BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Donuel
Date: 18 May 07 - 10:41 PM

"The executive can't seize control of the government without the cooperation/abrogation of the other two branches without a military coup"
quote annonymous


oh I think that control was seized while good men and women remained silent.

The Republican Congress cooperated, The Supream court stuffed with Bush and Reagan judges declated W the Winner.
One unlikely hero, and I do mean unlikely, to say no to to the NSA domestic police state spy program was John Ashcroft.
The President did it anyway by exec order. Furthermore they used the Judicial dept to implement voter fraud in 2004.

Lets see thats the Executive branch, the legislative branch, the judicial branch...
and oh yes the Media branch or as they used to call it "the fourth estate".

and the 5th branch...

Without any cynacism I assure you that the military and their defense contractors have been a decisive branch of goverment for some time.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 May 07 - 10:22 PM

I hope you are wrong, too, Bobert. :-) Here's what the article said the judge said, Bates, who expressed doubts about arguments on both sides, said he will rule in the coming weeks whether to dismiss the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Peace
Date: 18 May 07 - 09:36 PM

Essense of Bush administration by Unger.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 07 - 06:47 PM

OKay.... I read the article in The Post, Kat.... Well, I didn't deep read but skimmed an say where the judge had said something along the lines of "I don't buy either sides argument"... That, to me, bodes poorly for Val Plame and not the Bushites...

I mean, even Bush himself once said that the leaker should be punished and now it looks, to me that is, as if this judge is going to hold ther plaintiff's feet to the fire more than the crooks...

I hope I'm wrong but this upcoming decision smacks of dirty politics and when it comes to Karl Rove, who has yet had to ever be held accountablr for his fair share of lies and dirt, I fear he will again escape...

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 May 07 - 06:40 PM

The judge in the article I posted, today, might have been appointed by Clinton, Bobert. I see he was appointed in Dec. 2001: Click Here.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 07 - 06:35 PM

Who appointed the judge???

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 18 May 07 - 04:28 PM

>>July 14, 2003. All Novak reports is that the wife of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson is "an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction."

Novak has said repeatedly that he was not told, and that he did not know, that Plame was — or had ever been — a NOC, an agent with Non-Official Cover. He has emphatically said that had he understood that she was any sort of secret agent, he would never have named her.<<

Right. And all this hullabaloo must be because you're the only person in the world who realizes that nothing happened and everybody else is off on an oh-so-obvious wild goose chase.

I've got a really good idea: why don't you show this article to those investigating the Plame case, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to get it because they apparently haven't read it and still believe a big pack of lies that seems to have fooled everybody but you.

You remind me of a coworker who defends Bush by stressing that WMD WERE found in Iraq. When you ask him for his proof he brings up some old arsenal of obsolete ordnance that was already known about and which was largely useless. This was based on the statements of Rick Santorum. The State Dept even said it was not the WMD the administration was looking for. But to this fellow, it's the proof that vindicates Bush whether people want to accept or not.

You can't talk to people that willfully blind and I suspect that goes for you as well. You know the truth and the rest of the world is in darkness. Never mind that everything you've brought up has been pored over again and again and even Bush's defenders don't rely on it because it means nothing. YOU know the truth, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 18 May 07 - 04:18 PM

>>Recall the trip to Africa conducted by Bill Clinton in the wake of the embarrassing Monica Lewinski affair, playing to his most reliable voting base, and bringing with him a very large number of African-American business figures, politicians, and other influential individuals.

    The trip cost almost $50 million and was tagged as the most expensive foreign trip by a US President. Much of this expense was for transportation for the Clinton's took a large delegation with them. The delegation included Jesse Jackson, prominent Black businessmen such as Bob Johnson and the following Congressional delegation: Congressmen Payne ,William Jefferson and Rangel and Congresswoman Maxine Waters, as well as Secretary Slater. (Source) <<

Here we go again. Let's blame it all on Clinton. And these conservatives wonder why they got chucked out of Congress.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 18 May 07 - 04:16 PM

>>It is my understanding that most of them didn't even read the intelligence report sent them by the White House but instead relied on staff synopses. I wonder what they were doing that was so much more important than finding out first-hand what was in that report. It was, after all, their vote that allowed the President to go after Saddam.<<

It is your understanding? That doesn't impress me much since you seem to understand very little. Do you have any proof?

