COURT SCHEDULES ORAL ARGUMENTS IN WILSON CASE

by S-Q @ 8:06 PM MDT


The Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust

On May 17, 2007, Judge John D. Bates will hear oral argument on the defendants' motions to dismiss Joe and Valerie Wilson's complaint against Bush administration officials, as well as the motion to dismiss filed by the United States.

Defendants Cheney, Libby, Rove and Armitage have all claimed that they are entitled to immunity from suit, because when they put into place their scheme to deliberately retaliate against Joe Wilson by revealing Valerie Wilson's status as a covert CIA operative, the law was not clearly established that doing so violated the Wilsons' constitutional rights. They have also argued that each of the constitutional claims, brought under the First and Fifth Amendments, does not state a cognizable claim.

The United States has argued that it should be substituted for the common law tort claims against the individual defendants for publicly disclosing private facts, because each of the defendants was acting within the scope of his employment when he revealed, or caused to be revealed, Valerie Wilson's status as a covert CIA operative.

The court has given each side 60 minutes in which to present argument.

Committee on Oversight and Government....CIA Agent Leak...

By S-Q @ 5:50 PM MDT

Transcript from the Committee on Oversight and Government:

REP. WAXMAN: Thank you very much. The chair will recognize himself to start off the questions.

Mr. Knodell, you're the one in charge at the White House for safeguarding classified information, isn't that correct?

MR. KNODELL: That's correct.

REP. WAXMAN: And in -- in doing so, you have an executive order, 12958, that implements the regulations for protection of this information. I want to ask you about that and, of course, we're looking at it in the context of Mrs. Wilson's identity being disclosed. Federal regulations require that any person who has knowledge of the loss or compromise of classified information has an obligation to report to the White House security officer. I'm going to read from 5 CFR Section 1312.30, "Any White House employee who has knowledge of the loss or possible compromise of classified information should report the circumstances to the EOP security officer," end quote. Is that accurate, Mr. Knodell?

MR. KNODELL: Yes, it is.

REP. WAXMAN: And do White House officials who know about the disclosure of classified information have an obligation to report what they know to you?

MR. KNODELL: Yes, sir.

REP. WAXMAN: And Mr. Leonard, you're one of the nation's experts on protection of classified information.

Do federal officials who learn of the possible breach of classified information have an obligation to report it to the security officer at the White House?

MR. LEONARD: Any individual who becomes aware of a security violation, especially one which may involve an unauthorized disclosure, has the obligation to promptly report that matter to the designated official to receive it.

More Transcript

Hearing on Disclosure of Plame's Identity: No Investigation

By S-Q @ 6:58 AM MDT


The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on whether White House officials followed appropriate procedures for safeguarding the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson. Here Rep. Elijah Cummings and Chairman Henry Waxman question Dr. James Knodell, Director of the Office of Security in the White House, on whether there was ever a White House investigation into the leak.

THANK YOU FITZ & TEAM

Thank you Fitz and Team for your hard work and dedication to the CIA Leak Case!

CNN: Libby jury asks judge if he said Libby had lied, then write back saying they answered their own question

A question sent from the jury to the judge in the trial of former Cheney chief of staff I Lewis "Scooter" Libby has apparently been answered by the jurors themselves. The question -- which CNN says "essentially" asked if the judge had asserted Cheney's former aide had lied.

CNN's Brian Todd: A bit of activity in Libby trial... The jury sent another note back to the judge essentially saying "We've answered our own question, no clarification needed. We apologize. We are going to get back to work." ... The original question had to do with Count #3 of the Libby indictment ... that is Libby made false statements about a conversation he had with Time Mag. reporter Matt Cooper in July of 2003.

Libby told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that administration's critic Joe Wilson worked for the CIA but Libby didn't know if it was true. The prosecution contends that Libby did know it was true and confirmed it unequivocally in that conversation ... the question from the jury, verbatim, "Is the charge that the statement was made or about the content of the statement itself?"

Essentially [they were] asking the judge, "Are you saying that Scooter Libby lied that the conversation even happened or is he lying about the content of the conversation."... but after further discussion they said "We are clear on what we have to do. No further clarification needed. Thank you. We apologize." ... There was a lot of laughter in the courtroom from attorneys on both sides.

