What is Digg?78 Comments
- brainScan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+21A $57 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner for lost pants went to trial, but Plame's lawsuit didn't ?! Ridiculous!
- bleuwolfe, on 10/11/2007, -16/+30What to happened to justice in America? Oh, right, Republicans are above the law and treason in a time of war is now OK. Support the troops, support the CIA covert operatives? Give me a break, they can't even spell the word!
- TheLastProphet, on 10/11/2007, -6/+19The temperature in America just got hotter.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15All you need to know is in the last paragraph: "Bates, who was appointed by President Bush, is the same judge who threw out a case regarding the release of Cheney's Energy Taskforce records"
- citizenbfk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+16n this Plame-Wilson White House CIA-leaking agent's identity case it seems justice and accountability is still out of reach, although the Wilson's pledge to appeal and press on.
How the Bush administration ( now admitted!) would betray one of our own USA agents to cover up their lies is a historical disgrace. Some accountabilty would be nice: see, http://americancitizenstogether.org - interval, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Alright -- obviously no one even read the article OR the article description, or you're all so eager to find some more reasons to hate Bush that's you don't even care about the facts.
The case is NOT over nor is it lost. All the judge said is that his court was the wrong court to hear this case, and it needed to be filed elsewhere. That's it. - greenback1, on 10/11/2007, -10/+16Scooter Libby committed perjury in a complex case investigating the outing of US Intelligence Officer Valerie Plame Wilson. Valerie Plame Wilson was working for Brewster Jennings, a covert operation with a mission to track Nuclear Weapons material and Yellow Cake Uranium. The covert group discovered the forged Niger documents (google Chalabi and Niger documents) which falsely stated Saddam Hussein was purchasing Yellow Cake Uranium. The forged Niger documents was the key evidence justifying Cheney's and Bush's reason to invade Iraq. Obviously Cheney/Bush were not happy with Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame Wilson, which explains why they committed a treasonous act in outing a US Intelligence Officer. The sad part is that they have been able to use their self appointed Executive Powers (which are un-Constitutional) to complicate the entire investigation.
This is a deadly serious situation America. Do not let Bush/Cheney gang tell all of us it is old news and it's time to move on. - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -8/+141) An "admitted Democrat?" Is that a crime now? 2) Libby was convicted of BOTH perjury and obstruction of justice. 3) Libby admitted to outing Plame, Armitage identified Libby as his source 4). Novak was grilled, and revealed his source: Richard Armitage. Armitage was grilled, and revealed his source: Libby. Libby was grilled, and lied rather than reveal his source. We do not know who revealed her name to Libby, thus the obstruction of justice conviction. You might want to get your facts straight before telling others to "grow up."
- ChristPissed, on 10/11/2007, -14/+20Treason is now a sanctioned political act.
R.I.P. America, welcome to the bush (Z.O.G.) amerika. - NikoKun, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Anyone else read it as : "Judge throws out lame lawsuit" lol
- biotch, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Yeah like how liberals were wrong about WMDs.
Funny how all you can claim liberals are wrong about is something that wont even go to trial. - mommywommy, on 10/11/2007, -16/+21This is horrible news. Exposing Valerie was a treasonous offense, in my opinion. This judge is crooked. I have NO faith in our government any more.
- epicstruggle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5That lawsuit was dropped and the judge made plaintiff pay attorney fees to the dry cleaners. Get your facts straight.
- Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/11/2007, -16/+191) Valerie Plame is an admitted Democrat, and her husband is a known Bush administration hater. It doesn't take a college professor to connect the dots, this is called extortion.
2) Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice, not perjury. If every politician got the book thrown at them for having a bad memory, the Clinton White house would have been singing "Jail House Rock" through the late 1990s.
3) There was never any evidence of Scooter Libby outing the name of Agent Plame. Plame was well-known in Washington and there were several reports claiming her name was mentioned in a book published by her husband. She was not exactly a ghost.
4) No one seems to be interested in grilling the man who physically NAMED Miss Plame, Robert Novak. Freedom of the Press does not mean freedom to publish whatever the hell you want. If you want to start blaming anyone, you start with the facts. We know who published her name.
