Posted on 10/21/2005 4:24:14 PM PDT by blogblogginaway
WASHINGTON Oct 21, 2005 — The New York Times' Judith Miller belatedly gave prosecutors her notes of a key meeting in the CIA leak probe only after being shown White House records of it, and her boss declared Friday she appeared to have misled the newspaper about her role.
In a dramatic e-mail, Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote Times' employees he wished he'd more carefully interviewed Miller and had "missed what should have been significant alarm bells" that she had been the recipient of leaked information about the CIA officer at the heart of the case.
"Judy seems to have misled (Times Washington bureau chief) Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement," Keller wrote in what he described as a lessons-learned e-mail. "This alone should have been enough to make me probe deeper."
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
"In a dramatic e-mail, Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote Times' employees he wished he'd more carefully interviewed Miller and had "missed what should have been significant alarm bells" that she had been the recipient of leaked information about the CIA officer at the heart of the case."
Well sure, because we all know that the NY Times NEVER would have let her accept classified info /sarcasm
That would require practicing what we used to call "journalism".
Can you say, "CYA"?
"if I had known the details of Judy's entanglement" with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby."
Talking to a member of the Administration is an "entanglement"? He's got a lot of entangled people working for him.
The NYT may have a dim glimmer of awareness that those "forthcoming indictments" may not have Rove and Libby's names on them. The MSM has set itself up for a huge fall on this whole issue, and I sincerely hope the only thing that stops their fall is the noose around their collective neck.
Another translation: We're worried that *Miller conspired with the Wilsons to entrap the WH. Worried that Fitzgerald might hand indictments to liberals, we are doing Ms. Miller's "mea culpa" on her behalf.
*and a few other MSM reporters, like Russert, Cooper and Matthews
How very Rovian of him!
One theory is that it may have been a set up (after Porter Goss went to the CIA) to find out who was leaking and to whom.
The more outrageous the MSM headline, the more skeptical I become about the GJ leaking.
The only leaks I think we can believe are legitimate are the ones in Chris Matthews Depends.
The NYT is an expert at misleading the public. They can dish it out, but they can't take it.
One does wonder why the Times is distancing itself from Miller right now.
Excuse me? Who cares if she "misled" the stinking former "paper of record" - - it sounds to me like she obstrcted justice by misleading the grand jury and the prosecutor.
The young ones who still have ideological ideas can't understand all the fuss that is coming to nothing.
That's why Keller is saying "it's all Miller's fault."
(( ping ))
Seen this yet? It just keeps getting funnier and funnier.
A mere lapse of memory.
"after being shown White House records of it"
So, the folks at the White House would appear to be giving Fitz some help, now wouldn't they?
indeed, that is the exact point to focus on here. she is under no legal obligation to her employers.
what is amazing is - if Rove and Libby are indicted, yet she is not - then we will really know that Fitzgerald has been compromised and simply issued politically motivated indictments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.