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 18 May 07 - 04:09 PM

>>The executive can't seize control of the government without the cooperation/abrogation of the other two branches without a military coup.<<

Proof?

You talk like what you just said cannot be argued with when in fact it has basis in reality from the git-go.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Peace
Date: 18 May 07 - 02:34 PM

Great to hear. I love your work.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Donuel
Date: 18 May 07 - 02:32 PM

I'm doing a 3 D cartoon of Bush the black king about to be checkmated by a white Queen's bishop...

Rove as a pawn is franticly trying to paint the white squares black around Bush.

Already taken pieces have the faces of: Colin Powell,Tenet, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Gonzales, etc

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 May 07 - 01:44 PM

As the Red Queen said concerning the theft of the tarts, "Sentence first, verdict after."

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Peace
Date: 18 May 07 - 01:28 PM

"The bunch should be serving jail time, for their actions & for the cover up. Afterwards they should be shot as traitors."

Other than the unfortunate mixup with the order of the two events you propose, I agree completely.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 18 May 07 - 09:52 AM

The bunch should be serving jail time, for their actions & for the cover up. Afterwards they should be shot as traitors.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 May 07 - 09:46 AM

From HERE where you can read more. I was particularly struck with the continuing blatant claims of being above the law. (emphasis mine):



Judge Told Leak Was Part of 'Policy Dispute'



By Carol D. Leonnig

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, May 18, 2007; Page A03



Attorneys for Vice President Cheney and top White House officials told a federal judge yesterday that they cannot be held liable for anything they disclosed to reporters about covert CIA officer Valerie Plame or her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV.



The officials, who include senior White House adviser Karl Rove and Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, argued that the judge should dismiss a lawsuit filed by the couple that stemmed from the disclosure of Plame's identity to the media.



AND:



The lawyers said any conversations Cheney and the officials had about Plame with one another or with reporters were part of their normal duties because they were discussing foreign policy and engaging in an appropriate "policy dispute." Cheney's attorney went further, arguing that Cheney is legally akin to the president because of his unique government role and has absolute immunity from any lawsuit.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,marks
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 03:10 PM

Doubt this action will ever survive the discovery phase.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 02:18 PM

Joseph Wilson's War

Former US diplomat Joseph Wilson was the first senior government official to expose the lies upon which the Bush administration was building its case for war against Iraq. Politics and the media destroyed Wilson's reputation, but history has proved him right in the end. Now he is fighting to restore his good name.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:56 PM

By Clarice Feldman:

In 1998 Wilson left the State Department and began putting his diplomatic contacts to business use. He formed J.C. Wilson International Ventures Corporation, a business development and management company which ventured in gold, oil, and telecommunications and served clients in Africa, Western Europe, and Turkey. At this time new African markets were emerging due to the recent passage of an African trade bill Wilson had helped President Clinton promote. Wilson's African investment interests included oil markets in several parts of Africa and the gold market in Niger. Wilson also kept abreast of the gold market in Iraq, where the price of gold was exceptionally cheap, as Wilson observed in one of his lectures.

    Wilson ran his company out of the offices of an investment company called Rock Creek Corporation. Rock Creek was controlled by Mohammed Alamoudi, whom Wilson had met in 1997 at a reception organized for the World Bank by Westar Group. Alamoudi was a member of the Saudi-Ethiopian Alamoudi dynasty, which was heavily invested in the segments of the African economy Wilson was seeking to penetrate.

    The Alamoudi-affiliated company Delta Services-a Swiss subsidiary of the Saudi company Delta Oil-handled Iraqi oil export contracts in 2000 and 2001 and was revealed in 2003 as a recipient of Iraqi Oil-for-Food vouchers channeled through Abu Abbas, a Palestinian terrorist with Iraqi connections. Delta Services also cooperated with Afghanistan's Taliban regime in a project to build an oil pipeline from Afghanistan to Pakistan, prior to this project's suspension in 1998. In 1999, Alamoudi was accused by USA Today reporter Jack Kelley of heading a bank which was being investigated for financing Al Qaeda.

