used this tactic, its certainly not limited to Democrats.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 07/17/2006 @ 5:31pm

7. Most of the neo-con and Straussian pundits commenting on the Wilson / Plame lawsuit have one thing in common: they put as much misleading subterfuge into the public as possible in order to mask the real issue, namely that OUR President made a public statement to the effect of this: If the leak came from the CIA or the White House, I will fire the guilty party. Whoops! There was a detail that Bush's controllers neglected to tell him, failed to put "on script," and that was that the leak DID come from the White House. Intentionally. When will The Nation and The Washington Times stop mimicking Pravda, the official party line's paper?

   Posted by nunezcabeza at 07/17/2006 @ 5:35pm

8. "Most of the neo-con and Straussian pundits commenting on the Wilson / Plame lawsuit have one thing in common: they put as much misleading subterfuge into the public as possible in order to mask the real issue, namely that OUR President made a public statement to the effect of this: If the leak came from the CIA or the White House, I will fire the guilty party..."

   and that the all of the fabricated justifications for war are tied to the same tactics employed by cheney/bush in this sad-assed episode. eff plame, she's probably guilty of crimes against humanity anyway.

   Posted by dabar at 07/17/2006 @ 5:48pm

9. Like I said when this leak crap came out, " NON-STORY "! At least she and Joe got the cover of Vanity Fair out of it!

   Posted by barry25 at 07/17/2006 @ 5:58pm

10. Posted by BARRY25 07/17/2006 @ 5:58pm

    Like I said when this leak crap came out, " NON-STORY "! At least she and Joe got the cover of Vanity Fair out of it!

    Oh Barry, you persist in this failed attempt to divert attention from a real story. Not Rove and Libby, by the way, they were simply functionaries. No, it's the question of why Cheney (and possibly Georgie-boy himself) decided to leak the name of a covert agent handling sensitive counter-proliferation networks for purely political reasons. The question of illegality is almost beside the point when the damage that has been done by burning Plame-Wilson's covert contacts is taken into account. That's a real story, especially when it comes to BushCo and all their noises about preventing WMD from falling into terrorist hands. This case simply shows how little they actually care for anything other than their own political survival and protecting their own hind ends. They sacrificed the strategic good of this country and the safety of its citizens on the alter of their own ambitions. Why wouldn't that be a story, and if the press had any real hutzpah, a page 1 scorcher too?

    Posted by Stwriley at 07/17/2006 @ 6:36pm

11. should be able to fund their own lawsuit??!! are you out of your frigging mind, maasch?

    sheesh, man! get a grip!

    Posted by darladoon at 07/17/2006 @ 7:25pm

12. Posted by BARRY25 07/17/2006 @ 5:58pm: Like I said when this leak crap came out, " NON-STORY "!

    Actually, it's been quite a story. Why do you brag about being wrong?

    Posted by orwell2005 at 07/17/2006 @ 10:01pm

13. Posted by RIO BRAVO 07/17/2006 @ 11:33pm: Hypocricy defined

    Thanks for the def, brave river.

    I prefer the one that goes: a bedwetting pansy who calls himself brave but is so afraid of the reality that is this world that he blithly urges death, destruction, and terror upon any and all that Dear Leader informs him are a potential threat to him.

    Posted by orwell2005 at 07/17/2006 @ 11:54pm

14. Posted by RIO BRAVO 07/17/2006 @ 11:33pm: A cia agents name being leaked first by her husband and then by others is somehow important.

    Nope. Not the name.

    I know this is a difficult concept. But it's been rehashed time and time again. I'm sure it's not really beyond your grasp, o brave one.

    Hopefully, you can come up with the significant disclosure on a second try. Wanna guess again?

    Posted by orwell2005 at 07/17/2006 @ 11:57pm

15. Posted by RIO BRAVO 07/17/2006 @ 11:33pm: The NYT disclosing secrets of state in an ongoing "secret operation" against enemies of the state

    Ah yes... The illegal NSA eavesdropping program. More definitions from Brave River:

    "secrets of state" defined: things that are well known, like that we are monitoring the phone calls of suspected terrorists.

    "secret operation" defined: things that are not well known, like that we are illegally monitoring the phone calls of American citizens without warrants or court supervision of any kind.

    "enemies of the state" defined: the citizens of this country

    in which the damage done is only now being accessed is not important.

    Hardly. It is extremely important. This administration has been breaking the law. And, in the wake of the Hamden decision, their refusal to suspend the program makes their lawbreaking a willful, and historically defiant, act.

    The damage done by this lawless administration will take years to overcome.

    Posted by orwell2005 at 07/18/2006 @ 12:10am

16. yup, a non-issue, just like the lewinsky scandal ;)

    Posted by darladoon at 07/18/2006 @ 01:35am

17. Darloon,

    "should be able to fund their own lawsuit??!! are you out of your frigging mind, maasch?

    sheesh, man! get a grip! "...yes fund their own suit...it can be done on retainer where the lawyer gets 1/3 to 1/2 of any winnings...just ask Edwards, as that is how he made his cash of of health care companys..made more than his clients by any measure...and so could any lawyer who would take a case like this...especialy if they thought it was a gold mine...on the other hand, if the lawyers thought the case was to weak or had no chance, then the plaintifs would have to go it alone and prepay...what do you think...Plame and Wilson have a chance?

