From the WSJ (subscribers only, so I’ll excerpt at length):
In addition to the prospect of indictments looming in the CIA leak case, the Bush administration faces another threat: civil litigation that could expose top officials to damage payments and years of wide-ranging scrutiny.
Former diplomat Joseph Wilson, whose criticism of the administration’s Iraq policy sparked the current furor and led to the outing of his Central Intelligence Agency-operative wife, Valerie Plame, isn’t saying for sure if he will sue. But one recent precedent is the debilitating civil suit against his former boss, President Clinton. “What would be interesting to us would be to get the justice that a civil case offers,” Mr. Wilson says.
A civil lawsuit could target Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, and top presidential political adviser Karl Rove, both of whom are being investigated by a federal grand jury. Mr. Wilson has also suggested he may go after Mr. Cheney, or even President Bush, if evidence amassed by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald supported a wider case.
Bush opponents, recalling how damaging Paula Jones’s sexual-harassment suit was against President Clinton in the 1990s, have long savored the prospects of a civil lawsuit in the Plame leak case. It was Mr. Clinton’s testimony in the Jones case that led to the perjury charges at the heart of his 1999 congressional impeachment trial.
If allowed to proceed, a civil lawsuit against senior White House officials could lead to years of intrusive discovery that would force open White House files and require many of Mr. Bush’s top aides to give public testimony under oath. “People have argued … that we pursue a civil case so we could root around in White House files and really see what was behind all of this, but we did not want to do that” until the formal investigation ended, Mr. Wilson said.
But some lawyers say that if he goes ahead with a civil case, Mr. Wilson could have a tough time getting around the legal immunity that largely protects government officials. It is equally uncertain what legal grounds he might use to successfully sue. Lawyers contend that most of the obvious avenues, such as defamation, emotional distress or lost job opportunities, aren’t that strong. They also point out that some of Mr. Wilson’s own actions in the last two years—including a Vanity Fair photo spread and a lucrative book deal—could further undermine any pursuit for monetary damages.
“For a host of reasons, it’s hard to see there being a strong case here,” said Larry Barcella, a former federal prosecutor in Washington who now works as a defense attorney.
Other lawyers argue that Mr. Wilson may be able to make the case that White House officials went beyond their official duties in seeking to smear him or his wife, thus stripping those officials of immunity.
Mr. Wilson wouldn’t elaborate on what grounds he might seek damages, or how confident he was of clearing the immunity hurdle. “We haven’t had that discussion with our lawyer yet,” he said. His lawyer, Christopher Wolf, a neighbor of the Wilsons who normally specializes in copyright and telecommunications law, declined to comment.
Experts caution that the same free-wheeling powers of discovery that would open up White House records could hurt Mr. Wilson and Ms. Plame, too. “Anytime you file a lawsuit, you open yourself up to your life becoming an open book,” said Gilbert Davis, who represented Ms. Jones in the Clinton case. “The other side could start asking about their partisanship, their advocacy, what Plame did as a covert agent. That alone could lead to a dismissal of any suit if the judge rules that the defense couldn’t look into her official work at the CIA.”
A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report last year questioned some assertions Mr. Wilson made about his own 2002 trip to Niger to look into allegations that Iraq had tried to acquire uranium in Africa. Mr. Wilson has argued repeatedly, for instance, that his findings in Niger debunked the Iraqi uranium quest, and were sent all the way up to Mr. Cheney. The report said neither was the case.
Joe Wilson: former ambassador, best-selling author, husband to a CIA agent, subject of fawning news coverage and Vanity Fair photo spreads, member of the Beltway elite and star of the cocktail party circuit—and now, despite being a proven liar, professionally aggrieved victim.
Because up is down. Black is white. Peaches is Herb…
(h/t Terry Hastings)
So Joe Wilson would be an appropriate SCOTUS pick then?
Prediction: The indictments and any possible lawsuits will not come to fruition. Look for them to backfire upon their originators.
If there is a civil suit, it’s likely to revolve around a violation of the Privacy Act. Linda Tripp’s case against DoD comes to mind as a recent, high-profile example of such a suit.
Hmmm.
I certainly hope Wilson IV is foolish enough to open a civil suit. Imagine him *under oath* and having to testify.
It would be delicious.
Rove and Libby must be positively salivating at the possibility of being sued by Wilson. Unless we are missing something here, Wilson wouldn’t dare.
“Lawyers contend that most of the obvious avenues, such as defamation, emotional distress or lost job opportunities, aren’t that strong.”
The weak emotional distress claim didn’t stop the Jones’ lawyers
I’m confused. What is the actual damage? She’s arguably benefited careerwise, because she could hit the circuits if she wanted to, and she wasn’t fired anyway. Emotional distress would require something shocking – a hospital showing you a dead body and telling you, mistakenly, it was your father, or, as Jones argued, seeing the little pimple on Clinton’s noodle. The Privacy Act is an interesting theory, though, since I don’t see any common law torts here.
