Breaking: Ex Cia Valerie's Lawsiut Dismissed

[RICHICOQUI]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_lawsuit

[Baboonass]

While Bates did not address the constitutional questions, he seemed to side with administration officials who said they were acting within their job duties. Plame had argued that what they did was illegal and outside the scope of their government jobs.




Oh, the irony. She should be in jail for her highly inapporpriate actions while employed with the CIA.

There was never a case to begin with, Plame's ID was never privliged.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

Stupid biatch.

Wasted alot of gov't time.........not that the gov't uses its time wisely but they don't need anyone piling on to the problem.

The lady just abused her position at work to try and bring down Bush and the forth coming war, maybe she plans to run for senate or congress or something and thought this was the foundation she ought to build on.

[IraGlacialis]

http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/nws/p/ap_small.gif (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/brand/SIG=br2v03;_ylt=AnIRKAoblUzbqQfhOeCx1XkGw_IE/*http://www.ap.org)
Valerie Plame's lawsuit dismissed
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20070719/capt.nyet78207191909.cia_leak_congress_nyet782.jpg?x=282&y=345&sig=sEsL2faevzxr1gQKZ71lSg--
In this Friday, March 16, 2007, file photo, former CIA analyst Valerie Plame listens to opening statements on Capitol Hill during the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing. A federal judge on Thursday, July 19, 2007, dismissed Plame's lawsuit against members of the Bush administration in the CIA leak scandal. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

WASHINGTON - A federal judge dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame's lawsuit against members of the Bush administration Thursday, eliminating one of the last courtroom remnants of the leak scandal.
Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President **** Cheney and others of conspiring to leak her identity in 2003. Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband's criticism of the administration.
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove, former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.
Plame's attorneys had said the lawsuit would be an uphill battle. Public officials are normally immune from such lawsuits filed in connection with their jobs.
Plame's identity was revealed in a syndicated newspaper column in 2003, shortly after Wilson began criticizing the administration's march to war in Iraq. Plame believes the leak was retribution and that it violated their constitutional rights.
Armitage and Rove were the sources for that article, which touched off a lengthy leak investigation. Nobody was charged with leaking but Libby was convicted of lying and obstruction the investigation. Bush commuted Libby's 2 1/2-year prison term before the former aide served any time.
"This just dragged on the character assassination that had gone on for years," said Alex Bourelly, one of Libby's lawyers. "To have the case dismissed is a big relief."
Plame's attorneys said they were reading the opinion and had no immediate comment.
While Bates did not address the constitutional questions, he seemed to side with administration officials who said they were acting within their job duties. Plame had argued that what they did was illegal and outside the scope of their government jobs.
"The alleged means by which defendants chose to rebut Mr. Wilson's comments and attack his credibility may have been highly unsavory, " Bates wrote. "But there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism, such as that levied by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration's handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants' duties as high-level Executive Branch officials."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_lawsuit

[eskrima]

http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/bates-bio.html




Judge Bates serves on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. (http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/bates-bio.html)

[maw]

Oh, the irony. She should be in jail for her highly inapporpriate actions while employed with the CIA.

There was never a case to begin with, Plame's ID was never privliged.

ORLY?


CIA Director Hayden: Valerie Plame Was Covert Agent (http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/03/16/cia-director-hayden-valerie-plame-was-covert-agent/)

"CIA Director Michael Hayden personally reviewed and okayed Henry Waxman's opening statement for Valerie Plame's testimony today. Furthermore, Hayden took pains to set the record straight: Plame was indeed a covert agent up until the day Robert Novak revealed as much to the public."

besides the shell companies that were created to acquire nuclear components (triggers) on the black market were created by her. her name is on the registration docs. one of the trading companies had offices in Belgium and i think it was Slovakia. once plame's name got out, anyone running a lexis/nexis on her name would have found out that these companies were cia covers.

the case was dismissed based on jurisdiction. her lawyers told her it would be an up hill battle. the judge merely said he wasn't the right person to hear the case and that Plame, et al., should seek remedy elsewhere, through the federal tort claims act, already set up for their kind of problem.. the fight is far from over.

