Pressing news

By

On April 18, the media and reporters who were subpoenaed by Lewis Libby to provide documents in connection with the special counsel's case against him must produce those documents or file motions to quash or modify those subpoenas. 

While there had not earlier been a report that the Washington Post had received one, as I have said, yesterday the paper published that it was responding to such  a subpoena by turning over to Libby Bob Woodward's notes of a June 17, 2003 conversation he'd had with Libby. This was a singular case of transparency in the media.

The Post's behavior must be contrasted with the treatment of the New York Times which has received subpoenas requesting reporters' notes respecting interviews with eight persons. 

Time Inc. lawyer Robin Bierstedt confirmed that the magazine and reporter Matt Cooper were each subpoenaed by Libby's attorneys. The Times confirmed subpoenas to the newspaper and former reporter Judy Miller. NBC confirmed the subpoena to Russert.

The subpoena to Miller seeks her notes and other materials, including documents concerning Plame prepared by Miller and Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof.

Kristof wrote the first account of the criticism that Plame's husband was leveling at the Bush administration. Referring to Plame's husband, though not by name, a May 6, 2003, Times column by Kristof raised the possibility the Bush administration might have disregarded prewar intelligence suggesting Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. [snip]

The subpoena to the Times also calls for:

_Documents of contacts between any Times employee and any of eight people, including then—CIA Director George Tenet and then—White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, regarding Joe Wilson.

_Documents concerning a recent Vanity Fair article in which Miller said she talked to many people in the government about Plame.

_Drafts of a personal account by Miller, published in the Times, about her grand jury testimony.

_Documents regarding Miller's interactions with a Times editor in which Miller may have been told to pursue a story about Joe Wilson and a trip he made to Niger on behalf of the CIA. '

It is obvious to me that the New York Times was the source of the information about the subpoenas directed to it, and yet they saw fit to reveal the names of only two persons—George Tenet and Ari Fleischer—where documentation was being sought. Who are the other mysteriously undisclosed contacts they are not revealing? Why has the paper been so selective about what is being sought? And why has the rest of the press which has consistently demanded full accounting of the White House for every jot and tittle of their statements been so incurious about the Times very selective disclosure?
 
Clarice Feldman   4 15 06

On April 18, the media and reporters who were subpoenaed by Lewis Libby to provide documents in connection with the special counsel's case against him must produce those documents or file motions to quash or modify those subpoenas. 

While there had not earlier been a report that the Washington Post had received one, as I have said, yesterday the paper published that it was responding to such  a subpoena by turning over to Libby Bob Woodward's notes of a June 17, 2003 conversation he'd had with Libby. This was a singular case of transparency in the media.

The Post's behavior must be contrasted with the treatment of the New York Times which has received subpoenas requesting reporters' notes respecting interviews with eight persons. 

Time Inc. lawyer Robin Bierstedt confirmed that the magazine and reporter Matt Cooper were each subpoenaed by Libby's attorneys. The Times confirmed subpoenas to the newspaper and former reporter Judy Miller. NBC confirmed the subpoena to Russert.

The subpoena to Miller seeks her notes and other materials, including documents concerning Plame prepared by Miller and Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof.

Kristof wrote the first account of the criticism that Plame's husband was leveling at the Bush administration. Referring to Plame's husband, though not by name, a May 6, 2003, Times column by Kristof raised the possibility the Bush administration might have disregarded prewar intelligence suggesting Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. [snip]

The subpoena to the Times also calls for:

_Documents of contacts between any Times employee and any of eight people, including then—CIA Director George Tenet and then—White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, regarding Joe Wilson.

_Documents concerning a recent Vanity Fair article in which Miller said she talked to many people in the government about Plame.

_Drafts of a personal account by Miller, published in the Times, about her grand jury testimony.

_Documents regarding Miller's interactions with a Times editor in which Miller may have been told to pursue a story about Joe Wilson and a trip he made to Niger on behalf of the CIA. '

It is obvious to me that the New York Times was the source of the information about the subpoenas directed to it, and yet they saw fit to reveal the names of only two persons—George Tenet and Ari Fleischer—where documentation was being sought. Who are the other mysteriously undisclosed contacts they are not revealing? Why has the paper been so selective about what is being sought? And why has the rest of the press which has consistently demanded full accounting of the White House for every jot and tittle of their statements been so incurious about the Times very selective disclosure?
 
Clarice Feldman   4 15 06