I have noted that in addition to wanting information from her about a "specified government official" and what she was told about Plame between July 6 and July 13, the grand jury also wanted to know what she was told about "Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium".
Well, this strikes me as broader than the simple issue of looking into the leaking of a covert agent's name (which I long ago rejected as the focus of this grand jury).
Well, I just re-read the first part and after the court re-hashes Matt Cooper's subpoena from a last summer (they recite how he refused, was held in contempt and finally did give testimony about a "specific source" who we all know was Scooter Libby and Cooper admitted Libby had NOT discussed Plame with him) the court then describes the next subpoena. Again, the grand jury appears to be looking farther afield than a simple investigation of whether Plame was covert and if so who leaked her name. This subpoena is for everything related to what Cooper was told about Wilson, his trip to Niger in 2002, in addition to anything to do with his wife.
Now I ask, is it me? Why would the grand jury be looking at the trip itself and what stories were being told about Iraq and uranium if they aren't conducting a different investigation than conventional wisdom holds?
Well, reading judicial writings makes my head spin, but I scrolled down and toward the end one of the judges is going on about Plame's covert status and "the leak" about it.
May 2003 meeting??
Fishing??
Rockefeller memo??
Me too.
No; it is not you -- it is grander than simply looking at item "a".
I reviewed some of Judith Miller's (authored) books as soon as I'd read about the subpoenas; as an authoress she comes across as a nice woman. I know Mr. Safire went ballistic. It was in a way unusual for Safire.
OTOH, I think of the Slaughter/Conyer petition in re Jeff Gannon; it just looks so silly.
Cyncooper? If you read anymore on this, could you ping me, pls? I'll remember to do likewise.