Bush: "If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. " He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/

Libby "further testified that he at first advised the Vice President that he could not have this conversation with reporter Miller because of the classified nature of the NIE," the court papers said. Libby "testified that the Vice President had advised [Libby] that the President had authorized [Libby] to disclose relevant portions of the NIE."
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0406nj1.htm

[2Sheds_Jackson]

ORLY?


CIA Director Hayden: Valerie Plame Was Covert Agent (http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/03/16/cia-director-hayden-valerie-plame-was-covert-agent/)

"CIA Director Michael Hayden personally reviewed and okayed Henry Waxman's opening statement for Valerie Plame's testimony today. Furthermore, Hayden took pains to set the record straight: Plame was indeed a covert agent up until the day Robert Novak revealed as much to the public."


Then why has nobody been charged with breaking the law?



Bush: "If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. " He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/

"if the person has violated the law" - which apparently nobody has, because there have been no charges.



Libby "further testified that he at first advised the Vice President that he could not have this conversation with reporter Miller because of the classified nature of the NIE," the court papers said. Libby "testified that the Vice President had advised [Libby] that the President had authorized [Libby] to disclose relevant portions of the NIE."
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0406nj1.htm

Mmm but what's that got to do with anything? The president has the power to declassify whatever portions he wants. Anyway...it was Richard Armitage at State, not Libby who was the source of the leak.

The bottom line is that Plame used her position at CIA to get her Washington Rock Star husband a sweet gig, and then he used that gig to try to exert political leverage and influence national policy via going public with his commentary. The road leads straight back to Wilson and Plame. Did they imagine nobody would ask questions about all the connections here?

If she wanted to remain a covert operative, that's exactly what she would still be today. The two of them entered the public arena of their own free will. What did they think, that the government was going to allow some GS-13 CIA wonk to undermine national policy without calling them out? Sounds like she was a little too comfortable in her position.

[helomech]

If she wanted to remain a covert operative, that's exactly what she would still be today. The two of them entered the public arena of their own free will. What did they think, that the government was going to allow some GS-13 CIA wonk to undermine national policy without calling them out? Sounds like she was a little too comfortable in her position.


That's what I was thinking...if you're going to be critical of your boss you might want to wait until you leave your job,especially if you're being in the covert line of work;was Bob Novak a greasy little newsman by leaking that info?Yes he was,but you can't kill all the media,as enticing as it would be..

[maw]

Then why has nobody been charged with breaking the law?
i don't know. i'd like to hear fitzpatrick's (real) reasons for not proceeding. i'm not going to speculate about pressure from above and the like, but i don't accept the "nothing happened so there's no one to go after" thinking either.


"if the person has violated the law" - which apparently nobody has, because there have been no charges.
i don't agree. unless there's a technicality under which the administration can indeed out intelligence assets carte blanche, then i am of the opinion that laws were indeed broken.



Mmm but what's that got to do with anything? The president has the power to declassify whatever portions he wants. Anyway...it was Richard Armitage at State, not Libby who was the source of the leak.
regarding your comment about the president, fine then he should come out and formally declassify her status, as opposed to using proxies. regarding your second point about the source of the leak, i'm not so much interested in the source of the leak as the originator. i'm interested in the puppeteer and not the puppet if you like.


The bottom line is that Plame used her position at CIA to get her Washington Rock Star husband a sweet gig,
i think that your interpretation of the events is speculative, i'm not faulting you for attempting to connect the dots. but i see some gaps. what is known is that she placed his name on a list of candidates for the assignment. it is alleged (by her (- well duh!) and other members of the team) that she did no more, i.e. use her influence to push his name further up the list. frankly, in my mind from the moment joe wilson's name made it on that list he had the gig. he was probably the best man for the job. with twelve years of service in africa, including stints as an ambassador in the region and serving for two years in niger his diplomatic contacts would have been comprehensive. he then served as the deputy chief of mission in baghdad for three years, as political adviser to commander in chief u.s. armed forces in europe and then spent a year on the national security council. you get my point, if anything he was over qualified for the job.


and then he used that gig to try to exert political leverage and influence national policy via going public with his commentary.
there are two ways to see this outcome. i choose to see that he didn't want to sit by while yellow cake claims were being used as a basis for a war. sure he's probably a card carrying democrat, but the democrat's weren't opposed to the war at that time so i don't see the strategic political advantage of speaking up at that time. i've thought about his motivations and perhaps you'll dismiss me as naive but that's the conceptual jump i'm willing to make.


