[Alberta's Child]

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.

Not at all. If she were called to testify before the grand jury and invoked the Fifth Amendment on the stand, this would be a clear indication that she was, in fact, the "source" in question.

This would be a colossal embarrassment to herself, would immediately end her career as a "journalist," and would end up causing the whole Rove angle of this story to unravel. I speculated yesterday that she may very well have figured that she'd get far more career mileage and positive media exposure by going to jail to cover for a non-existent source than by getting on the stand and invoking her Fifth Amendment rights.

[oceanview]

I understand that, but she would not be in jail now, and that would leave the burden on the prosecutor to be able produce other evidence to indict her. the media would just bury the "she took the 5th, it must be her" story (it would have to come from a grand jury leak) as they do with all the rest - they would just demonize Fitzergerald as a "rogue" prosecutor, etc. we all know the drill.

[normy]

This would be a colossal embarrassment to herself, would immediately end her career as a "journalist," and would end up causing the whole Rove angle of this story to unravel. I speculated yesterday that she may very well have figured that she'd get far more career mileage and positive media exposure by going to jail to cover for a non-existent source than by getting on the stand and invoking her Fifth Amendment rights.

I am sure you are correct. The solution is to put her in the county jail and not some soft suburban jail where solitude is her only burden. Put her in the same jail other criminals in her county go to.