You liberals are great! Keep it up! LOL!

The news as you may have heard already is that the former U.S. Ambassador and Mrs. Joseph Wilson IV have filed a lawsuit against Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby accusing them of revealing Plame's CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wil...

I think they're grasping here, trying to keep this story in the public eye:

Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, filed a lawsuit yesterday against Vice President Cheney, presidential adviser Karl ...

You assume an exact correspondence between jurisprudence and truth!

But yes, I do hope we find out *some* definitive answers via this suit (undercover or not, for ex). The heat/light ratio of the Plame case has always been pretty high.

One would think that after the special prosecutor found no evidence of a crime and after Robert Novak told the world how he obtained Valerie Plame’s name that the issue would be settled. One would also think that no indictments indicates she was...

Valerie Plame has filed a lawsuit against Vice-President Cheney, Karl Rove and Scooter Libby accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.
In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her h...

The differences between Harlow and Novak's accounts aren't that far apart. Harlow says he never told Novak that Plame "authorized" Wilson going on the trip, Novack says Harlow confirmed that Plame "suggested" Wilson for the trip. Certainly you can split hairs between authorized and suggested.

Harlow says he didn't confirm or deny Plame's being undercover because that was "classified", but he did confirm that she worked at the CIA and suggested Wilson for the trip. Novak says he asked that she not be identified by name (kind of meaningless when the Who' Who book had her) and that 'she probably never again would be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause 'difficulties.'

Like the differences between Rove "You heard that too" and Novak "You know that too", the differences in testimony aren't going to go very far for proving malicious intent.

You know that if there are no criminal indictments on outing her (and it sure looks like that's the way to bet) and if she loses the civil case, then the left is going to have to admit that their couple of years of conspiracy theory was just a bunch of caca.

(And the CIA guy that Novak cites has a very different version of the facts.)

Eugene Volokh is "swamped" but finds the causes of action "pretty weak"--follow this link to see what his commenters think, some of whom I hope will be much more up on the applicable law than I am. If the complaint's really that weak, then even a 12(b)(6) might have a shot, esp. with a conservative judge.

Fersboo, as explained above, I believe the evidence shows that Plame was undercover and that Novak's column burned her. You can disagree, but if she *weren't* undercover, I think we would have some good evidence of that fact, 3 years down the road.

Valerie Plame has sued Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and Lewis Scooter Libby for allegedly revealing her secret CIA identity. As a litigation attorney, the lawsuit sounds like an uphill battle to me. Not an impossible battle, mind you, but a long uphill slog...

I'm just pointing out a witness. The trial is going to be more about facts and witnesses than left wing dreams.

As far as the CIA "freaking" when she was outed, Novak reported that it was the CIA public relations guy who confirmed she worked for the CIA. Now maybe this was a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, but it is going to be pretty hard to make the case that these three guys set out to wreck her career by exposing her CIA connection on the basis of one 20 second conversation with Rove and the CIA spokesperson confirming her employment.

I know you were disappoint with the Fitzmas and I know that you can dream visions of frog marching Roves with this, I'm just suggesting that you don't get your hopes up to much as they are likely to be dashed.

As far as the statute of limitations go, I wonder when that clock started running. Because the conversations Novak had where prior to 7/14.

As far as seeing it thrown out of court, I doubt that will happen. If you take all the accusations as true (aka no evidence, just assume they can prove any and everything) then they might have a case. The real question is did they owe any duty to Plame not to wreck her career. I sure can't think of any cases like this, but who knows.

The CIA freaked

Wrongly, from the looks of things now. Somebody at CIA foisted a boondoggle on taxpayers with that referral.

Wilson is, to put it politely, a �character.� On the other hand, if someone did that to my wife, I would be a character, too.

Did what? List themselves in the Who's Who? Have the parody of an article done in a magazine like the Vanity Fair? Be the life of the Washington Elites Social Circuit?

Mr. Anderson, you aren't really Joe "I can't find no yellowcake" Wilson are you?