The road leads straight back to Wilson and Plame. Did they imagine nobody would ask questions about all the connections here? If she wanted to remain a covert operative, that's exactly what she would still be today. The two of them entered the public arena of their own free will. What did they think, that the government was going to allow some GS-13 CIA wonk to undermine national policy without calling them out? Sounds like she was a little too comfortable in her position.
you're probably going to call me naive again, but perhaps they didn't think too hard about the consequences to them when they saw what was in their minds the lie of using the yellow cake uranium as part of the justification for the war. if he'd have sat silently by would he not have been judged even harsher today?

[bugkill]

i don't know. i'd like to hear fitzpatrick's (real) reasons for not proceeding. i'm not going to speculate about pressure from above and the like, but i don't accept the "nothing happened so there's no one to go after" thinking either.


i don't agree. unless there's a technicality under which the administration can indeed out intelligence assets carte blanche, then i am of the opinion that laws were indeed broken.



regarding your comment about the president, fine then he should come out and formally declassify her status, as opposed to using proxies. regarding your second point about the source of the leak, i'm not so much interested in the source of the leak as the originator. i'm interested in the puppeteer and not the puppet if you like.


i think that your interpretation of the events is speculative, i'm not faulting you for attempting to connect the dots. but i see some gaps. what is known is that she placed his name on a list of candidates for the assignment. it is alleged (by her (- well duh!) and other members of the team) that she did no more, i.e. use her influence to push his name further up the list. frankly, in my mind from the moment joe wilson's name made it on that list he had the gig. he was probably the best man for the job. with twelve years of service in africa, including stints as an ambassador in the region and serving for two years in niger his diplomatic contacts would have been comprehensive. he then served as the deputy chief of mission in baghdad for three years, as political adviser to commander in chief u.s. armed forces in europe and then spent a year on the national security council. you get my point, if anything he was over qualified for the job.


there are two ways to see this outcome. i choose to see that he didn't want to sit by while yellow cake claims were being used as a basis for a war. sure he's probably a card carrying democrat, but the democrat's weren't opposed to the war at that time so i don't see the strategic political advantage of speaking up at that time. i've thought about his motivations and perhaps you'll dismiss me as naive but that's the conceptual jump i'm willing to make.


you're probably going to call me naive again, but perhaps they didn't think too hard about the consequences to them when they saw what was in their minds the lie of using the yellow cake uranium as part of the justification for the war. if he'd have sat silently by would he not have been judged even harsher today?

dude, if she was covert and the law was broken, there would have been charges leveled at someone in this administration.

[Baboonass]

ORLY?


Yes really.


She was an analyst with the same identity classification as the janitor. Her work was secret, but her ID was not.

There are guidlines for the protected idnetitiy of "covert" or "Clandestine" agents. She would have had to have been a field agent for a minimum of 3 years and within a 5 year period of time to still have a protected status, she had neither.

She was well known, and I mean well known in the DC hot spots and cocktail parties as being an employee for the CIA. There was little secret about it.

Her work was abysmally bad and only served her own personnal political interests and the finacial interests of herself and her husband. She had violated some very basic pricipals of protocal and contract violation by "nominating" her husband for "intelligence gathering", which it was anything but.

Besides, the protection of your ID is entirely incumbant on the indiviual. The law is designed for the prosecusion of individuals who work within the agency who already have this information and try to sell it to a foriegn government. It was not set up for some moron who gives away their identity at every step and turn then have some reporter blurt it out and then cry foul.

If I post on here what I do and who I am, is it your fault if you repeat this information on another website?

She knew she was done and was probably going to be canned anyway, this was a way for her to protect herself finacially and save herself from any prosecustion. This is the way things work in the government system, namely any government system that involves strict classified information.

It's a matter of who crys foul first and get lawers up first.


There is soooooo much more to this that what you read on open sources.

She and her huband are slime.