I've lost track of how many times I've said this here, but, grow UP people, life is not one large conspiracy like you want it to be. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Hate the "republican"?
Uh, maybe you missed the memo, but the people in office now are NOT republicans. They might run under that label, but no ***** way are they real republicans. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4What?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Liberal and labels are great, because you are on the right america team, republican right? Its a shoe in all republicans are great right? Get passed the brainwashed left / right and you might actually give a ***** about something more than a party face.
- theeEqualizer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5What fiction are you going to pass off as fact here, Spaz? Fact: Someone in the Bush administration leaked Plame's identity. Fact: The Bush administration has never been forthright with those investigating this act of treason. Fact: One week ago even the president admitted that "someone" must have done it. He has "often wondered" what would happen if "someone" would come forth and admit that they did it. But apparently Scooter Libby didn't deserve any jail time. That was just to harsh on the poor boy.
I listen to more than two decades of ***** from the republican party about "personal accountability". Now they show absolutely none.
So what have you heard on talk radio or Fox news that you'd like to share with all the simple-minded liberals out there, Spaz? Oh please enlighten us with your rational, insightful, and logical style of deductive reasoning. This should be great. - GrizzWolf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3To all you LEFT-WING MORONS...
Why is it when some court in the land rules against some republican YOU all jump up and down in joy proclaiming how great it is and how the ruling "must be accurate" because a "judge or jury" said so, and yet, if some court or jury rules even slightly in favor of the republicans YOU all crap your pants and scream that the system is corrupt and that Bush and Cheney must have "intimidated" the judge or something? You are all so ***** sick and nuts it's pathetic. And *I* don't even LIKE Bush or Cheney... I just think you need to be FAIR about this *****, you loons. - JonnyTrombone, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Judge throws out dupe: http://digg.com/politics/Valerie_Plame_s_Lawsuit_Dismissed
Seriously- this JUST frontpaged! - JimSwarthow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2JamesSpaza - "By the way, just because I am opposed to some leftist's ideas doesn't mean that I support Bush. Geez."
Oh yes it does. these days anyway. the far Left and the far Right have never been more binary in their idiocy. and here's the irony the far-Left can feel free to choke themselves on.. one of their big problems w/ Dub was the whole "you're either with us or against us"-nonsense. non-sense indeed but in the short span of his presidency they've adopted the EXACT same modus operendi. you don't hate Bush? you must be a Republican and therefore racist and therefore "pro" war and therefore HITLER and therefore pro-life and therefore HALIBURTON!! and therefore EVIL!! and therefore ARGHHH!!!....... ad nausea!! wtf?!? and the far Left doesn't even flinch when that simpleton non-sense that they so opposed comes out of their own mouthes. pa. the. tic.
_______________________
anywho, vote 3rd party!!!!!! - DanThePainter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2>.....Joe Wilson should have minded his wife's status from the beginning. If anyone should have been sued, Valerie should have named Joe at the top of the list. Instead, Joe had to grandstand after getting the assignment through the efforts of his wife that led to his star turn as Bush administration critic. There's nothing new about that; we've made that argument all along.
If the judge had allowed it to go to trial, though, it still wouldn't have succeeded, because the actual leak in this case came from Richard Armitage, not Libby or anyone at the White House. In a civil suit, the damage has to come from the defendants, and no one could argue with a straight face that Armitage would have done Cheney's or Libby's bidding. The discovery that Armitage gave the information to Robert Novak should have closed the criminal investigation, and it should have mooted this particular suit, unless the Wilsons amended it to replace Cheney and Libby with Armitage. He did the actual damage, to the extent damage occurred at all.
