Dear Congress

by emptywheel

John Bates has issued a ruling I've been anticipating--dismissing the Wilson lawsuit against Cheney, Rove, Libby, and Armitage. If I'm reading correctly, Bates ruled that he has no jurisdiction to rule in this matter.

This Court therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs' tort claim for public disclosure of private facts.

He therefore did not deal with many of the arguments the Wilsons and the defendants raised in this case--including Cheney's claim to absolute immunity. But he prefaces his detailed discussion with the following comment.

The merits of plaintiffs' claims pose important questions relating to the propriety of actions undertaken by our highest government officials.

All of which is a 40-page way of saying what Cheney and Libby and Rove and Armitage did was wrong. But a civil suit is not the appropriate venue to address that wrong. And with Bush's self-serving commutation of Libby's sentence, the criminal courts have been foreclosed as the means to address that wrong, too.

Which leaves Congress. There is abundant evidence already in the public record showing top members of the Administration--including Bush himself--abused their positions of power to rebut Joe Wilson. Some of those actions--including the commutation itself, since it removed Bush from criminal liability for his actions--fit well within the purview of Congress.

It's time to step up, Congress. That crappy hearing last week did much to polarize the two parties. But did little to address the evidence before us, pertaining directly to Bush's potential move to declassify a CIA spy's identity for political retaliation. Two judges who have reviewed the facts agree the actions were wrong. What is Congress going to do about it?

Comments

[Jodi]

I guess Mr Novak was correct again.

[emptywheel]

Jodi
I'm curious. Do you have a citation for that? I recall Novak saying he wouldn't respond to a subpoena in this case (which tells you something about his testimony in the Libby case). BUt right? And righter than those of us here on the site that have presumed this would be dismissed, based on at least as much knowledge as Novak had?

[Jodi]

Yes. I am a bit proud too. It is not often I know something you don't.

Friday, Jul 14
Novak Says Plame/Wilson Suit Will Be Dismissed
In an interview to be aired this weekend on Bloomberg's "Political Capital with Al Hunt," Bob Novak says that the civil suit Plame and her husband brought against Vice President Cheney, his former aide and White House adviser Karl Rove probably will probably be thrown out.

Full transcript when you click below...

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/television/novak_says_plamewilson_suit_will_be_dismissed_40185.asp

[marksb]

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.

[bmaz]

Hell, Jodi AND Novak probably read that here months ago. Didn't take any genius to predict this.

[ab initio]

"What is Congress going to do about it?" - EW

This is a question that many citizens like me have. What is Congress going to do about the abuse of power and obstruction of justice by Cheney and Bush - from conspiracy to out a CIA agent to warantless spying on Americans to a many other activities.

Can some smart marketing types suggest a focused campaign where many of us citizens could help Sen. Leahy and Rep. Conyers and Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid discover courage and a spine in standing up for the rule of law?

[Elsie]

I'm sure that the Wilsons must have been bracing themselves for this ruling as well, but I'm curious: Why such a long delay in rendering it? Shouldn't it have been apparent to the judge well before now that he didn't have jurisdiction over the case?

[bmaz]

Elsie - I trust you didn't mean your question to be funny, but it is. That WAS a fast ruling on a motion like this. I didn't expect it for at least another month. I have waited close to a year on occasion for rulings on motions to dismiss and/or summary judgment in Federal Courts.

[marksb]

ab initio, maybe the focused campaign is on electing more congressional members and getting a near 60-vote majority in the Senate, while taking the White House by a "clear mandate" majority. Giving us four years in which to mend the fabric of democracy.

[emptywheel]

Fair enough, Jodi.

May you make citing links a habit...

[Elsie]

You don't have much to be proud about, Jodi. Novak was obviously implying that the case would be thrown out because it didn't have merit, not on jurisdictional grounds. That's apparently not how Judge Bates felt.
In case you missed it above:

"The merits of plaintiffs' claims pose important questions relating to the propriety of actions undertaken by our highest government officials."

[melior]

2 for 2... All that remains is for Bush to pardon Tom DeLay to hit the summer 2007 obstruction of justice trifecta!

[Ralph]

Great post, Marcy. Very helpful.

[phred]

marksb -- As John Nichols eloquently pointed out in the Bill Moyers' show the other night, impeachment is the remedy to the problems at hand. Congress is, in principle, a co-equal branch of government. In their oath of office they are sworn to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That is their job. Their oath mentions faith and allegiance, doing their duties of office, but it explicitly makes them swear to defend the Constitution against all enemies. The Constitution has no greater enemies on earth than George W. Bush and Richard Cheney.