Can I sue actus for emotional distress since he keeps coming on here and showing his ass?
I doubt Wilson wants to face his complete discrediting, which would be bound to occur in a civil trial. He’ll just milk this with more bogus claims like “What would be interesting to us would be to get the justice that a civil case offers.” The last thing this treasonous asshole wants is the “justice” he deserves. What a contemptible piece of offal.
Does this also mean that Wilson believes that there is going to be no indictments of White House officials. The going the civil suite case usually follows failure to get criminal indictments. I believe it is smoke on Wilson’s part. To cover his “embarrassment” at not getting Rove frog marched to jail. Mr. Wilson may have little to hide since all his lies are already out there, but I feel Mrs. Wilson and her cronies at CIA have a lot still to hide.
B Moe, does actus’s ass have a particularly noticeable pimple, like Clinton’s noodle? If so, then yes.
/that will be $200 for consultation
//what’s the statute of limitation on some of these things, anyway? Lot of torts run only two years.
The weak emotional distress claim didn’t stop the Jones’ lawyers.
Yeah, maybe it was weak–she maybe laughed at his little trouser worm.
But other features of the lawsuit broke down the Bubba stonewall and got him to settlement.
Thanks for the memories, actus.
Cordially…
Lew Clark, that’s Ms. Plame, not Mrs. Wilson.
You better watch it. You’re asking for hate-mail from the NOW.
-Steve
Never happen. Discovery would eat him alive.
SB: system
of the world
That’s exactly it. Just trying to extend his time in the spotlight, with all its profitability and all of the ego strokes from a fawningly biased MSM, for as long as possible.
Yeah, that civil trial would fall apart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Goldman
Just the opposite, it is the total lack of substance and form I find so offensive.
Kinda horrifyin’, actually.
And his scotch? Dewar’s…
Alot of shoes have been switched by the Dems and the Reps in the G.W. presidency. The concern with CIA secrets is one instance.
P.S. There is a lot of annoying speculation regarding Plame. I have no idea what will happen, but I can wait. Let me say one thing that may be feeding speculation is people’s lack of sophistication regarding GJ proceedings. Loosely explained: as a prosecutor, I am going to instruct the jury regarding the potentially applicable crimes and ask them to determine whether reliable evidence exists to support every element of those crimes. If so, please return an indictment on such crimes. If not, return a no true bill on them. The submission of a crime for the consideration of the jurors is not equivalent to a judgment that a crime has been committed – especially where a grand jury is investigative. Typical federal grand jury service is not investigative, it serves to meet the need that the government show there is support for each element of a crime before the government is permitted to proceed with a prosecution.
Hmmm.
So let me get this straight.
If a liberal outs a gay Republican in order to destroy said Republican, it’s no biggie.
If a Republican outs a deceptive schmoe who then later on writes a book, goes on the lecture circuit, ends up on a multitude of news and interview tv programs and has a Vanity Fair cover photo shoot, that’s something to be really concerned about?
Well. Crap. If it’ll get me a book published, on the gravy train lecture circuit, on a multitude of news and interview tv programs and get a Vanity Fair cover photo shoot, I hereby volunteer to be the next one mistreated in such a dastardly fashion by the White House.
sw: “need”; I need a Balvenie 15yr on the rocks.
Yeah, Joe. You go get that justice.
Get yourself a big ol’ can of Family Size Justice – now with Reputation Gravy!
What about Kiki?
Well let’s set the record straight. The Paula Jones suit against Clinton was for damages for the tort of sexual harrassment in the workplace (IANAL).
Despite the lengthy rumination in the WSJ, what is the tort which is alleged to occur regarding Wilson or Plame? Slander? Reporting the true facts of how Wilson got a CIA assignment. Defamation? The report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence states (strongly implies?), on three occasions, that Joe Wilson lied. Emotional distress? Vanity Fair photo spread, anyone? Lost job opportunities? He RETIRED from the State Dept. senior diplomatic corps with full pension benefits!
Unfortunately the WSJ article is more msm prattle regading the Plame Name Blame Game, but there’s no there, there.
Wake me up when Valerie does a photo spread for Playboy.
– Forbes – If you’ve seen her photo you must know you might as well get some sleep……
so, um, the administration will be sued because, during the act of smearing Mr. Wilson, interns were performing the tonsil tango on them below the desks? And they lied about it under oath? Man, life’s a bitch in Washinton.
“If a Republican outs a deceptive schmoe who then later on writes a book, goes on the lecture circuit, ends up on a multitude of news and interview tv programs and has a Vanity Fair cover photo shoot, that’s something to be really concerned about? “
I don’t think Joe Wilson was outed.