Friday, July 21, 2006
Plame Lawsuit Motivation Explained
When I first slogged through the Plame/Wilson complaint against three famous people and 10 John Does, I thought that they had alleged just enough to get past a motion to dismiss on the pleadings and perhaps some of the claims would survive a Motion for Summary Judgment even under the rigorous standards of federal court (where the Judge can take out weak cases not just hopeless ones). Then smarter lawyers than I said that it will run afoul of governmental immunity.
If that is true, then why would the Plame/Wilson plaintiffs bring a loser of a suit? Even the most narcissist of narcissists doesn't want to be remembered as a loser.
Riding to the rescue is Byron York over at The Hill. He thinks that it's an effort to revive interest in Valerie Plame's book (working title: Fair Game). Of all the reasons to bring a lawsuit I have heard, and I've heard a lot, that may be the worst ever.
If that is true, then why would the Plame/Wilson plaintiffs bring a loser of a suit? Even the most narcissist of narcissists doesn't want to be remembered as a loser.
Riding to the rescue is Byron York over at The Hill. He thinks that it's an effort to revive interest in Valerie Plame's book (working title: Fair Game). Of all the reasons to bring a lawsuit I have heard, and I've heard a lot, that may be the worst ever.
Comments:
<< Home
Maybe V.P. wants to expose some unseemly motivation at the white house. Certainly embarrassment of the other side brings a sense of satisfaction.
Sometimes letting the public know the motivations of the opponent is enough to gain the upper hand.
Sometimes letting the public know the motivations of the opponent is enough to gain the upper hand.
But there was no unseemly motivation at the white house, unless you believe Novak is not being fully truthful. The motivation was to counter lies by Wilson and explaining why this non-spy was doing spy work poorly. Thanks for the comment.
Post a Comment
<< Home