Cheney: Yeah, we outed Plame... But we're immune. - New England Patriots Forums

***PressCoverage*** · 05-18-2007, 05:44 PM

and so here it is.... admission.... at long last, what we all knew to be true is right out in the open... they outed Plame ...

you gotta love the defense tactic... "ok, ok... yes, we did it... we disclosed the identity of a COVERT CIA officer... but look, it's part of our normal duties to tell select members of the media such information.... throw this case out... please??"

how utterly satisfying and vindicating on so many levels...

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.

<snip>

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates asked: "So you're arguing there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- these officials could have said to reporters that would have been beyond the scope of their employment," whether the statements were true or false?

"That's true, Your Honor. Mr. Wilson was criticizing government policy," said Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's civil division. "These officials were responding to that criticism."

Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke University law professor who is representing Wilson and Plame, said the leak was no typical policy debate. President Bush himself said that revealing Plame's identity could be illegal conduct and a firing offense, he told Bates.

Chemerinsky said that after Plame's cover was blown, the couple feared for their safety and their children's safety and Plame lost any opportunity for advancement at the CIA.

Holy Diver · 05-18-2007, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

and so here it is.... admission.... at long last, what we all knew to be true is right out in the open... they outed Plame ...

you gotta love the defense tactic... "ok, ok... yes, we did it... we disclosed the identity of a COVERT CIA officer... but look, it's part of our normal duties to tell select members of the media such information.... throw this case out... please??"

how utterly satisfying and vindicating on so many levels...

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.

<snip>

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates asked: "So you're arguing there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- these officials could have said to reporters that would have been beyond the scope of their employment," whether the statements were true or false?

"That's true, Your Honor. Mr. Wilson was criticizing government policy," said Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's civil division. "These officials were responding to that criticism."

Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke University law professor who is representing Wilson and Plame, said the leak was no typical policy debate. President Bush himself said that revealing Plame's identity could be illegal conduct and a firing offense, he told Bates.

Chemerinsky said that after Plame's cover was blown, the couple feared for their safety and their children's safety and Plame lost any opportunity for advancement at the CIA.

Ladies and Gentelmen....welcome to communist China!

***PressCoverage*** · 05-18-2007, 06:42 PM

so, when the judge rules on this in a few weeks, what will the defense strategy be then? they've already admitted to it....

who wants to bet this judge gets paid off in the time it takes for him to make his decision?

***reflexblue*** · 05-18-2007, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

and so here it is.... admission.... at long last, what we all knew to be true is right out in the open... they outed Plame ...

you gotta love the defense tactic... "ok, ok... yes, we did it... we disclosed the identity of a COVERT CIA officer... but look, it's part of our normal duties to tell select members of the media such information.... throw this case out... please??"

how utterly satisfying and vindicating on so many levels...

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.

<snip>

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates asked: "So you're arguing there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- these officials could have said to reporters that would have been beyond the scope of their employment," whether the statements were true or false?

"That's true, Your Honor. Mr. Wilson was criticizing government policy," said Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's civil division. "These officials were responding to that criticism."

Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke University law professor who is representing Wilson and Plame, said the leak was no typical policy debate. President Bush himself said that revealing Plame's identity could be illegal conduct and a firing offense, he told Bates.

Chemerinsky said that after Plame's cover was blown, the couple feared for their safety and their children's safety and Plame lost any opportunity for advancement at the CIA.

This administration is always raising the SCUM-LINE in the bath-tub of U.S.history to new levels.

***PressCoverage*** · 05-18-2007, 08:16 PM

i officially feel slightly sorry for Libby.... while guilty, he really was a fall guy for Cheney and Rove...

***patsfan13*** · 05-18-2007, 08:50 PM

The claim thaqt Plame was covert was made by the author of the Wa comPost article. not by Cheney's Defense. They calim the right to respond to the dishonest smear by Wilson.

Reading comphrension isn't your strong suit is it.

***PressCoverage*** · 05-18-2007, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

The claim thaqt Plame was covert was made by the author of the Wa comPost article. not by Cheney's Defense. They calim the right to respond to the dishonest smear by Wilson.

Reading comphrension isn't your strong suit is it.

ah yes... as Pied Piper, I knew I'd get you, or staunchest Plame denier, to show yourself...

interesting that you still won't acknowledge their capitulation ... but rather instead cling to the "prove she was covert" bit of rationale...

the author wrote covert because he, like everyone, accept for you and a few shills at Fox News, knows she was covert...

regardless, now they're changing their story... first they denied they ever leaked her name to the press.... now, they're saying they had every right to leak her name to the press... gosh, there's consistent honesty for you...

Fogbuster · 05-19-2007, 05:10 PM

Point is, nobody gives a flying frig, Pressy. *YOU* may have wet dreams over it, but most of the world, most of America has long since moved on.

Hint: put down your pitchfork, lose the tinfoil, and get a life. You could even find happiness!!

//

***PressCoverage*** · 05-19-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogbuster

Point is, nobody gives a flying frig, Pressy. *YOU* may have wet dreams over it, but most of the world, most of America has long since moved on.

Hint: put down your pitchfork, lose the tinfoil, and get a life. You could even find happiness!!

//

is this one of those posts you conveniently forget about when you praise yourself for debating with class and congeniality? it follows a pattern... with you making a personal attack first, and me responding...

i'm sure if Robertsons like yourself had their way, we'd all be forced to forget about your heroes' criminal intentions and endeavors, opening the door for future criminal endeavors... unfortunately, they will not be forgotten or silenced... as much as that ruffles your feathers...

Hint: put down your bible, lose the kool-aid, and try to enjoy life without such a tight sphincter... you may even find tolerance for your fellow man...

Fogbuster · 05-20-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

is this one of those posts you conveniently forget about when you praise yourself for debating with class and congeniality? it follows a pattern... with you making a personal attack first, and me responding...

i'm sure if Robertsons like yourself had their way, we'd all be forced to forget about your heroes' criminal intentions and endeavors, opening the door for future criminal endeavors... unfortunately, they will not be forgotten or silenced... as much as that ruffles your feathers...

Hint: put down your bible, lose the kool-aid, and try to enjoy life without such a tight sphincter... you may even find tolerance for your fellow man...

Guess you don't read all my posts, the ones that have taken fundamental issue with W's ill-advised response to 9/11. Check this again, and see if you can catch the drift. My attitude is summed up very well here:

http://www.peacefederation.org/

It's pretty clear: peace comes through living for the sake of others, not from acting from a self-serving agenda. Means we need to reach *more* than half-way to the other, especially when differences exist.

I'm no Pat Robertson, probably any more than you are Lenin's second coming. Robertson is far too narrow, I never watch his show, and don't subscribe to his parochial view of life or God.

Bible: how often have I quoted the Bible? In the few instances when I used a quote here and there -- kinda like Sam Ervin at the ol' Watergate hearings, only being more apropos -- where do you disagree?

Kool-aid: you mean like not laying down and soaking up any and every mole-hill or old old news you try to turn into something earth-shatteringly new? No can do. You spin, I counter-spin. Life's a beach, ain't it.

Tight sphincter?? I dunno, Press. You seem to be the one who is constantly bulging your eyes and going apoplectic over the most mundane events, treating the Bush administration as if it were the virgin presidency of the US of A, as if the Clinton, Carter, Johnson, and Kennedy admins never happened. I'd suggest getting a little perspective before you blow out a mitre valve or something.

//