More thoughts on the grand jury and Judith Miller

By

In July, I suggested that it was more likely than not that Libby and Rove did, as they assert, learn of Plame from reporters, and that Judith Miller was one of those likely sources . Today, the Washington Post indicates as much:

New York Times reporter Judith Miller has discovered notes of a conversation she had with Vice President Cheney's chief of staff in June 2003 and has turned them over to the prosecutor investigating whether administration officials illegally leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative to the media, according to two sources familiar with case.
Miller, 57, also has agreed to special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's request that she meet with him Tuesday to answer additional questions as part of his probe, the sources said.

Libby, urged her in a letter and phone call to answer Fitzgerald's questions about conversations they had on July 8 and July 12 or 13, 2003.

It is unclear why Fitzgerald wants to speak with Miller again. Miller turned over some redacted notes to the prosecutor last week, and her attorneys asked her to reexamine others, according to a source close to Miller. She found some that involve discussions she had with Libby about the CIA operative's husband, Bush administration critic Joseph C. Wilson IV, the source said

While the reporter  tries to spin this as somehow an improper activity——the first steps in a concerted campaign to tar Wilson——the very idea is preposterous. It was obvious at that time that someone was talking to the NYT's Kristoff (someone described I believe as "a former envoy"). What law would bar normal inquiry? Has the entire press corps some special right to discrediting information about a key source that the Administration is not entitled to know of?

And again, I remind you, that reporters like Miller and Pincus and the NYT's Kristof have surely known all along that the Wilson Plame connection was well—known, as they let the story spin from the pages of their own newspapers that Rove and Libby engaged in improper conduct in learning of the connection and discussing it.

Tom Maguire shares my view that the spin on this by the media is risible.
When this story is fully and honestly told, the press behavior in this matter will make their coverage of Iraq and Katrina look stellar in contrast.

Clarice Feldman   10 08 05

In July, I suggested that it was more likely than not that Libby and Rove did, as they assert, learn of Plame from reporters, and that Judith Miller was one of those likely sources . Today, the Washington Post indicates as much:

New York Times reporter Judith Miller has discovered notes of a conversation she had with Vice President Cheney's chief of staff in June 2003 and has turned them over to the prosecutor investigating whether administration officials illegally leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative to the media, according to two sources familiar with case.
Miller, 57, also has agreed to special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's request that she meet with him Tuesday to answer additional questions as part of his probe, the sources said.

Libby, urged her in a letter and phone call to answer Fitzgerald's questions about conversations they had on July 8 and July 12 or 13, 2003.

It is unclear why Fitzgerald wants to speak with Miller again. Miller turned over some redacted notes to the prosecutor last week, and her attorneys asked her to reexamine others, according to a source close to Miller. She found some that involve discussions she had with Libby about the CIA operative's husband, Bush administration critic Joseph C. Wilson IV, the source said

While the reporter  tries to spin this as somehow an improper activity——the first steps in a concerted campaign to tar Wilson——the very idea is preposterous. It was obvious at that time that someone was talking to the NYT's Kristoff (someone described I believe as "a former envoy"). What law would bar normal inquiry? Has the entire press corps some special right to discrediting information about a key source that the Administration is not entitled to know of?

And again, I remind you, that reporters like Miller and Pincus and the NYT's Kristof have surely known all along that the Wilson Plame connection was well—known, as they let the story spin from the pages of their own newspapers that Rove and Libby engaged in improper conduct in learning of the connection and discussing it.

Tom Maguire shares my view that the spin on this by the media is risible.
When this story is fully and honestly told, the press behavior in this matter will make their coverage of Iraq and Katrina look stellar in contrast.

Clarice Feldman   10 08 05