    If I am wrong I am sure some one here will correct me...

    Posted by john maasch at 07/18/2006 @ 01:39am

18. With the AIPAC Spy trial coming up next month in America, this war is just the distraction that was called for, at just the right time.

    The Poppy Bush Crime Family is so guilty of so many things on so many levels, their only hope is to control Congress and its investigative capabilities forever.

    They thought the had the next elections in the bag through the backdoor of the electronic voting machines, but it appears the world is hip to that scam.

    Their only choice is total war, full blown mayhem, a series of false flag attacks on the US Mainland and a wag-the-dog proclamation of Avian Flu to keep a frightened and compliant population locked in their homes.

    Gameoverville is just around the corner.

    America has been totally looted.

    the armed forces have been intentionally degraded, and Israel will become the world's only super power, having confiscated the vast majority of the planet's oil reserves.

    Sadly, our troops are in Iraq to be ambushed and die there.

    Picture two train robbers heading for the Mexican border with bags of gold strapped to their horses.

    At the border, one gets greedy, shoots the other, then takes his horse and his gold over the finish line.

    We're the dead guy.

    But, but, what about all of our nukes...we control the world, right?

    No.

    Israel's software has been installed throughout the most critical systems in the United States, thanks to all of the AIPAC Moles who refer to themselves as Senators and Congressman.

    Who really controls America?

    "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

    The so-called Christian Zionists, the Holy Roller end of timers who are acting in concert with the Oil Whores - in what they believe to be a "Partnership With Israel," these are what the Likudists refer to as"

    "useful idiots."

    The word "Double-cross" doesn't even begin to describe what comes next.

    In the words of Henry Kissinger, these Goy will soon be viewed as little more the "Useless Eaters" in the eyes of the Likudists, as they maneuver to align with their next strategic partner, China.

    The Arrogant and Powerful Americans are simply patsies in an elaborate sting operation, for all the marbles.

    When your "mark" is as susceptible to blackmail as is George Bush Senior, Cheny, Rummy and the rest of these criminals - and the (s)elected President has the intellect of an avocado - and you have the banksters and the Media under your own control...the end game is a foregone conclusion.

    Is this easy, or what?

    Posted by plunger at 07/18/2006 @ 06:11am

19. Odd defense team the Wilsons have here...

    FRANK compared their tactics to Tom Delay

    and DARLADOON compared their case's relevance to Clinton-Lewinsky.

    Uh, guys...sure you want to stick with THOSE parallel?

    Posted by Mask at 07/18/2006 @ 06:37am

20. The Wilson's should also add Senator Roberts to the list of those getting sued for his lies in the SIC Report regarding his claims that Valerie ‘sent her husband'/'recommended him for the trip'.

    Posted by Kuni at 07/18/2006 @ 08:29am

21. Quote from a United States senator: "You want us to investigate everything?" Y e s , And why not start with some of the Democrats as well, as investigate Bush and his Bush League? I f t h e elected D e m o c r a t s a r e s o w o r r i e d now a b o u t o u r b r o k e n c o n s t i t u t i o n , w h y d i d t h e y h e l p t o b r e a k i t ? P a t r i o t a c t s 1 a n d 2 . . . t w i c e o v e r ? G o o d G r i e f !

    I am a Democrat but I am e x t r e m e l y a n g r y r e g a r d i n g t h e l a c k o f c l e a r o p p o s i t i o n f r o m m o s t o f t h e De m o c r a t s in office . W hat h a v e t h e y b e e n doing s i n c e 2 0 0 0, except pandering to the Bush League's agenda ? Where is the outrage against t h e w a r (or should I s a y, w a r s )? Constantly b e i n g hoodwinked not only by the neo–cons but also b y t h e d i s t r a c t i n g s i d e - i s s u e s o f t h e B u s h L e a g u e i s e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e o f w h a t D e m o c r a t s should have been doing. It is time that elected Democrats s e t a valid a g e n d a a n d i g n o r e t h e w h i t e– n o i s e o f d i s t r a c t i n g , non– i s s u e s from the right–wing and the Selected Resident, Mr. Bush . Democrats n e e d rally around l e a d e r s h i p t h a t has an agenda that is courageous, f o c u s e d, and clearly stated . A f t e r v i c t o r y i s t h e t i m e t o be expansive regarding details, but n o t b e f o r e . P o w e r m u s t b e w o n b e f o r e o n e c a n a i d t h e p o w e r l e s s . It is time for elected Democrats to q u i t " b e a t i n g a r o u n d t h e - B u s h !"

