Correction, in a civil lawsuit the plaintiffs do not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, more like, that it's reasonably true.

"Unless she is able to prove there is a direct link between the actions of the defendants that resulted in employment discrimination against her, I doubt the court will let this case proceed."

I don't believe this is the standard in a civil action. (I may be wrong, please correct me if I'm off)

Though I doubt if this suit will get far enough to succeed, I'm hoping that it cast more light on who exposed her, that's a criminal offence. I don't care for the CIA either but it bothers me greatly that this administration would use their own (a CIA Operative & an Ambassador ) people to make a political play & hang them out to die. I see that this action shows what they'd do to those that are not their own, like you & I.

This move on their part against the administration, wither successful or not is also an embarrassing black eye that will have to worn & seen for a long time to come, which should be, as an example to all that this kind of media use & public display of pay back is not to be tolerated. It also discredits any disgruntled employee excuse which has been consistent in the past, it also blows the idea of canning the whistle blowers act & it again shows that no matter the position that one holds within the government one needs to fear speaking the truth. This is the way it's been & I'm glad it's now coming into the light.

Barry