[lider_r]

She and her huband are slime.

you're right

its so wrong of her husband to print the truth on the whole yellowcake niger thing and she only has herself to blame for being outed by the government as part of a political witchhunt

:roll:

i guess patrick fitzgerald must be wrong too?

[CPLHUNTER]

Your location: Very, very drunk
It does alot in helping me understand your stupid post ^^^

[BugHunt]

Next time we needs some covert information we certainly know who to ask! Theres such a wealth of CIA experts on this board!

Theyve probably been "educated" by rightwing rants (in irony of ironies) OMFG DA MEDIA!!! But i for one would trust them with the safety of a nation over and above any scumbag who's actually worked for the CIA or diplomatic service! p-)


You also gotta respect the way they scream about the CIA "getting it wrong" when one of the men (and women) who stood up and spoke the truth becomes such a enemy of the state! ;)

I personnelly think whistle blowers and traitors like that shouldve been hung drawn and quartered.....:roll:



Why has nobody been charged? Look whos in freaking power atm- the guy they pointed out was lying! ..... guess what sitting Presidents have quite alot of power.

[Baboonass]

you're right

its so wrong of her husband to print the truth on the whole yellowcake niger thing and she only has herself to blame for being outed by the government as part of a political witchhunt

:roll:

i guess patrick fitzgerald must be wrong too?



LOL!!

Outed by the government?


I see reading comprehension is not one of you stronger suits, so I'll spell it out for you.

She was very well known in the DC circit as being an employee for the CIA. She was not on the priviliged identification list as she was never a clandestine agent. (for a more detailed explaination, read my first post).

The law for the protection of the identity of covert/clandestine agents was designed for internal espionoge, not for morons who out themselves and crys foul when a reporter writes up a story. (Read my first post for a bit more detail)

This isn't even political, this is just the way it all works.

She made it political, which is not in step with her job parameters. She abused her status to gain political and finacial credit for her own selfish needs. (read my first post for a more detailed description)

She got called on it, then whined about her "cover being blown" which was utter non-sence, but what the hell, truth becomes irrelevent in the world of political buggery.

But then, this doesn't fit into your own political agenda, so you'll ignore this as well.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

i don't know. i'd like to hear fitzpatrick's (real) reasons for not proceeding. i'm not going to speculate about pressure from above and the like, but i don't accept the "nothing happened so there's no one to go after" thinking either.

"pressure from above"? Fitzgerald had no problem hanging one of the President's closest advisers out to dry - not for anything to do with the Plame leak, but just for lying during the investigation. You can imagine that there's some nefarious goings on here, but that's just not supported by the evidence.



i don't agree. unless there's a technicality under which the administration can indeed out intelligence assets carte blanche, then i am of the opinion that laws were indeed broken.

In fact yes, the executive branch does retain the ability to declassify information at will. It's done all the time. And while you're free to hold any opinion you'd like, it's the law that really counts here.



regarding your comment about the president, fine then he should come out and formally declassify her status, as opposed to using proxies. regarding your second point about the source of the leak, i'm not so much interested in the source of the leak as the originator. i'm interested in the puppeteer and not the puppet if you like.

Well, we are dealing with law here, not doing things the way maw would like. Things are either legal or not, right?



i think that your interpretation of the events is speculative, i'm not faulting you for attempting to connect the dots. but i see some gaps. what is known is that she placed his name on a list of candidates for the assignment. it is alleged (by her (- well duh!) and other members of the team) that she did no more, i.e. use her influence to push his name further up the list. frankly, in my mind from the moment joe wilson's name made it on that list he had the gig. he was probably the best man for the job. with twelve years of service in africa, including stints as an ambassador in the region and serving for two years in niger his diplomatic contacts would have been comprehensive. he then served as the deputy chief of mission in baghdad for three years, as political adviser to commander in chief u.s. armed forces in europe and then spent a year on the national security council. you get my point, if anything he was over qualified for the job.

Nobody has questioned his qualifications. But the facts are - and these facts were established in the investigation and are part of the official record so they are not speculation on my part - that it was his wife who used her position at CIA to put his name up for consideration, and who backed him for the job. That's the entire reason why several investigations have found it entirely appropriate for the administration to drop her name in an effort to defend it's policy...she involved herself and then became fair game.