    T h e f o l l o w i n g i s a l i s t, i n o r d e r o f i m p o r t a n c e , o f w h a t should be e x p e c ted of elected D e m o c r a t s :

    I t i s s t i l l t h e "- e c o n o m y s t #?! d " … d e f i c i t, war debt , v a n i s h e d s u r p l u s , w e a k d o l l a r , s k y h i g h t r a d e d e f i c i t , trillions in d e b t ,… all e f f e c t i n g : Investments in e d u c a t i o n , h e a l t h c a r e , policing, a n d s o c i a l s e c u r i t y .

    Desist from w a r - h a w k i n g in any form. D o n ' t s u p p o r t t h e w a r . . . s u p p o r t t h e t r o o p s by b r i n ging t h e m h o m e . D o n ' t r u n c a m p a i g n s t h a t are debased in fear–mongering, which p a n d e r t o m i l i t a r i s m and anti–terrorism, catering to our l e s s e r a n g e l s . If Democrats need to talk about anti–terrorism surely they must start with outrage against the terrorist acts of Bush's war in Iraq whereby 127 thousand civilians have been killed by our weapons. Capturing Saddam was not worth the life of one American soldier nor one dead Iraqi child, let alone, thousands of dead Iraqi children.

    S p y i n g o n A m e r i c a n s a n d e v e r y o n e e l s e, b r e a k i n g o u r c o n s t i t u t i o n, l y i n g a b o u t W M D , l y i n g a b o u t s p y i n g , t o r t u r i n g p e o p l e a n d h a v i n g o t h e r s t o r t u r e f o r y o u, and k i l l i n g 127 t h o u s a n d I r a q i s ( m o s t l y c i v i l i a n s , a d d s u p t o w a r c r i m e s i n a n y o n e ' s b o o k , e s p e c i a l l y u p i n L e H a g u e ) . It is no exaggeration to say that w e h a v e a f a s c i s t i n t h e W h i t e H o u s e . T h e t i m e i s l o n g o v e r d u e f o r t h e D e m o c r a t s t o wake–up and r e g a i n t h e a b i l i t y t o l e a d , and for the press to fulfill its constitutional duty. I am w a i t i n g .

    Posted by hokesimpson at 07/18/2006 @ 09:05am

22. Posted by HOKESIMPSON 07/18/2006 @ 09:05am | ignore this person

    Anybody got an old "Enigma" machine that can de-cipher that?

    Posted by Mask at 07/18/2006 @ 09:17am

23. No-one mentioned the fact that the Wilsons said they wouldn't take one cent from the judgement in their lawsuit. Instead they would put it in a general fund to help future whistleblowers in their suits against the government.

    Naturally. Such unselfish largesse of taxpayer money will score integrity points towards a book deal. When the case was dropped and Rolling Stone quit calling the Wilson's, plan B was put into motion. Their 15 minutes of fame is heading into the 11th hour.

    Posted by Sliver at 07/18/2006 @ 10:18am

24. Yeah, wasn't the civil lawsuit by Paula whatshername vs. Bad Bill Clinton funded by one of the more right wing legal foundations? And did that not lead to Monicagate and an impeachment farce? And didn't a sitting president have to sit still for a deposition? Curiouser and curiouser.

    Posted by The Goods at 07/18/2006 @ 12:39pm

25. And Rio, my wife finally bought me (for our anniversary) a DVD of your movie. Watched it last night with most of the kids. Ever notice how the villian is the major capalist big deal in town (and his "no good" relation)? The good guy (the Duke) is part of the government.

    Posted by The Goods at 07/18/2006 @ 12:43pm

26. i see the tools are still pushing the line that "there was nothing to the leak". after fitzgerald told us she was covert, after it is absolutely clear that the administration lied us into war, the best line the republicans can come up with is "oh, it's a publicity stunt!" i just cant figure out if you guys are traitors or dupes--i guess it doesnt matter, youre supporting treason anyway.

    Posted by pretzel at 07/18/2006 @ 1:02pm

27. As much as they insist it's a non-story, it's all Joe's fault, she was never covert anyway ... the BushCo fans want this little fire to keep burning. Because the hapless and photogenic Plame/Wilson duo attracts all the cameras, and turns any discussion of the runup to the war into a bunch of gossip. Much better to chat about lawsuits of no lasting consequence than to seriously examine how so much got so fucked up so fast.

    It works on the same principle as debating a flag burning amendment while Israel and Hezbollah are getting ready to go to war. Something else was in the news, the voters won't make the connection, we won't be held responsible.

    Posted by MyParadigm at 07/18/2006 @ 1:23pm

28. "Will Plame vs. Cheney, Libby & Rove Unearth New Info?"

    The real question should be, "Does anybody remember that there is a war currently taking place in Iraq? Does anybody care?"

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/18/2006 @ 1:23pm

29. i think the iraq war forms the backdrop to the plame lawsuit. if the war wasn't such a gigantic disaster, people wouldn't care as much. dont kid yourself that the republicans want this; they want it to go away without a ripple. and remember OJ lost the civil suit, and al capone went down for tax evasion. (imagine how the right wingers would have spun that--Al never did anything! if he had done anything he wouldve been indicted for it! St. Valentine's Day Massacre? nothin but liberal propaganda! Poor ol Al is just a victim of an overzealous IRS! and that darn publicity huntin Eliott Ness!