    USA Today printed retractions of several details in Kelley's article in 2004, after another member of the Alamoudi family-Abdurahman Alamoudi, a prominent American Muslim lobbyist-was indicted on terror-related charges involving a Libyan-backed conspiracy to assassinate Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah. Abdurahman was ultimately convicted in October 2004 and sentenced to 23 years in prison. Under Mohammed Alamoudi's direction, Rock Creek was chaired by Elias Aburdene, an Arab-American international banking advisor and lobbyist who had previously advised banks linked to organized crime and intelligence community figures involved in the S&L Scam. In 2003 and 2004 Aburdene donated to the Sandhills Political Action Committee, which was affiliated with Senator Chuck Hagel, 13 a leading Republican critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policy.

Recall the trip to Africa conducted by Bill Clinton in the wake of the embarrassing Monica Lewinski affair, playing to his most reliable voting base, and bringing with him a very large number of African-American business figures, politicians, and other influential individuals.

    The trip cost almost $50 million and was tagged as the most expensive foreign trip by a US President. Much of this expense was for transportation for the Clinton's took a large delegation with them. The delegation included Jesse Jackson, prominent Black businessmen such as Bob Johnson and the following Congressional delegation: Congressmen Payne ,William Jefferson and Rangel and Congresswoman Maxine Waters, as well as Secretary Slater. (Source)

What is less well known is that the man who orchestrated this trip was Joseph C. Wilson IV co-star of the long-running Plame comedy hour.

    Joe Wilson really was the architect of President Clintons visit to Africa, said Leonard Robinson, senior fellow at the McCormack Institute and deputy executive director of the National Summit on Africa.

The emphasis of this trip was to promote African development, US investment in Africa and US-African trade.   

    Wilson's role was acknowledged by Clinton. When he hosted a dinner for Ghana's visiting President, Wilson and his wife, noted in the press account of the dinner as 'Valerie Wilson' were among the guests. Another honored guest was Congressman William Jefferson and his daughter.

According to the SSCI Wilson made at least one other trip to Africa That was made at his wife's suggestion for the CIA in 1999. He made the second trip there that year as part of a trade delegation. As Just One Minute poster Rocco found these tidbits:

    Mima Nedelcovych, Vice President for International Operations, F. C. Schaffer and Associates, Inc traveled with Wilson, Alamoudi and others in Nov. 99, for a trade delegation.

    Nedelcovych gave Jefferson campaign donations in 01, 02, and 05.

    F. C. Schaffer and Associates is a small Louisiana based sugar company but the curious thing is, the donations aren't from Schaffer, they're from AFRKA GLOBAL/PARTNER

As for the Alamoudis, a substantial amount of information about the family and their links can be found here (see comment 7)

Following the Wilson-managed Clinton trip, the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was signed into law on May 18, 2000 as Title 1 of The Trade and Development Act of 2000. The Act offers tangible incentives for African countries to continue their efforts to open their economies and build free markets.

Corruption , however, has been a continuing problem in Africa and those monitoring the impact of the Act have urged more transparency and monitoring of those countries deemed eligible to participate.

Joe Wilson's new incarnation as a wheeler-dealer in corruption-rife countries in Africa was a perfect fit for his role as impresario of the massive Clinton delegation to Africa, which brought together corruption-stained individuals on the lookout for future business opportunities.

The documents seized in the FBI raid on the offices of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) remain unread by Justice Department investigators, pending a federal Appeals Court ruling scheduled for August 27. Jefferson is anxious to overturn the ruling of federal Judge Hogan of the Washington, DC federal District Court, who allowed the raid. One can only surmise that the seized documents contain material even more embarrassing than the discovery of $90,000 in cash in Jefferson’s freezer.

But we already know a bit about the charges and some of the alleged partners of Congressman Jefferson. Two people have pleaded guilty to bribing him. One of them is Vernon L. Jackson, owner of a technology company called iGate. The Washington Post reported:

    Federal authorities have alleged in court documents that Jefferson took more than $500,000 in bribes in exchange for using his official position to promote iGate’s technology in Nigeria, Ghana and Cameroon. The FBI said it videotaped Jefferson taking a $100,000 payoff on July 30, 2005.

    The affidavit discloses an alleged scheme in which Jefferson introduced officials from Netlink Digital Television (NDTV), a Nigerian company, to Jackson.