I know I'm repeating myself, but this is all about precedent. If their conduct is allowed to stand, what will be left to deter a future President from even more alarming abuses than this one has achieved? Nothing. Certainly not the political elite in either party who currently reside in Washington, D.C. And with the judicial and electoral systems already rigged (e.g., DoJ and gerrymandering to protect incumbents), what makes you think an election will somehow make everything better? Remember there are Democrats hiding embarassing documents now as EW discussed in a thread below. Dems have already shown themselves to be prone to corruption in the past (which is what got them chucked out of the majority last time).

If the Dems fail to execute their oaths of office, then there are a lot of people who will see no reason to vote for them in November of 2008. The Dems now own the mess in DC as much as the Rethugs do, so they better find the spine to do something about it or all their dreamed of gains will fail to materialize.

[windansea]

you've been anticipating?? LOL

have to confess I'm being a bit irresponsible in making my argument this way. My point is, if we can describe how any of these non-governmental employees (a the time of the leak, that is) were involved in the conspiracy, then we get to discovery; the suit doesn't get dismissed on Cheney's immunity claim.

It probably won't be GannonGuckert who gets us there. My bet's on Newt.

But how funny would it be if it were GannonGuckert!

oops!

[windansea]

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said that Cheney and White House aides cannot be held liable for the disclosure of information about Plame in the summer of 2003 while they were trying to rebut criticism of the administration's war efforts levied by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. The judge said such efforts were certainly part of the officials' scope of normal duties.

"The alleged tortious conduct, namely the disclosure of Mrs. Wilson's status as a covert operative, was incidental to the kind of conduct that defendants were employed to perform," Bates wrote in an opinion released this afternoon.

BOOOM

[bmaz]

Windansea - There is a difference between dicta and a dick. One is what you may have quoted; the other is you.

[Woodhall Hollow]

Thank you Marcy for your talent, your intelligence, and your tenacity. And for having the nimbleness of mind and finger to write down and publish what so many of us would like to say.

(& Jodi, Jodi, Jodi...your schtick is really boring and tiresome)

[emptywheel]

windansea

Your difficulties with the English language apparently continue.

Perhaps you didn't see the discussions in the past thread where we all talked about the necessity to cite a non-governmental employee on these issues? Same thing that you're citing here. See, with your limited English skills, you probably don't get this. But if I was saying we need a non-gov to get to discovery with Cheney, then I was implying that without we don't get to discovery with Cheney. Not sure if you know this, but Rove, Cheney, Libby, and Armitage were all gov employees in July 2003.

Let me know when you've passed out of basic English.

[JEP]

On some of the other blogs, there's a concerted movement to answer this miscarriage of justice with a counter threat of monumental proportions.
... so they won't let Joe and Valerie take their fight to the courts? Well. then we'll send Joe Wilson to the Senate!

Wilson v Domenici, if I thought the Wilsons wanted to be back with the weenie crowd, I would second the nomination.

But it is an interesting tack; If they won't give the Wilsons justice, then we'll give them The Wilsons, up front and in their faces!!!

I will say this, if Joe Wilson EVER expresses an interest in serving as a Congressman or Senator, then consider me one of the volunteers willing to help him any way I can.

[JohnJ]

I noticed the trolls' new tactic is to get the first comment in at "dangerous" blogs like this one. Who's running these trolls? Maybe this is the Big Dick's intern program for mail order lawyers he likes so much. Maybe the Big Dick or his line snortin' puppy is running the program, which would explain the low IQ behind the talking points.

[looseheadprop]

Spot on Marcy!

And Phred, You must be reading my mind

[marksb]

phred, thanks for the encouraging words. I'm with you all the way. And while I'm eternally hoping that progress can be made in Congress, I'm quite discouraged at the brick wall the media uses to contain any progressive moves, and the cautious attitude that seems to run though our elected representatives. Thanks again for the gentle reminder not to give up.

[Woodhall Hollow]

JEP -- that's right. Joe Wilson for Senate (D-New Mexico)! Can you see him on the Senate Foreign Relations or Intelligence Committees?

I can.

[phred]

bmaz -- tip o' the hat to you my friend, you could give freepatriot a run for his money with your troll-handling abilities :)