    Posted by pretzel at 07/18/2006 @ 1:38pm

30. Posted by THE GOODS 07/18/2006 @ 12:43am | ignore this person

    What is "Rio's movie"???

    Posted by Mask at 07/18/2006 @ 2:25pm

31. Outside of DC no one cares about this issue. But it will be fun to follow as it happens, because history won't care either.

    Man on the street: "Valerie Plame? Oh I loved her on Idol!"

    Posted by FREIHEIT 07/17/2006 @ 9:18pm

    Damn, bro, you are hanging out with some stupid-assed people. Everyone I know knows who she is, and what this is about.

    My advice: Move to a smarter town, if that's the sampling you're getting off the streets of your own.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/18/2006 @ 2:44pm

32. PRETZEL: I think it comes down to what is more important: a suicide car bombing that kills fifty people, or a member of the Bush administration leaking Plame's name? Haditha or Karl Rove?

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/18/2006 @ 2:56pm

33. Sort of along the track of what GERTRUDE posted....

    here we are, moving into one of the greatest periods of crises in the Middle East since 1973...maybe even Suez-1956...

    and David Corn is still concentrating on "Plame-gate"?!?!???

    Yes, yes, I realize the "Wilsons sue Cheney/Rove" thing was last week, but David Corn is an EDITOR of "The Nation", and while Ari Berman, John Nichols, Katrina vanden Heuvel have atleast MENTIONED the Israeli-Lebanonese situation....

    Mr Corn is still hooked on his "story" and Inside-The-Beltway scandal du jours.

    Is this obsession?

    Posted by Mask at 07/18/2006 @ 3:13pm

34. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 07/18/2006 @ 2:41pm

    But Liberty, I thought Joe Wilson was a liar with no credibility. Now you are citing him on the rationale for war. Which Joe Wilson do we believe here?

    Posted by Hman23 at 07/18/2006 @ 4:20pm

35. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/18/2006 @ 3:24pm

    But Mary, it certainly counters the notion that the suit is for profit.

    Posted by Hman23 at 07/18/2006 @ 4:24pm

36. Funny song parody by the way.

    Posted by Hman23 at 07/18/2006 @ 4:24pm

37. And let's not forget that Novak thought he was exposing a crime. There are anti-nepotism laws on the books. Since it has been determined that Plame did play a role in getting Wilson an all expenses paid vacation in Niger, there was an actual crime committed that no one is talking about.

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/18/2006 @ 3:26pm

    Bullshit. I can only hope this is a weak attempt at humor. If you are serious, quote me the part of Novak's column making your point.

    Posted by Hman23 at 07/18/2006 @ 4:39pm

38. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/18/2006 @ 3:37pm

    Why can't I obsess over secret conspiracies while I listen to music?

    Posted by leftofcenter at 07/18/2006 @ 4:49pm

39. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/18/2006 @ 4:57pm

    Wrong answer. Your googling turned up an article by Victoria Toensing and Bruce Sanford. Now maybe they share your opinion, but it is hardly evidence that Novak was motivated by that same concern. Try pointing me to the part of Novak's July 2003 piece showing he was so concerned with the potnetial that anti-nepotism laws were violated. I re-read it and didn't get that impression at all.

    Posted by Hman23 at 07/18/2006 @ 6:08pm

40. The Administration will pull every legal trick in the book to get this case dismissed before Discovery starts.

    The thing Republicans fear MOST is the truth-finding power of a JURY.

    Isn't it IRONIC that it will probably be one of those "evil" trial lawyers filing one of those "frivolous" lawsuits that will lead to the ultimate undoing of this President?!

    Posted by Krashkopf at 07/18/2006 @ 6:54pm

41. Corn thought he was going to win a Pulitzer on this junk. It has fallen apart on him and he can't quite let it go. Time to find a new cause Mr. Corn===just let it go----maybe a 12 step program would help---remember,step one is admitting you have a problem.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 07/18/2006 @ 9:44pm

42. so which is it len?

    just let it go?

    or twelve step program?

    Posted by Will C. at 07/18/2006 @ 10:25pm

43. because one eliminates the use of the other

    Posted by Will C. at 07/18/2006 @ 10:25pm

44. Corn thought he was going to win a Pulitzer on this junk. It has fallen apart on him and he can't quite let it go. Time to find a new cause Mr. Corn===just let it go----maybe a 12 step program would help---remember,step one is admitting you have a problem.

    David Corn....Dan Rather....separated at birth????

    Posted by Sliver at 07/18/2006 @ 11:00pm

45. You guys are brilliant in the same way that Trekies are brilliant. You have created an entire world of thought that make sense to you, connects the dots, and feels right. All while being completely backward.

    No matter how plausible it seems, the Enterprise does not exist.