    NDTV agreed to pay iGate nearly $45 million for the right to use its technology and to distribute it in Nigeria. The affidavit alleges that Jefferson, without iGate’s knowledge, separately negotiated with NDTV officials to receive $5 for each subscriber in “return for Jefferson’s official assistance if the deal was successful.â€쳌

The Post also reports that investigators are examining a number of other companies linked to Jefferson, his wife, and various other relatives. While no details have leaked, and the seized documents have not yet yielded their secrets, it is quite probable that the bribery iGate’s owner has acknowledged is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the dubious business associations of Representative Jefferson.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: DougR
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:09 PM

For once I agree with Sorcha! I'm glad they are suing. Can't wait for the truth to come out.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 01:29 AM

Why should we leave the countries in the Middle East out of the discussion, Troll?

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 01:22 AM

Troll - Again - My post of 17 Jul 06 - 12:26 AM was a response to GUEST 16 Jul 06 - 11:26 PM who stated, "She was outed by Aldrich Ames in 1994," which is only speculation not a fact.

You then go on to say, "Of coures, if it could be proven that Ames DIDN'T out her, then that would at a lot more credence to the idea that Bush et al outed her and so should be taken out and shot or something like that."

Your logic is based on assumptions and is obviously intended to discredit me. Stick to the facts and stop making statements about what I am thinking. You don't have a clue. I have plenty to say but you can't take a statement out of context and apply it to a request for clarification. You will certainly arrive at a false conclusion.

Troll away. You're not worth replying to.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 12:19 AM

Based on your last two paragraphs, I rest my case.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 07:23 PM

Why would you make an assumption based on my previous posts when I was responding to the GUEST who boldly stated that, "She was outed by Aldrich Ames in 1994?" It is false and misleading.

I asked a simple question to expose the GUEST as a liar. There is no need to refer to my previous posts and then conclude that I wanted someone shot. You too, are stretching the truth.

I hope Plame and Wilson blow the lid off the entire U.S. administration. I'm glad someone is actually challenging the White House. Its about time. I know I wouldn't want two CIA agents trying to prove my guilt about anything. I hope they do their homework and that the American public finally discovers how slimy their leaders really are.

I generally do not support the actions of the CIA but in the case of these two individuals, I'll make an exception. Actually I'd love it if Plame and Wilson went down in history as American heroes.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 05:42 PM

My assumption was based on aome of your previous posts, Dianavan.

Just because my conclusions don't match yours doesn't mean I "can't read or put two and two together."

But, have it your way.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 05:36 PM

You assume an awful lot, Troll, and obviously you can't read or put two and two together.

My post was in response to the previous post by GUEST: "She was outed by Aldrich Ames in 1994."

Thanks for your clarification.

At least now I know that GUEST is just blathering and has no source for his statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 05:33 PM

October 11, 2003

VALERIE PLAME'S CAREER....Today's Nick Kristof (NYT)column on Valerie Plame actually contains some new information:

    First, the C.I.A. suspected that Aldrich Ames had given Mrs. Wilson's name (along with those of other spies) to the Russians before his espionage arrest in 1994. So her undercover security was undermined at that time, and she was brought back to Washington for safety reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 04:51 PM

Dianavan, there is, at the present time, no way to prove conclusively that Ames outed Plame since only the CIA knows for sure and they ain't talkin'.

However, since she was taken off active field work shortly after the Ames matter broke and given a desk job in Washington, it is reasonable to assume that the Cia no longer felt that she was a good risk for covert ops.

Of coures, if it could be proven that Ames DIDN'T out her, then that would at a lot more credence to the idea that Bush et al outed her and so should be taken out and shot or something like that.

Which is probably the reason behind your post.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 04:40 PM

CarolC, can you cite some specific examples other than your usual ones about the Israel/ arab conflict?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Jul 06 - 12:26 AM

Aldrich Ames outed Plame to whom? Russia?

Prove it.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 11:33 PM

BTW, just because this country won't defend its borders, doesn't give us the right to criticize a country that does.

We (and our government) criticize countries for defending their borders all the time when the countries in question don't have a "special relationship" with our government.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 11:26 PM

I just saw Novack interviewed by Russert on TV.

