Federal Probe Poses Dilemma for Journalists

Wall Street Journal ^ | October 7, 2004 | JAMES BANDLER

[OESY]

...Fitzgerald has subpoenaed at least five prominent reporters in his investigation of the leaked identity...[of] Plame. New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who did reporting on the story, but never wrote about it, is resisting. Ms. Miller has refused to testify even though one of her sources, I. Lewis Libby... has given her permission to talk....

The case was referred to Mr. Fitzgerald, the U.S. Attorney in Chicago and a career prosecutor with a strong reputation for nonpartisan professionalism. In January, Mr. Fitzgerald asked administration officials to sign waivers of their rights to have confidential conversations. After seeking records of White House contacts with reporters, Mr. Fitzgerald began trying to question reporters, issuing subpoenas to... Russert and... Cooper.

Both news organizations unsuccessfully fought to have the subpoenas quashed. Mr. Russert agreed to be questioned by prosecutors in August.... Russert testified only about what he said in a conversation with Mr. Libby.

Ms. Miller of the Times has refused to accept at face value Mr. Libby's waiver and his lawyer's assurance that any such willingness to talk is not being coerced.

One concern of Ms. Miller, says Mr. Abrams, is the open-ended nature of the inquest. Her agreeing to speak about one source could lead to questions about others.And Ms. Miller worries about principle: "She thinks that journalists testifying about interviews with sources will adversely impact their ability to have confidential sources in the future," says Mr. Abrams....

She helped spearhead the Times's weapons-of-mass-destruction coverage in the months leading up to and following the Iraq war. In an extraordinary article from the editors that did not name Ms. Miller but that cited several of her articles as unfortunate examples, the Times issued a lengthy mea culpa admitting that some of its coverage "was not as rigorous as it should have been."...