    Posted by Person at 07/19/2006 @ 06:52am

46. The biggest problem the Wilsons will face in this lawsuit is getting a favorable decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, which is packed with Reagan right wing appointees. If they do get to discovery they won't get very far as my guess is most requests for production of documents and other discovery matters will be stopped by the Court of Appeals. Having read about the problems Walsh had during Iran contra within this court, I don't see any way the Wilson's can prevail in this circuit even though I wish they would as I do understand how discovery would yield a lot of information about what happened that we may never hear about from Fitzgerald. One needs to realize that Fitzgerald will only play the cards he feels he can win with...not those that look good but aren't certain winners. If it gets that far, the Wilsons only need to prove their case by a preponderance of fact...not beyond a reasonable doubt. Their burden is much less than Fitzgerald's but they have other problems to deal with that make their case extremely difficult.

    Posted by rjcrane42 at 07/19/2006 @ 11:05am

47. RESE: Are you joking?

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/19/2006 @ 2:30pm

48. PERSON: "You guys are brilliant in the same way that Trekies are brilliant. You have created an entire world of thought that make sense to you, connects the dots, and feels right. All while being completely backward."

    Yep.

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/19/2006 @ 2:32pm

49. RESE: Are you joking?

    Posted by GERTRUDE 07/19/2006 @ 2:30pm | ignore this person

    HOW DARE YOU! Don't you know RESE and PLUNGER are the only ones who know the full story of what happened on those fateful days.

    They are bringing you all the evidence, based only on the secret testimony, of the miserable souls, who survived these terrifying ordeals.

    The incidents, the places. My friend, we cannot keep this a secret any longer. Let us punish the guilty. Let us reward the innocent. My friend, can your heart stand the shocking facts of grave robbers from outer space?

    Posted by Mask at 07/19/2006 @ 2:41pm

50. MASK: Tee-hee.

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/19/2006 @ 3:53pm

51. RESE: http://www.911mtyhs.com/html/the_irish_did_it__or_did_they.html

    All of your worst fears will be proven true if you read this, RESE.

    Posted by Gertrude at 07/19/2006 @ 3:56pm

52. Who's smarter? People who enjoy relaxing while listening to music or people who obsess over secret conspiracies in the government that can never be proven?

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/18/2006 @ 3:37pm

    The Plame case is hardly what you just tried to imply it is - hardly a UFO coverup or the like.

    And given that you think you'll get smarter by relaxing and listening to American Idol instead of paying attention to American politics (and scandals) explains your posts quite a bit.

    Do you really think you're clever?

    Sorry, no cigar.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 5:07pm

53. And by the by, MBB, Freiheit had said that the average man on the street doesn't even know who Valerie Plame is, and would mistake her for an Idol contestant.

    Do you personally know anyone that stupid?

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 5:14pm

54. MBB -

    For someone like you to presume to lecture me on the difference between intelligence and knowledge is laughable, considering the awesome lack of both you regularly exhibit here.

    Spin, spin, spin.

    Don't you get dizzy?

    What does your child have to do with intelligent adults? Does your child qualify as "a man on the street"? And how did he get an IQ like that (if we're to believe you in the first place)? Mom's side of the family, I take it...

    I have an IQ in excess of 130, too, and am educated, knowledgable, and intelligent, and I know, like every other rational, intelligent person I know, that there is no comparison between American Idol and a discussion of whether or not (whichever you believe) a CIA agent was outed by a vengeful, angry administration as retaliation for an NYT piece they didn't like. To obsess over American Idol in favor of political discourse about governmental misconduct is the very definition of stupidity to me.

    Then, you go into Republican whitewashing mode (and not even very subtly) and start spewing tripe like:

    "So was it smart to pin your hopes of destroying the Bush administration on Corn's speculation? I sure many of you think it was, because it was all you had. But since it turned out to be a gigantic dry hole, you can't say the time you spent obsessing over it was any more productive than the time idiots spent watching American Idol."

    What the hell "you" are you blathering about, you idiot? Not me, since I never "obsessed" over the incident in the first place. In fact, I've rarely commented on threads about it.

    I also have no "hopes of destroying the Bush misadministration [based] on Corn's speculation". The Bush misadministration is doing a fine job of destroying itself, thanks.

    By the way, I wasn't talking to you in the first place.

    Thanks for your refuting of reality that the White House wanted to, and continues to want to, vilify Wilson/Plame, and your predictions on Corn's book (about which, frankly, I couldn't care less).

    What a waste of space you are.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 6:05pm

55. I take back one thing - the epithet "idiot". Not that I don't mean it, but it wasn't warranted in this conversation (yet).

    MBB incenses me because of its bigoted homophobic stance on gay marriage, so much so that whenever I see that name, I'm already irritated, no matter what the subject.

    And hey, by the way, you lost on that issue, too, MBB!

    Have an ordinary day.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 6:17pm

56. MBB -

    You could have saved us all a lot of time by now by admitting that your 3:37 post was superfluous and not to be taken seriously.

    But noooo. You gotta dance about how "intelligent" people spend their time - still failing to address what I was responding to in the first place - the supposition that the "average" man on the street would think Valerie Plame was an "Idol" contestant. This is simply not so.