Click

INTELLIGENCE LEAKS --Cheney's Call

Early on the morning of June 20, 2002, then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., received a telephone call at home from a highly agitated Dick Cheney. Graham, who was in the middle of shaving, held a razor in one hand as he took the phone in the other.

The vice president got right to the point: A story in his morning newspaper reported that telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency on September 10, 2001, apparently warned that Al Qaeda was about to launch a major attack against the United States, possibly the next day. But the intercepts were not translated until September 12, 2001, the story said, the day after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Because someone had leaked the highly classified information from the NSA intercepts, Cheney warned Graham, the Bush administration was considering ending all cooperation with the joint inquiry by the Senate and House Intelligence committees on the government's failure to predict and prevent the September 11 attacks. Classified records would no longer be turned over to the Hill, the vice president threatened, and administration witnesses would not be available for interviews or testimony.

Click for more

Trial exposes White House crisis machine

WASHINGTON - David Addington, chief legal adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, says he was taken aback when the White House started making public pronouncements about the CIA leak investigation.

In the fall of 2003, President Bush's press secretary was categorically denying that either Karl Rove or I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was involved in exposing the identity of Valerie Plame, a CIA employee married to a critic of the war in Iraq.

"Why are you making these statements?" Addington asked White House communications director Dan Bartlett.

"Your boss is the one who wanted" them, Bartlett replied, referring to Cheney.

With that, "I shut up," Addington recalled recently for jurors in Libby's CIA leak trial, which begins its fourth week on Monday with Libby's lawyers calling their first witnesses.

So far, the testimony of Addington and other administration aides, along with documents and Libby's audiotaped grand jury testimony, have provided a rare glimpse of how the Bush White House scrambled to respond to a political crisis as it intersected a criminal investigation.

At the intersection was Cheney, along with Rove and Libby, who were working in the summer of 2003 to rebut claims by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, that Bush had misled the nation about prewar intelligence on Iraq.

The White House denials on behalf of Rove and Libby came just before Rove secretly began acknowledging to the FBI that he had confirmed Plame's identity for conservative columnist Bob Novak, who first published her name and relationship to Wilson.

About the same time, Libby came under suspicion because NBC News Washington bureau chief Tim Russert had talked to the FBI, contradicting Libby's version of a conversation between the two men that would become the heart of the perjury and obstruction charges against Libby.

Bush and Cheney made a common mistake in their public handling of the Plame affair, says presidential scholar and University of Texas government professor Bruce Buchanan, who has watched Bush's career since his days as Texas governor.

Click for more

Libby's lawyers may not call Cheney to testify

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's lawyers are debating whether to call Libby's former boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, to the stand, a source with knowledge of the lawyers' discussions told CNN on Thursday.

Libby's lawyers also are debating whether Libby should testify, the source said.

Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff, is on trial in Washington on charges that he lied to investigators and a grand jury investigating the leak of the information that Valerie Plame was a covert CIA operative. Knowingly identifying a covert agent is illegal.

Libby is not charged with leaking the information.

The source said it does not seem a decision has been made about whether either will testify. (Watch why putting Cheney on the stand could harm the defense )

Click for more

Tim Russert Contradicts Libby's Testimony

"Meet The Press" Anchor Tells Courtroom He Never Discussed CIA Operative With Former Cheney Aide

(CBS/AP) NBC newsman Tim Russert testified Wednesday he never discussed a CIA operative with vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, contradicting Libby's version to a grand jury in the CIA leak investigation.

The testimony came as prosecutors prepared to rest their perjury case against Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff.

The courtroom testimony so far has provided a rare view inside a White House under fire during the lead-up to the war in Iraq, reports CBS News correspondent Gloria Borger. It's not pretty: top advisers squabbling in the West Wing, leaked secrets and faulty memories — all part of a full-blown damage control operation apparently led by the vice president himself.

Russert, the host of "Meet the Press," testified about a July 2003 phone call in which Libby complained about a colleague's coverage. Libby has said that, at the end of the call, Russert brought up war critic Joseph Wilson and mentioned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.

"That would be impossible," Russert testified Wednesday. "I didn't know who that person was until several days later."

That discrepancy is at the heart of Libby's perjury and obstruction trial. He is accused of lying to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding Wilson's wife, CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Click for more