Plame Out
Technically, it was just the dismissal of a disgruntled former employee’s nuisance lawsuit. In fact, it was the dismissal of an entire political genre of Bush Derangement Syndrome:
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said that Cheney and the others could not be held liable for the disclosures in the summer of 2003 in the midst of a White House effort to rebut criticism of the Iraq war by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. The judge said that such efforts are a natural part of the officials’ job duties, and, thus, they are immune from liability.
“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.”
But wait, your honor. You’re forgetting the fundamental underlying legal principal here: Bushus liedus, Peoplii diedi.
Don’t expect the FireDogLakes and Kosses of this world to get it. But with a penstroke, Bates just threw their complaint of Bush administration criminality out the window. Fitzgerald had already done that by failing to find reason to bring any kind of meaningful criminal charge. While Libby perjury was deemed a great victory for the side, in fact what they wanted was legal action to indicate deepseated evil, wrongdoing, a plot. According to the judge, rebutting a politically motivated jackass* is part of the job.
Keys word in the first sentence quoted re unsavoriness: “may have been.” Meaning, arguable. Allowable that it may have been a cockamamie mission from the start, by an agency and employees that should have known better, and what did you expect?
Of course, this is only one of many complaints of criminal behavior. Not one of which has yet to be borne out. From the claims of torture to illegal detention to illegal war to murder.
*Never noticed that Joseph C. Wilson was a IVth, by the way. It appears to have been somewhat illustrious a name until he got ahold of it.
One minor point. WaPo states:
No one was charged with the crime of intentionally disclosing Plame’s covert identity.
WaPo neglects to mention that’s because it could not be established as a prosecutable crime, and her covert status was debatable.
Jason Steck, sitting in at everyone’s favorite Dutch blog, turns out to be a legal genius:
Lawsuits are an avenue of redress for those that have suffered harm. Has Valarie Plame or her husband, Joe Wilson, suffered harm as a consequence of the leak of her name and their relation during the early days of Wilson’s career as an anti-war advocate and anti-Bush partisan?
Hardly. Unless becoming the toast of lefty DC and anti-war darlings, with their faces plastered all over Vanity Fair, was a traumatic experience for them.
Protein Wisdom has a party all over Joe Wilson’s indignation:
“This case is not just about what top government officials did to Valerie and me […] We brought this suit because we strongly believe that politicizing intelligence ultimately serves only to undermine the security of our nation. Today’s decision is just the first step in what we have always known would be a long legal battle and we are committed to seeing this case through.”
Joe Wilson lied about the significance, scope, and impetus of his own fact-finding mission for the express purpose of undermining the President (and, it is fair to speculate, with hopes of securing a prominent position in a Kerry administration).
Joe and Valerie are right. Politicizing intelligence is wrong!
Finkelstein at Newsbusters: NYT avoids mentioning Plame in headline. headlines are funny things. You have so much space, all of which must be filled, no more, no less. He may be overreading here. But if there’s a copy editor wielding a motive here, you have to ask yourself whether citing her as a former CIA operative isn’t intended to exalt her. Especially the “operative” part.
Topics: law & order, pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:50 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2007
4 Responses to “Plame Out”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
July 20th, 2007 at 2:42 am
I was hoping you could give us - and the Plame’s - a tutorial or an anatomy on of the private life — living life in privacy…
Such as..
Item d - Do not trip on your own dick to be on every cable network or venue when they call if you’d like to preserve your privacy…etc
July 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
“Technically, it was just the dismissal of a disgruntled former employee’s nuisance lawsuit. In fact, it was the dismissal of an entire political genre of Bush Derangement Syndrome:”
Good. Now that that nonsense is dispensed with, lets get the Wilsons in front of a jury on charges of treason and espionage in time of war, and give them the same thing we gave the Rosenbergs.
July 20th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
BDS sufferers, unite! We must find another common cause to hate Bush over!!!!! Iraq is soooooo last year.
/moonbat
July 20th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Joe and Valerie Rosenberg.
Yes, it has a good ring to it.
Don’t forget to wet the sponge.