    And gee, I just checked my dictionary, and under "stupidity", it does not say "to obsess over minutia one isn't interested in", which was how you defined it.

    And an intelligent person would Google "gay marriage amendment fails" and understand what I wrote. Perhaps you should ask your kid, who appears to be much smarter than you, to explain it to you.

    Bye now.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 6:45pm

57. No, dumbass, but nice try.

    You are the one who keeps insisting on "defining" "intelligence".

    I said: "Damn, bro, you are hanging out with some stupid-assed people. Everyone I know knows who she is, and what this is about.

    My advice: Move to a smarter town, if that's the sampling you're getting off the streets of your own."

    In response to:

    "Outside of DC no one cares about this issue. But it will be fun to follow as it happens, because history won't care either.

    Man on the street: "Valerie Plame? Oh I loved her on Idol!"

    Posted by FREIHEIT 07/17/2006 @ 9:18pm

    But hey, feel free to continue blowing smoke up everyone's asses here with your blather - no one is fooled.

    Damn that written record!

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 6:59pm

58. I said that following Idol as opposed to following politial discourse is stupid, and I still say it. It's a mark of the dumbing down of America when your priorities lie in that order.

    How is that my defining intelligence by "whether a person agrees with New Dawn's political opinions"?

    You really are an idiot, Mary.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 7:01pm

59. political

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 7:01pm

60. (funniest part of all this that I happen to love Idol...)

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/19/2006 @ 7:05pm

61. The Wilson's and Mr. Corn must be pretty upset that the little war in Lebanon/Isreal is stealing all their thunder from the "real" news story. After all if there was no "leak," we could probably be learning of the real crime in this matter, that is the shotty CIA intel and the career CIA agents runnning a shadow goverment against the administration. Maybe Corn can answer why no one has taken Andrea Mitchell to task for saying just days after the Novak story that it was widely known among you Washington elitists that Plame worked at the CIA, come on David, admit it, you knew it too. It's pretty shameful that the US courts and "Meet the Press" are going to be used to promote another book deal & try to do what the Dems can't do, win at the ballot box. Even before their big press conference the Wilson's met with the Dems on the hill in a private meeting. If I really want conspiracy kooks taking over for news I'd go and listen to the "Rancid Rhodehard" show over on Lie America radio... heck atleast someone would be listening.

    Posted by MJ Procko at 07/20/2006 @ 11:46am

62. "Hubris" with Michael Isikoff comes out in October....

    but when does the "Plame-gate" book come out, I wonder?

    Posted by Mask at 07/20/2006 @ 3:02pm

63. There was no leak. You know these people in Washington. If they can nail someone they will work as hard to nail that person as we wish they would work on our behalf. The Democrats aren't going after it, the press isn't going after it. There is no it. And by going on with this lawsuit, Joseph Wilson is dumber than I thought. His wife, however, seems to me a perfect example of today's career CIA officer. They don't realize that they have nothing to give the President's enemies and that they have been dumped. They are really sad.

    Posted by wredner at 07/20/2006 @ 5:32pm

64. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/20/2006 @ 2:21pm

    For anyone who cares to look back over our posts since Mary chimed in at 3:37 with a dumbass comment that he/she/it found clever (which wasn't)... For everyone who sees that he/she/it is now dancing all over the place to avoid saying that he/she/it didn't need to chime in in the first place... Mary has proved that he/she/it is, after all, if not an idiot, then at least a pain-in-the-ass.

    "Because a person's priorities don't indicate his or her intelligence. But you, New Dawn, declare someone intelligent if they share the same priorities as you. Priorities are very highly correlated with political opinions."

    I haven't declared anyone intelligent. And Mary, I thought you were arguing that I rate intelligence by agreement with my "political opinions"... Now, suddenly, since your other argument fell apart, I supposedly rate intelligence in everything I and everyone else does, by their "priorities"... Hmm... Blanket statement, anyone? Whitewash? Simply untrue?

    I think so.

    What a weak way to stick to your guns. You're reduced to grasping at semantic straws just to avoid admitting you wasted space responding to my post to Freiheit a couple dozen posts ago.

    Let it go. Your flip-flopping and story-changing is growing tiresome, and you sound just like your misadministration insisting on "Staying the course", no matter how ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed, or stupid that course may be.

    That's enough of you now, Mary. You don't know shit about how I define shit, and my intelligence was never the question or the point, anyway. You just wanted to feel better about yourself by making a comment you thought was clever. Now, you're trying to do it by questioning my intelligence.

    Good luck with that.

    What are you trying to prove, anyway? Were you really offended that I think the "average man on the street" should know who Valerie Plame is, especially if they've ever read a newspaper, watched television, or had a conversation with any adult who follows politics?

    Still has nothing to do with my own political views, but since you've got nothing else, you're reduced to changing your story - now, it's because I said "priorities"...

