Miller-N.Y. Times Spat Goes Public

AP ^ | 22 October 2005 | Pete Yost

[YaYa123]

WASHINGTON (AP) - In the latest fallout from the CIA leak investigation, reporter Judith Miller and The New York Times are engaging in a very public fight about her seeming lack of candor in the case.

In a memo to the staff, Executive Editor Bill Keller says Miller "seems to have misled" the newspaper's Washington bureau chief, Phil Taubman, who said Miller told him in the fall of 2003 that she was not one of the recipients of a leak about the identity of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame.

Miller says Keller's criticism is "seriously inaccurate."

"I certainly never meant to mislead Phil, nor did I mislead him," Miller was quoted as saying in a Times story Saturday.

[ken5050]

You have to post Dowd's column today..."Woman of Mass Destruction." In it, she eviscerates Miller..

[okie01]

Responding to Keller's criticism, Miller told the newspaper, "I was unaware that there was a deliberate, concerted disinformation campaign to discredit Wilson and that if there had been, I did not think I was a target of it."

The reason Judy was unaware of "a deliberate, concerted disinformation campaign to discredit Wilson" is because there wasn't one -- outside the fevered minds of Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, Tim Russert et al.

If the Bush White House had wanted to discredit Joe Wilson, they could've blown him out of the water. Instead, when asked, they simply passed along a tidbit that explained how it wasn't Cheney who had sent Joe to Niger and suggested that reporters "consider the source". <> It was a low key effort to "set the facts straight", well short of the scorched earth policies of previous administrations.

Surprisingly, the flakey Miller actually seems to have had a clear understanding of what was going on.

[UglyinLA]

If Keller is that upset with Miller, then fire her. Otherwise, I don't buy it. It seems like a ploy, especially with his statement that "we fostered an impression that the Times put a higher premium on protecting its reporters than on coming clean with its readers."

If Keller wants to come clean with his readers, then tell the truth about Joe Wilson, tell the truth about Able Danger, tell the truth about the DeLay indictment.

I am convinced that both Miller and Keller and even Libby all knew how Valerie Plame was well before June of 2003. The "beltway" is a elitist group consisting of politicians and media. They party together and they gossip amongst themselves. In thier little circle, who and what you know makes you a somebody. To be invited, you have to bring something to the party.

Why were the Democrats so convinced that Bush was wrong on the existence of WMD's. