Some additional details:
Judge Upholds Media Subpoenas in CIA Leak Case
Reuters:
The subpoenas, issued by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, require that Russert and Cooper appear before a federal grand jury to testify about conversations with an unidentified government official who was a confidential source.
~snip~
In an order on Monday, Hogan said Cooper and Time at a hearing on Friday refused to comply with the subpoena despite his ruling and he held them in civil contempt of court. The ruling was dated July 20, but released on Monday.
The reporter was ordered "confined at a suitable place" and Time was fined $1,000 a day until they complied. The judge did not specify where Cooper would be confined.
Hogan stayed Time's fine and granted Cooper bail while they appeal the contempt finding to the U.S. appeals court. He said the appeals presented "substantial legal questions."
~snip~
"The information requested from Mr. Cooper and Mr. Russert is very limited, all available alternative means of obtaining the information have been exhausted, the testimony sought is necessary for the completion of the investigation and the testimony sought is expected to constitute direct evidence of innocence or guilt," Hogan wrote.
~snip~
More from another source:
Reporters Ordered to Testify Over CIA Leak
AP via KansasCity.com
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago wants Russert and Cooper to testify "regarding alleged conversations they had with a specified executive branch official," wrote U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan of Chicago. The official he referred to was not further identified in court papers.
~snip~
Well, that identification of "a specified executive branch official" along with the notation that this testimony is expected to be "direct evidence of innocence or guilt" is extremely intriguing.
When did Richard Clarke leave the administration?
Here's my take .. it's Randi Beers with the help of Joe Wilson