    Give it up. Go dispute someone you stand a chance against, intellectual or otherwise.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/20/2006 @ 6:58pm

65. Here's the long and the short if it:

    I define intelligence by the results of an IQ test.

    New Dawn defines intelligence by whether a person agrees with New Dawn's political opinions.

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/19/2006 @ 6:50pm

    Because a person's priorities don't indicate his or her intelligence. But you, New Dawn, declare someone intelligent if they share the same priorities as you. Priorities are very highly correlated with political opinions.

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/20/2006 @ 2:21pm

    Politics are far from my highest priority, which has nothing to do with my or anyone else's intelligence.

    Flip. Flop. Which is it?

    Please, tell the room something else about me now that you have no way of knowing about me. Tell them how I define "rubicon" or "paramount" or "presumption".

    Or hey, you can just make it up - you're pretty good at that.

    And this:

    "Sorry to beat a dead horse, but priorities are generally a rational function of conditions. If you don't have a secure source of food, getting food is generally a very high priority, no matter how intelligent one is."

    So, now you say that intelligence and priorities are unrelated, which means you definitely flip-flopped in your accusations of me.

    You really are making a dead horse's ass of yourself.

    Ley it go.

    Posted by New Dawn at 07/20/2006 @ 7:07pm

66. gertrude, the point is that outing plame has the potential to lead to a terrorist nuclear attack on the united states? most people would consider that important, even more important than defending george bush. of course, treason enabling republicans have a different view.

    Posted by pretzel at 07/20/2006 @ 7:41pm

67. the point is that outing plame has the potential to lead to a terrorist nuclear attack on the united states?

    Posted by PRETZEL 07/20/2006 @ 7:41pm | ignore this person

    Where would that "terrorist nuclear attack" come from, PRETZEL, with whose weapons?

    Posted by Mask at 07/21/2006 @ 09:57am

68. from terrorists mask. her job was tracking them. when bush took her down, he also took down her cover company, and anyone that worked with it. it is typical of today's republicans that they will even excuse treason, if they think it helps george bush.

    Posted by pretzel at 07/21/2006 @ 11:20pm

69. Conservatives are stupid because they don't understand that raising the minimum wage will improve the lives of the poor." That is not a fact but an opinion (since obviously, we can't predict the future).

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 07/21/2006 @ 10:17am

    Conservatives are stupid because they said there were budget surpluses as far as the eye can see

    Since obviously… we can't predict the future

    Posted by Will C. at 07/21/2006 @ 11:45pm

70. ISRAEL BLACKMAILS AMERICA

    NUCLEAR WAR IMMINENT.

    "PURE EVIL" Does A Deal With "THE DEVIL."

    PURE EVIL is Dick Cheney.

    THE DEVIL is Israel's Mossad.

    THE DEAL was 9/11.

    Cheney perceived the perfect partner in the perfect crime to be Israel's Mossad. Cunning, ruthless, skilled, connected, covert - the "False Flag" experts.

    As is now clear and agreed upon by all, the Bush Sr. / Cheney Administration (in which Shrub is merely a spokesperson and useful idiot) adopted the PNAC plan as its own. Cheney found within it the opportunity to capture vast resource-rich territory in a World War blamed on others, and thereby enrich himself and his friends.

    9/11 proved not to be the perfect crime, and the co-conspirators actually got caught, and have been covering up their crime and silencing their "enemies" ever since.

    Israel and Cheney were both caught red-handed on 9/11 itself.

    Cheney was caught when Norm Minetta walked in on him in the midst of barking out the orders that allowed the A3 Skywarrior to strike the Pentagon without being shot down.

    Israel's Mossad was caught when their five agents were arrested after being observed celebrating and filming the impact and subsequent collapse of the Twin Towers. They weren't just arrested, they had with them video taped evidence of themselves celebrating on camera as the towers fell (as would a demolitions team after a successful implosion).

    These events are factual. They occurred.

    The lengths to which the US and Israeli governments have gone to bury these and other historic events are evidence of their complicity in 9/11.

    Cheney was wrong to have selected Israel as any kind of partner in crime. Israel was not going to be content to share the spoils of war, Israel wants ALL the spoils of war, and has at its disposal ALL of the tools and leverage to literally destroy the United States, and is in the midst of doing so right this very moment.

    Why the silence from the Bush Administration with respect to Israel's destruction and acquisition of territory?

    BLACKMAIL - plain and simple.

    Through Abramoff, Franklin, Lieberman, Chertoff and their thousands of moles within the US Government, in concert with their vast network of installed monitoring software, data retrieval and listening devices, Israel has compromised virtually every Administration official AS WELL AS nearly every US Senator and Congressman.

    Israel has evidence of all of them accepting bribes, because Israel was behind the bribes and recorded evidence of all of it. Israel has evidence of sexual escapades out of wedlock, because Israel arranged for it, and documented it. Israel has direct evidence of the Administrations role in 9/11, because Israel partnered in it.

    Israel controls the Mainstream US Media, and the Administration KNOWS IT.

