Miller's statements are nonsense - don't try to make sense of them. She's claiming to have the principle of not divulging confidential sources (no matter what), but her principle can withstand 85 days in jail, and no more, before it is compromised.
And now she is saying she hasn't compromised her principle, when in fact she has.
The law has principles too, one of which aims to get to the bottom of allegations of criminal conduct. And the law has the tool of contempt, useful at times to compel testimony. Some witnesses do hold the principle of confidentiality in higher regard than prosecuting the law. Judith Miller is not such a person.
if indeed she only agrees to talk about Libby - and her "other sources" are protected, then she won. she walks out of jail, she avoids the criminal indictment, she continues to protect the real story here (which is not the Plame name game nonsense). explain to me where I am wrong.