But the Plames didn't file this suit to recover from actual damages. They filed the suit to continue their status as darlings of the Left. It's hard to imagine that Joe Wilson could have acquitted himself on the stand well enough to keep the lawsuit from getting dismissed on the merits, even if it had survived on jurisdiction. Any cross-examination would have established his credibility as at near zero, and the case would have dissipated. The judge did them a favor; now they can claim judicial martyrdom, and their supporters have another cause to decry. >>
Plame Doused
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010577.php - philiaC, on 10/11/2007, -8/+10Win for justice. Valerie Plame was doing almost nothing in the CIA. No one's livelihoods depended on her name, and there were several people who knew it. "Exposing" her was NOT A CRIME under ANY LAW. She didn't seem to concerned about her name when she POSED FOR THE FRONT PAGE OF VANITY FAIR. I doubt the CIA would let something like this happen to someone who was actually important. I mean come on people, get off your "hate the Republican" chair for a while and look at the cold hard facts. No law was broken.
- JimSwarthow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I don't suppose you nitwits wanna face up to the fact that Richard Armitage (one of the folks on Joe Wilson's! side of the whole ordeal) was the leaker, eh? the case was thrown out b/c that's already been proven in the Fitzgerald investigation. - ergo, Cheney/Bush/et al weren't culpable. - you people are thick as a brick. there's a billion legitimate beefs you could pursue regarding Bush Co. but you'd rather go for the false/fallascious easy pickin's. duh.
- MattBrown, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Um, except for the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_Identities_Protection_Act
Also, Valerie Plame was a covert officer in the CIA. That fact, including her job content, was classified and not well know outside of the intelligence community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_plame - Gothvanhelsing, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7I wish i could make millions off of being outed as a desk jocky
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Hmmm... greedy, lying, corrupt, selfish, hypocritical, incompetent, sexually perverted, criminals .... I don't know man, they look like Republicans to me.
- IslandDog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"After all the rhetoric about patriotism and national security, I hope this is the slip-up that will get Bush impeached."
This has nothing to do with Bush. - biotch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Interesting term to use for someone who initiated a tour into Niger to find evidence of WMDs.
- siszam, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Anti Christian? I'm a Christian and I'm not a Republican. You've turned your corrupt political party and your evil president into your false God. People like the Republicans and you have made real Christians......you know the ones who don't twist Gods word to do evil, look bad. If you think God would condone the lies, murder, oppression of the poor in America and citizens of other countries, then you've obviously never opened your Bible. You may be misguided but make no mistake, those who truly follow God have separated themselves from our clearly satanic president. It's one thing to be fooled for a while like some have been, but it's whole nother ball game when you unabashedly embrace evil because you refuse to change your ideology. Wake up fool.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Thank you. While i support some moonbat ideals like the concept that the government is being run as illegally as ever, it was a jurisdictional dismissal.
No wonder dumbass liberals are such losers: never being right about anything's GOTTA hurt. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4The judge also dismissed a major case against Cheney.
He's obviously up to something and needs to be removed. Forcefully, if necessary. - Weaselski, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1yeah isn't that the same act that fitzgerald was looking at. he said there probably wasn't a (provable) violation
- Weaselski, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3If you've have not read the opinion, sat on a bench, or at least gone to law school... do you really know what you're talking about? I'd love nothing more than to see those guys burn but a weak case is a weak case and the judge may have saved us a few dollars by disposing of it. It will be appealed, and likely affirmed, and that will be that.
- IslandDog, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Plame was not a covert agent, and her identify was already well known.
- philiaC, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You're completely right, there's none of that on the other side. Just Republicans. Way to be 50% blind and 100% fail.
- bizchris, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Agreed - and why are they quoting CREW instead of Plame's lawyers? I would have instead preferred to hear the counter-argument to this:
"The court ruled it lacked jurisdiction over Plame's case because she has not exhausted administrative remedies under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which is the "proper, and exclusive, avenue for relief on such a claim." The act provides a waiver from the government's immunity from being sued in certain situations when its employees act negligently within the context of their jobs. The lawsuit that was dismissed Thursday was aimed at individuals within the Bush administration, rather than the government itself as FTCA actions are required to be."
There could be legitimate counter-arguments to why this is not a good ruling, but we certainly didn't hear them here. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"she wasn't a "covert" agent."
Gee, while you DO bring all the credibility of a right wing nutcase to the issue, I'll have to stick with the CIA's description of her as a covert agent. Sorry, Rush. - manicallday, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Actually this is does not belong within the catagory of injustice. The court simply couldn't hear this case.
