NY Times Statement on Judith Miller

The Forward ^ | Friday, Kuly 15, 2005 | Catherine Mathis

[Pete]

"Ms. Miller learned about Valerie Plame from a confidential source or sources whose identity she continues to protect to this day.

I think it's either Wilson and Plame, themselves, or another reporter to whom Wilson and Plame had blabbed.

I think W and P went around Washington shopping their story to the MSM. Novak got wind of it and wrote a story. Other members of the MSM who weren't connected automatically assumed that Novak's piece had been planted by the WH and they smelled blood.

The long knives came out and before they could be drawn back, it was too late.

Meanwhile, W and Rove are sitting in the Oval Office laughing their heads off.

[BlessedByLiberty]

Good point. I did not think of the 5th Amendment protection.

Who is the NYTimes protecting? We should list requirements to qualify for their protection:

1. Must be liberal/socialist
2. Must be anti-AMERICAN
3. Must be qualified propagandist/liar
4. Must be tied to the MSM umbilical cord
5. Must have access to classified information
6. Must have access to personnel/personal files (FBI, etc.)
7. Must be dedicated to the destruction of the Bush Administration
8. Must...

[alice_in_bubbaland]

"I don't understand why she is willing to going to jail over this."

She will become a martyr to the lib press.

[martin_fierro]

I don't see how she can be protecting herself - because then she would be entitled to 5th amendment protection.

And the minute she invokes her 5th Amendment protection -- while she can't be directly prosecuted for it -- she effectively says, "Yes, I was my own source, but don't expect me to say so."

[Steven W.]

Ms. Miller learned about Valerie Plame from a confidential source or sources whose identity she continues to protect to this day.

DUH!

And that source is clearly Plame and / or Wilson themselves!

[Vermont Lt]

She is suffering? Where is she Abu-Garib? Gitmo? Did they make her wear panties on her head? My god, the humanity.

[AlGone2001]

This one is even better than Buckhead having Dan Rather fired.

I think this is going to get real bad for the media.

In the end, I think she is going to get caught committing fraud to lay falsely lay the blame on Rove.

I can't wait.

Maybe she ought to go on a hunger strike.

[An American In Dairyland]

I don't see how she can be protecting herself - because then she would be entitled to 5th amendment protection. she cannot be forced to out herself. it must be someone else.

If Miller takes the 5th she is openly stating she is her own source (IOW she made it up ala Jason Blair). Being a liberal and a "journalist" she wouldn't tell that truth about herself. What's more, the Times wouldn't want her to. They don't need another Jason Blair type of scandal. Since liberals all lie like dirty old rugs she could well be "protecting" herself and her employer with just one more tired liberal lie. If she never coughs up a source we can figure she made it up herself and there was no anonymous source.

[Steven W.]

she can't reveal Plame or Wilson as a source because then the whole media + DemoncRAT driven conspiracy is clear & proven for all as obvious now can be seen!

[Phsstpok]

I don't see how she can be protecting herself - because then she would be entitled to 5th amendment protection. she cannot be forced to out herself. it must be someone else.

She might be entitled to the protection, but invoking the 5th as a defense against revealing her source would pretty much lead everyone, even Dingy Harry Reid, to the conclusion that she was the source.

It's a catch 22 of the best kind.

Hoist by her own petard.

And I consider that an apt phrase in this case, as well:

A petard was a medieval term for a small bomb used to blow up gates and walls when breaching fortifications. Etymology: Middle French, from peter to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from Latin peditum, from neuter of peditus, past participle of pedere to break wind; akin to Greek bdein to break wind. [Merriam-Webster]

[Pete]

She is suffering? Where is she Abu-Garib? Gitmo? Did they make her wear panties on her head? My god, the humanity.

No, actually, her Chicken L'Orange was slightly undercooked. And, no, nobody should be forced to suffer like that.

[Toidylop]

You gotta laugh of these losers :). They bring it on themselves and live to regret/lie again...

[andyk]

Given that she is suffering in jail, it is also mean-spirited.

Shame on me! Bad Andy!

[Hatteras]

Maybe the Times could question why Mr. Wilson hasn't released all journalists from any confidentiality agreements...

[Lee'sGhost]

"I don't see how she can be protecting herself - because then she would be entitled to 5th amendment protection."

Wait a minute. If she invoked the 5th that would be saying "I am protecting myself." Not a good thing to do if you don't want people to know you made up the "source" to start with, or you are protecting some within your newspaper.

Don't know if that's what's going on, but you can't discount the idea of self protection.

[ken5050]

and the Times knows this to be true.... how?

[andyk]

Would like to hear more details, please. :>)

Now that's mean-spirited - LOL

[tet68]

She's suffering? Would like to hear more details, please. :>)

Oh no, you don't mean.......panties on her head?
As a journalist, I'm sure she's soaking up the jail house
realism for a later column, maybe she'll write about her
cellmate "Bull".

[Lee'sGhost]

Crud. You beat me to it, both with the self incrimination and the petard.

[Egon]

Given that she is suffering in jail...

Uh oh. Another prison abuse scandal.