"Best man for the job" is highly doubtful IMHO, considering his botched report which he not only failed to properly deliver, but it was factually inaccurate - and of course used his position to further his personal agenda. If anything, this shows Wilson was the last guy they should have considered.



there are two ways to see this outcome. i choose to see that he didn't want to sit by while yellow cake claims were being used as a basis for a war. sure he's probably a card carrying democrat, but the democrat's weren't opposed to the war at that time so i don't see the strategic political advantage of speaking up at that time. i've thought about his motivations and perhaps you'll dismiss me as naive but that's the conceptual jump i'm willing to make.

Wilson and Plame have sold too many books and been on too many magazine covers, even before this self-promoting exercise for me to buy into that line of thinking.



you're probably going to call me naive again, but perhaps they didn't think too hard about the consequences to them when they saw what was in their minds the lie of using the yellow cake uranium as part of the justification for the war. if he'd have sat silently by would he not have been judged even harsher today?

No, considering his report proved to be wrong.

[lider_r]

LOL!!

Outed by the government?


Armitage was in government when he leaked the name


She was very well known in the DC circit as being an employee for the CIA. She was not on the priviliged identification list as she was never a clandestine agent. (for a more detailed explaination, read my first post).

"Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003. "

Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html)



The law for the protection of the identity of covert/clandestine agents was designed for internal espionoge, not for morons who out themselves and crys foul when a reporter writes up a story. (Read my first post for a bit more detail)


"There is the claim that the law to protect intelligence identities could not have been violated because Valerie Wilson had not lived overseas for six years. Too bad this is not what the law stipulates. The law actually requires that a covered person "served" overseas in the last five years. Served does not mean lived. In the case of Valerie Wilson, energy consultant for Brewster-Jennings, she traveled overseas in 2003, 2002, and 2001, as part of her cover job. She met with folks who worked in the nuclear industry, cultivated sources, and managed spies. She was a national security asset until exposed. . ."

Larry C. Johnson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_C._Johnson#Plame_affair)



She made it political, which is not in step with her job parameters. She abused her status to gain political and finacial credit for her own selfish needs. (read my first post for a more detailed description)

She got called on it, then whined about her "cover being blown" which was utter non-sence, but what the hell, truth becomes irrelevent in the world of political buggery.

But then, this doesn't fit into your own political agenda, so you'll ignore this as well.

She was a NOC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-official_cover), she was undercover, clandestine. So why is it not a problem that her identity was revealed?


"Some press accounts have raised questions about whether or not the CIA still considered Plame a "covert" agent––that is, the precise nature of her "classified" status or the type of "cover" that she had and whether or not it was "official" or "non-official"––at the time she was outed in the Novak column of July 14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_14), 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003). However, the Grand Jury indictment states that
Ms. Plame was in a classified employment status with CIA. Yet, as Johnson observes in his Congressional testimony:

These [disparaging] comments [by members of the press and others in the public debate] reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover. The fact is that there are thousands of U.S. intelligence officers who "work at a desk" in the Washington, D.C. area every day who are undercover. Some have official cover, and some have non-official cover. Both classes of cover must and should be protected.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame#_note-officialhearingtranscript)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame#_note-JohnsonIsMax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame#_note-JohnsonIsMax)"

[2Sheds_Jackson]

So why is it not a problem that her identity was revealed?


Because it was not against the law for the administration to do what it did. I mean, you can go on expressing your opinion, and the opinion of other people all over the web - each more outraged than the last - but the bottom line is the law. This was investigated at the highest levels, by special committees who would love nothing more than to see Cheney and Rove led out in handcuffs - and the very best they could do was to nab Libby for lying during questioning.

The "outing" myth has been played out - it's a dead issue. The Senate investigations say so, Fitzgerald's investigation says so, and now this latest court rejection says so.

This case is emblematic of lots of Bush criticism - everybody running around with their opinion, waving their arms and leveling all kinds of dire sounding accusations - in the end, Bush & Co. sit back with arms folded and laugh because they've remained well within the confines of the law. It's perfectly fine to dislike how they do business, but that doesn't make it illegal.