- LavaHot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1... So you're mad at the judge for dismissing the case because he doesn't have any jurisdiction over the defendant? For that reason I should be pissed at almost every person on this planet for not being able to Kill Bill, er, Bush. Wait for the case to get to the higher circuits, then complain when it gets thrown out.
- JimSwarthow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1she wasn't a "covert" agent. repeat after me, she wasn't a "covert" agent... jesus freakin' christ. the woman was a god damn celebrity in Washington social circles and EVERYONE knew she worked at the CIA. she hadn't been overseas in a covert role in 5+ freakin' years. what a group of hyperbolic, hand-wringing, diaper-crapping sheeple you are.. YEESH!
- IslandDog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1How is that different from a democrat?
- SlimFastForYou, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What!?!? Bush appointed the same judge that threw out the case. And the Bush appointee's reasoning was "federal law protects Cheney and the other top administration officials from being sued for actions taken as part of their official duties." How is that any different from saying the Bush administration is above the law???
- Fabc001, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1What a CROCK-OF-CRAP. Identifying a CIA agent is a Federal crime. TREASON HAS BEEN COMMITED BY THIS ADMINISTRATION AND BUSH HAS ALLOWED THIS TREASONOUS BEHAVIOUR AGAINST THE USA! CAN YOU FOLLOW THE PICTURE YET? THIS ADMINISTRATION ALLOWS TREASON OF THE USA TO GO UNPUNISHED! WHAT HOPE DO WE HAVE? ARM YOURSELVES PEOPLE, THERE IS NO MORE JUSTICE IN THIS COUNTRY, THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT CAN DEFEND YOU NOW IS YOURSELF! GOODLUCK AND GOD BLESS!
- jambox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Why not?
Are you telling me he didn't know that Plame was being exposed? Given that it's a treasonous act, his mere knowledge of it makes him a traitor, because he did nothing to stop it.
I think the whole lot of them should be thrown into the slammer for this, exposing a serving CIA agent because of political criticism is an outrage. - Weaselski, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Dead on. Except executive powers are, literally, constitutional. Your thinking of executive privilege. Executive privilege is technically extraconstitutional , as it has been implied by the federal courts over the last 50 years. And while it seems like a good idea I'm not sure if it has ever been invoked for any reason other than to cover up fishy business.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Although this is close to factess, ousting a CIA agent is still a crime. A felony. Oh it was the vice president, thats ok, dictators can do what they want. Bush admitted the administration leaked the name.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Do not forget that bush said in his new press room that someone from his administration did leak the name. Sure Clinton was bad, its not a republican democrat issue when it comes to breaking the law. The executive orders are against the constitution and so are writing statement which bush has the record for.
These issues are about our freedom. Every president going back many years were crooks and liars. It is coming to a point now. The executive branch taking over the legislative branch. Its treason. there is no accountability, that is not American.
George Bush and most of the people in his office should hang from a noose. Treason is punishable by death. No terrorist writes writing statements or removes our freedoms. Our own elected group of shells do that.
Conspiracy, wake up? Who are you talking to? Read a ***** history book. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3As much as I'd like to believe a right wing nut on Digg, I think I'll go with Patrick Fitzgerald and the CIA on this one.
- noblepaladin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0No "normal" law was broken, but when you sign up to be in the CIA, DoD, FBI, defense contractor etc or any government agency that deals with classified information, you sign papers saying that you will not leak any classified information. There are some stuff that are still classified that isn't really that big of a deal (you can probably google the information), but if you work in a government agency, you don't talk about that stuff to people who don't have clearance. If a normal citizen finds out classified information, such as a news reporter, he can talk about it all he wants. It if free speech, no law is broken. However, for someone with a secret clearance to talk about classified stuff, that is illegal. The reporter did nothing wrong spreading the name, but the people who gave him the name have committed a crime. Leaking intelligence is punishable by death.
She probably isn't doing anything very critical, but who knows? All we know is that she is a covert CIA officer, she could potentially be doing some important mission. Also, how would you feel if you career was suddenly ended (the people who leaked the information knew exactly what would happen to her)? -
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is