Posted on 08/12/2008 10:21:10 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Appeals court upholds CIA leak lawsuit dismissal Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:01pm EDT
By Andy Sullivan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday dismissed former CIA analyst Valerie Plame's lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney and several former Bush administration officials for disclosing her identity to the public.
The Court of Appeals in Washington dealt another setback to the former spy, who has said her career was destroyed when officials blew her cover in 2003 to retaliate against her husband, Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Huh?
In the face of ~20K articles in papers all over the country painting pLame as a victim, this judge sees through the pLame sham, rules accordingly, and you call "idiot"?
I'll not jump to any conclusions and start painting you as a closet lib, but you're really going to have to get a little more on the ball, here, and explain where you're coming from in greater detail than you have.
From my position, I don't see where this ruling has the broad implications you seem to perceive that it has vis-a-vis government employees "carrying out official duties". But, granting that you may have a sound point, please elaborate; lay out your argument in full.
If you take the position that Libby 'blew' her cover, then you must also say Joe Wilson, Richard Armitage also 'blew' her covert status.
You must also logically conclude that the Judge/Jury in the Libby-case also 'blew' Plame's cover. In order for them to have made a finding that she was covert, she must have been secretly out of the country somewhere during the period of her Langley deskjob. It's the only way, under the law, that they could arrive at that conclusion.
Exactly who can levy a charge of treason? Can we make a citizens arrest?
BINGO! It was NOT a leak, it was an on purpose because she was not covert!
A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday dismissed former CIA analyst Valerie Plame's lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney and several former Bush administration officials for disclosing her identity to the public.
Mukasey: No prosecutions in Justice hiring scandal
I guess we better put the DU folks on suicide watch, LOL!
Let's hope not. It should be remembered and constantly reminded to future high (and not so high) government officials (particularly with "R" after their names) of what can and will happen to "Kinder and Gentler", "Uniters, not Dividers" and those who are under the influence of "New Tone" while being tone deaf.
At the time the former ambassador traveled to Niger, the Intelligence Community did not have in its possession any actual documents on the alleged Niger-Iraq uranium deal, only second hand reporting of the deal.
The former ambassador’s comments to reporters that the Niger-Iraq uranium documents “may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong,’” could not have been based on the former ambassador’s actual experiences because the Intelligence Community did not have the documents at the time of the ambassador’s trip.
In addition, nothing in the report from the former ambassador’s trip said anything about documents having been forged or the names or dates in the reports having been incorrect. The former ambassador told Committee staff that he, in fact, did not have access to any of the names and dates in the CIA’s reports and said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct. Of note, the names and dates in the documents that the IAEA found to be incorrect were not names or dates included in the CIA reports.
Following the Vice President’s review of an intelligence report regarding a possible uranium deal, he asked his briefer for the CIA’s analysis of the issue. It was this request which generated Mr. Wilson’s trip to Niger. The former ambassador’s public comments suggesting that the Vice President had been briefed on the information gathered during his trip is not correct, however.
While the CIA responded to the Vice President’s request for the Agency’s analysis, they never provided the information gathered by the former Ambassador. The former ambassador, in an NBC Meet the Press interview on July 6, 2003, said, “The office of the Vice President, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked and that response was based upon my trip out there.”
The former ambassador was speaking on the basis of what he believed should have happened based on his former government experience, but he had no knowledge that this did happen.
These and other public comments from the former ambassador, such as comments that his report “debunked” the Niger-Iraq uranium story, were incorrect and have led to a distortion in the press and in the public’s understanding of the facts surrounding the Niger-Iraq uranium story.
The Committee found that, for most analysts, the former ambassador’s report lent more credibility, not less, to the reported Niger-Iraq uranium deal.
During Mr. Wilson’s media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had “debunked” the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa.
As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT “debunk” the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact.
In an interview with Committee staff, Mr. Wilson was asked how he knew some of the things he was stating publicly with such confidence.
On at least two occasions he admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all.
For example, when asked how he “knew” that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved “a little literary flair.”
The former Ambassador, either by design or through ignorance, gave the American people and, for that matter, the world a version of events that was inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and misleading. http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/congress/2004_rpt/iraq-wmd-intell_pat-roberts.htm
It is worse than a shame, it is a crime. It will be worse if Bush does not give Libby a FULL PARDON when he leaves office, along with Ramos and Compean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.