I have a hard time believing Waas' article, because his main premise is Libby/Tate discouraged Miller from testifying and Libby, supposedly, was not clear on his initial waiver. However, on CNN Reliable Sources, Miller's prior attorney, Abrams, said to the interviewer, Kurtz:
"KURTZ: I talked to people at the "New York Times" who are angry and confused about this. They say, understanding -- look, many journalists have used confidential sources. Most of us have not gone to jail. They say you could have had something approaching the same deal before she went to jail. You and Judy Miller took an absolutist position -- we cannot possibly betray the source -- by going to jail and what happens at the end? She takes the waiver and testifies before the grand jury.
ABRAMS: We couldn't have had the same deal. Indeed, in one respect I tried to get a deal a year ago. I spoke to Mr. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor, and he did not agree at that time to something that he later did agree to, which was to limit the scope of the questions he would ask, so as to assure that the only source he would effectively be asking about was Mr. Libby. She has other sources and was very concerned about the possibility of having to reveal those sources, or going back to jail because of them."
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011865.php
So Abrams said it was the "other sources" issue. Why does Waas leave out key facts?
Because those "key facts" don't support his agenda -- which is to find Rove and/or Libby guilty of something!
It strikes me that there is another piece of evidence that this whole affair has been manufactured, then inflated beyond reason.
The universal MSM premise is that the Bush administration was actively seeking to destroy Wilson (e.g., "...an intensive period in which senior White House officials were scrambling to discredit Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson..."). Every news story contains a statement like this as "necessary background".
However, thanks to Cooper's testimony, we then hear the actual reports of this alleged attempt "to destroy Wilson". And what does it amount to?
Cooper calls Rove.
Cooper asks about welfare reform.
Cooper broaches the Wilson column and asks for a response.
Rove responds off-handedly, "I hear his wife, who works at the agency, sent him. I wouldn't get too far out there."
That's it. Whatever it is, it ain't an intense media campaign to discredit Joe Wilson.
In other words, just about everything the MSM has reported about this affair has been bent into an unrecognizable form by their pet bias.
You know why.