He said no one ever gave him the name, Valerie Plame, only Joe Wilson's wife and he then looked it up.

He Did not and does not believe she was covert.

He believes he did not out her.

She was outed by Aldrich Ames in 1994.

He believes she got Joe Wilson was hired to go to Niger.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 10:32 PM

The executive can't seize control of the government without the cooperation/abrogation of the other two branches without a military coup.

Since Bush has not staged a coup, his "opinion" of his powers is just that--unless and until another branch of government reins him in. Which they clearly need to. Since the wheels of justice turn so slowly (unless there are votes being counted, of course), it has to be the legislative branch.

But since the party that rules Congress also has control of the White House, the investigative side has, shall we say, gotten a bit mired down?

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 06:34 PM

President cites powers of his office

President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ''to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to "execute" a law he believes is unconstitutional.

In other words, Bush says he can ignore any law passed by Congress, and by asserting that he is the "final authority" on what is Constitutional he claims that his authority takes precedence over the Judiciary, including the Supreme Court.

Sieg Heil mein Führer!

He has repeatedly agreed to "compromises" in order to get legislation through Congress, and then after signing the Laws has simply "written out" the "compromises" in his numerous "Signing Statements," effectively nullifying what Congress has done.

American Bar Association Investigation — to evaluate Bush's assertions that he has the power to ignore laws that conflict with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Among the laws Bush has challenged are the ban on torturing detainees, oversight provisions in the USA Patriot Act, and "whistle-blower" protections for federal employees.
The challenges also have included safeguards against political interference in taxpayer-funded research.
Bush has challenged more laws than all previous presidents combined.

Note especially the "Executive Order" removing protections for Federal Employees under "Whistle Blower Protection" laws passed by Congress, which effectively says any Federal Employee who disagrees with his boss may be fired.

All government employees will now practice saying "Yassuh Boss" as no other response is acceptable to this administration.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 06:13 PM

Forgive me if I have this all wrong, but I seem to remember that Congress - with the exception of Sen. Feinstein - voted to give the President the go-ahead to use whatever means were necessary to bring down Saddam.

This whining and crying that he fooled them by cherry-picking the intelligence reports and lieing looks more to me like "Oh shit we goofed we'ed better cover our asses quick" than anything else.

If they were so stupid as to fall for what they now say was a pack of lies, I would think that , rather than going after the Bush administration, the liberals would be looking to elect some representatives who were not quite so gullible.

It is my understanding that most of them didn't even read the intelligence report sent them by the White House but instead relied on staff synopses. I wonder what they were doing that was so much more important than finding out first-hand what was in that report. It was, after all, their vote that allowed the President to go after Saddam.

As far as Joe Wilson is concerned, he tried to make himself look like a real big wheel by claiming that Cheney himself had asked him to go to Nigeria when the truth is that Cheney did no such thing. Wilson drew attention to himself by bragging about his supposed connections when he would have been better off to have kept his pie hold closed.

If memory serves me, MI5 still says that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake, as does French Intel, Joe Wilson notwithstanding.
I don't know if I'd trust them any more than I would trust the CIA, but Joe Wilson doesn't inspire a great deal of confidence either.

BTW, just because this country won't defend its borders, doesn't give us the right to criticize a country that does.

Just my opinion, you understand.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 01:01 PM

Now, I know my opinion is in a fairly extreme minority, because I fault Democrats as much as Republicans for the fine fiddle we are in. But I think history will show that Bush has gotten away with what he has gotten away with not because he is all powerful, but because the Congress abrogated their constitutional duties of oversight and investigation--with the corporate media playing the tunes.

I'm pretty much in agreement with you on this.

But with Israel bombing the fuck out of the Middle East, and Bush saying that is JUST FINE with him, I think there are far more important things to concern ourselves with than a pretty, publicity hungry Washington power couple being slapped down by Karl Rove.

Possibly. Although I find it difficult to look at any of these kinds of issues in isolation from the rest. I think they're all sort of tied inextricably together.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 11:52 AM

Yes Barry, their real crime is stupidity and venality.

Carol, you are correct in saying the Intelligence Identities Protection Act is not relevant in their suit. However, it is the main ammunition that has been used by the Democrats in the court of public opinion.

