Sues panel

Ex-staffer sues Gowdy and Benghazi panel

By Rachael Bade

The ex-GOP House Benghazi Committee investigator who accused the panel of conducting a partisan witch hunt against Hillary Clinton filed suit Monday against the committee and Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) for wrongful termination and defamation.

Air Force Reserve Maj. Brad Podliska in his court filing alleged he was fired from his post in June because he took leave for active duty. He also says he was singled out because he refused to focus his investigative work on Clinton and the State Department.

The Benghazi Committee and Gowdy have denied both accusations, arguing that the panel, which employs several former military officers and law enforcement agents, would never punish a military member for his service. And during the back-and-forth that followed Podliska’s allegations, first made public in late September, the committee also rejected the notion that they’re out to get Clinton, arguing that Podliska himself had asked interns to take up partisan projects after being warned against it.

The panel says he was fired for misbehavior and mishandling classified information, both of which Podliska denies.

Podliska announced his intent to file suit at the end of September, but in a new twist, Podliska is also alleging that Gowdy illegally defamed him during the public skirmish that erupted after Podliska first went on national TV to accuse the panel of wrongdoing.

In his suit, Podliska alleges that Gowdy’s accusation that he mishandled sensitive material has damaged his reputation. And he says that the information he received was from “publicly available sources from the Internet."

“Chairman Gowdy, personally and through his agents, tied these defamatory statements to Podliska’s firing to damage Podliska’s reputation and his ability to seek or secure employment in his chosen field, depriving Podliska of his rights under the Constitution,” the filing says.

The filing says three additional staffers were also sat down by a security staffer about having potentially mishandled classified information. But those staffers were never punished, according to the filing.

“Ultimately, Plaintiff was the only one of the four accused of the trumped-up security violation to be reprimanded by the Majority Staff or subjected to any adverse employment action,” the filing reads, arguing that the security staffer later admitted the information was not, in fact, classified.

Podliska isn’t asking for money for the alleged defamation piece of the lawsuit. Instead, he wants an injunction barring the panel from repeating the accusations and requiring Gowdy to say publicly that his allegations against Podliska were false.

This particular angle of the legal battle hits on a gray area in the law. While lawmakers have immunity for what they say during official duties, their statements to the media may or may not also be protected.

The filing alleges tensions between Podliska and other staff members, including committee staff director Phil Kiko, who Podliska says started treating him differently after his March 2015 active duty leave.

It also cites increased criticism of his work by Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman, the former Army Judge Advocate General. Chipman, Podliska said, called his work centered on the administration’s talking points after the attack, “sh--.” Podliska had been doing research for Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) about whether or not the attack was terrorism or an out-of-control protest sparked by a controversial video.

“I know you have your post-attack piece. But, only right wing nut jobs care about that,” the filing quotes Kiko as saying.

The filing also accuses Chipman of questioning whether Podliska needed to serve in Germany and recounts the stories about "Wine Wednesday" drinking parties and a gun buying club that have become major talking points for Democrats who call the panel a waste of taxpayer money.