    As we speak, Israel is threatening the administration with the total exposure of their role in 9/11 if they even begin to interfere with Israel's plan to take out not just Lebanon, but also Syria AND Iran, using NUCLEAR WEAPONS - all within the next ten days.

    The bombs that we are rushing to Israel at this very moment...the bunkerbusters to be delivered by the F-15s - are they nuclear?

    If the US had any ACTUAL LEVERAGE or ability to slow down Israel's mad territory grab and death machine, the least they would be doing is holding back delivery of bombs.

    As with EVERY member of the Bush Administration, Condaleeza Rice has no power whatsoever over Israel. They're blackmailing her too.

    Israel has already accomplished its goal. It has completely compromised the integrity and security of the United States Of America. It is in total control of the US Treasury, Defense Department, Congress - every institution and branch of government.

    The culture of corruption in Washington met its match in Israel. The co-conspirators thought they had an equal partner in crime, but they have now come to realize that this was a very long term and elaborate sting - for the ultimate prize - control of the United States Of America and its Nuclear Arsenal.

    This is where we stand today. Literally everyone in Washington knows it. All of the retired Generals and Bush Senior advisors are on highest alert.

    The Bush Administration is in the midst of the biggest disaster ever conceived, and unless they do EVERYTHING that Israel demands, the evidence of their crimes will be plastered across every major newspaper in the United States.

    The Administration knows for a fact that Israel is going to nuke Iran and Syria. The only choice the Administration has to stop Israel from nuking these two countries, is to Nuke Israel itself. Even this though will not prevent the Truth of 9/11 from being revealed.

    CHECKMATE.

    Nuclear war is coming either way, and its coming right now.

    "The Crazies" as Colin Powell referred to the Zionists, have won - and he personally enabled it.

    "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. 'God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan'." "And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq...' And I did.

    Secretary of State Rice's response to the disaster in New Orleans was: "The Lord Jesus Christ is going to come on time." She added: "If we just wait." "On time"? How does Rice know the exact time Armageddon starts? "If we just wait"? That means in her, that is our, lifetime!

    "At Church one day [Tom DeLay, House Majority Leader] listened as the pastor declared that 'the war between America and Iraq is the gateway to the Apocalypse.' DeLay rose to speak, not only to the congregation but to 225 Christian TV and radio stations. 'Ladies and gentlemen,' he said, 'what has been spoken here tonight is the truth of God.'"

    LESS THAN ONE MONTH AFTER 9/11:

    "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

    Only by revealing the entire truth and arresting all of the guilty parties can the threat of Blackmail be removed.

    Posted by plunger at 07/22/2006 @ 03:44am

71. so as rove sytematicly goes after everyone else's wife i do wonder, but i'm sure he hangs with the poker playing hooker crowd so no one will notice

    Posted by jimharris at 07/24/2006 @ 11:31am

72. Posted by PRETZEL 07/21/2006 @ 11:20pm | ignore this person

    But WHOSE nuclear weapon, PRETZEL....from what country would the terrorists get it?

    Posted by Mask at 07/24/2006 @ 2:08pm

73. But WHOSE nuclear weapon, PRETZEL....from what country would the terrorists get it?

    Posted by MASK 07/24/2006 @ 2:08pm

    you're asking the wrong guy mask

    call up ol gee dubya... (he'll leak it to you)

    Posted by Will C. at 07/24/2006 @ 11:32pm

74. oops... sorry

    I was wrong. You're a big bill clinton fan. Which means you're shit out of luck baby

    Ha Ha Ha Ha

    Posted by Will C. at 07/24/2006 @ 11:33pm

75. Posted by WILL C. 07/24/2006 @ 11:32pm | ignore this person

    So YOU have no answer either, huh?

    Posted by Mask at 07/25/2006 @ 12:43pm

76. People file lawsuits because they work on so many different levels. The mogrel dogs of the Christian Right were correct in suing Bad Bill because they could extend their BS claims.

    Regarding Plame and Wilson. The same rules apply here. While they may be Liberal Pond Scum, they are our scum and it's nice to see efforts first used by the conservatives, now turned on them.

    May the Plame/ Wilson "Discovery" be just that. I am also hoping the Republicans remember this as past successes lay the foundation for their ruin.

    Posted by terryday at 07/25/2006 @ 7:00pm

77. and why would plame and wilson be described as pond scum? all she did was get exposed by traitors in the white house. all he did was try to alert people about the deceptions used to hurdle us into war. and now they are fighting back. they look like good patriotic americans.

    Posted by pretzel at 07/25/2006 @ 9:38pm

78. i answered you above mask. she was tracking and trying to prevent the spread of nukes to terrorists. i believe her focus was on iran. pakistan, our ally, has been involved in spreading nukes to iran. but as a treasonous republican supporter, do you really care--apparently you are not concerned about our enemies obtaining nuclear weapons, as long as republicans keep getting elected. this is precisely the attitude that is causing so many americans to turn on this radical, out of touch party--including long time republicans like john dean, paul craig roberts, wesley clark, and jim webb.

    Posted by pretzel at 07/25/2006 @ 9:42pm