No one has been indicted on charges of outing her as a CIA agent in violation of the Act. Libby was indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice--in other words, for falling on his sword to protect Cheney and Rove. That is what anyone at that level is expected to do to protect the boss. Politics 101.

I am deeply concerned that nothing is being done by Congress to hold the Bush administration accountable for their many breaches of our national security, the number one breach being stripping US citizens of their civil rights in the Patriot Act, and number two, taking us to war.

But at this point, I'm far more upset with the US Congress' abrogation of their constitutional duties of oversight and investigation, than I am the Bush administration. Any repressive, authoritarian administration like this (and there are many parallels, IMO, between this Bush administration and the Nixon and Johnson administrations) is going to go petal to the metal and get their agenda as far as they can as fast as they can, and only pull back when checked by the other two branches of government.

The Bush administration is, however, only being checked by the judicial branch. It is as if the Congress doesn't even exist at this point.

Now, I know my opinion is in a fairly extreme minority, because I fault Democrats as much as Republicans for the fine fiddle we are in. But I think history will show that Bush has gotten away with what he has gotten away with not because he is all powerful, but because the Congress abrogated their constitutional duties of oversight and investigation--with the corporate media playing the tunes.

But with Israel bombing the fuck out of the Middle East, and Bush saying that is JUST FINE with him, I think there are far more important things to concern ourselves with than a pretty, publicity hungry Washington power couple being slapped down by Karl Rove.

Just my opinion, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 05:41 AM

In a "CRIMINAL" court of law (which none of any involved may ever get to see) that they would need to be presumed innocent untill proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but it's not so in a civil court. They don't need to be convicted beyound any reasonable doubt to be found guilty & blame can be awarded in percentages. She could be 10% to blame herself just because she had the job knowingly that she could be hung out to dry but some body(s) 'IS/ARE' 90% quilty & they need to be brought to bare the their share of the guilt.

Carol C says it far better above that the CIA is an awful & criminal bunch but it's not just a case of whistle blowing. It's a case of a US Ambassador telling the truth & getting punished for it. That in it's self was his real crime not where his wife worked. The Bush Administration is guilty of being stupid enough to use her job as a form of pay back & not realizing (really no thought at all) that it would come back to bite them on the ass & that's their crime.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 06 - 03:11 AM

Yes, and I might have more sympathy for Cheney, Rove, et al in this context if they were more willing to extend those same protections under the law to the many innocent people being denied them in places like Guantanamo. But they are not.

Guest, I can't dispute your points, but as far as I know, that law isn't going to come under review because of the Plame case. Do you know something about it that I don't?

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 09:00 PM

Good one troll. Except it's a civil case, not criminal, so the guilt factor doesn't fit.

Back to the drawing board for you, then.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Troll
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 08:57 PM

It's probably a good thing for our Judicial system that the members of the Mudcat Forum are not in charge of it.

Reading this thread makes it clear that Cheney and Co. have already been tried and convicted in the minds of a majority of the posters, based on media reports and their own prejudices.

What ever happened to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a COURT OF LAW?

I am ashamed of the lot of you. Such shallowness does you no credit.

You may hate Bush, Cheney, Rove, and anyone else you choose but they are still entitled to equal protection under the law, Just like you are.

If they are found guilty, they should be punished according to the pertinent statutes, but until such time they MUST be presumed to be innocent.

While you are all entitled to express your opinion, to act as though the guilt of Cheney et al is a foregone conclusion smacks of pettiness and a childish assumption that your opinion should be the final arbiter.

I am sure that this will cause some comment, so let me repeat what I've said before.

I have very little use for politicians in general and the Bush Administration in particular, but it is central to our system of law that a man is innocent until proven guilty.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 07:27 PM

That rarely even works for civilian dominated federal agencies, though Carol. And in the case of the CIA, there are simply no civilians who know what goes on "in the field". So the need to have agents and other intelligence personnel be able to blow the whistle on US intelligence operations gone awry, is far more important to our democratic form of government than protecting a CIA analyst's cush job at Langley.

What is more important to our democracy today: Joe Wilson and his disgruntled Democrat friends getting back at the Bush administration, or reining in the covert US government that has grown by leaps and bounds (with Dubya's Daddy's help) since the Reagan years, with no one able to scrutinize their actions?

It's paramount to remember Carol, the law Libby, et al violated was passed when a CIA agent, Philip Agee, went public with all the gruesome details of the CIA's Latin American adventures.

The book is still a compelling and enlightening historical read. It is called Inside the Company: CIA Diary

Don't forget, the only FBI agent who blew the whistle on the FBI over the 9/11 debacle was fired. At least Valerie Plame was able to afford to quit and support herself on her new seven figure book deal, also due to be released any minute.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 06:03 PM

It's one thing for citizens to uncover and bring to light covert activities of the CIA that are illegal, immoral, criminal, and just plain wrong.

It's quite another thing for the "leaders" of the country to expose people who work for them and their families to increased risk of harm (and possibly death) in retaliation for legitimate whistle blowing.

I approve of the former, but I think the latter is just despicable, and I hope Plame and Wilson win their case, knocking a lot of horrible people down off their pedestals in the process.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 03:34 PM

And did I mention who the major funder of the mujahadeen that became the Taliban was?

A wonderful fellow by the name of Osama bin Laden.

And to think all of today's Islamic fundamentalists who were once "our bastards" (as Jeanne Kirkpatrick was so fond of saying) are now "terrorists".

Doubt it? Ask Dan Rather. He was good buds with the Afghan mujahadeen.

And y'all thought the only story he was on the wrong side of was Dubya's military service.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 03:30 PM

The CIA is who brought us Iran-Contra, the overthrow of Allende, etc etc etc.

Casey, who was Reagan's Karl Rove, was the chief architect and engineer of the unprecedented build-up at the CIA in the wake of dramatic budget cuts and scaling back of operations during the Carter administration.

Not to mention, he was the architect of that great policy (along w/ Jean "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" Kirkpatrick) that funded the Afghan mujahadeen, which became the notorious Taliban with whom we are now at war.

In the covert operations game, what goes around comes around.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 02:59 PM

From a historical perspective, it should be pointed out that the CIA did not exist "during the Nazi regime," and Mr. Casey's tenure as Director began about 25 years after World War II ended. Contrary to popular opinion, the CIA is/was not the direct successor of the OSS.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 02:52 PM

The CIA is involved in all kinds of illegal, immoral, and just plain reprehensible acts all around the globe, and I'm quite sure, even within the US. So I believe the law that Cheney, Rove, et al violated is wrong, and should be overturned as a violation of free speech (which is what it is, and why the waters were so murky when Fitzgerald started putting journalists in jail to find the leaker).

Because of this law, we can't find out what the CIA is doing in our names. It is that simple. And NO ONE should think that the CIA is doing the right thing, because there is no evidence of it in the history of the organization, even during William Casey's infamous years infilitrating the Nazi regime.

The CIA should be shut down.

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 02:04 PM

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

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Arne
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 01:08 PM

Guest:

Actually, I doubt the suit will get far. A party needs permission from the US government to sue the US government & it's representatives.

The lawsuit makes clear they're being sued in their capacity as individuals.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Plame Sues Cheney/Rove!
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jul 06 - 12:40 PM

WASHINGTON - Valerie Plame Friday called Vice President Cheney and alleged leakers who blew her cover as a CIA spy "reckless" and "shameful."

Plame is suing Cheney, his ex-chief of staff Lewis (Scooter) Libby and President Bush's political guru Karl Rove for allegedly outing her in 2003 in a bid to discredit her husband, an Iraq war critic.

"I am proud to have served my country by working at the Central Intelligence Agency," Plame told reporters in her first public remarks since retiring from the clandestine service this year.

"I and my former CIA colleagues trusted our government to protect us," said Plame. "That a few reckless individuals within the current administration betrayed that trust has been a grave disappointment to every patriotic American."

Unnamed defendants in the lawsuit include "John Does" in the alleged conspiracy whom the Wilsons hope to uncover as the case progresses. Their lawyer, Christopher Wolf, would not say whether they suspect President Bush.

Spokesmen for Cheney and Libby have declined comment. Rove's spokesman has said the case is "without merit."

"Those who acted so harmfully against our national security must answer for their shameful conduct in court," said Plame, flanked by her husband and co-plaintiff, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.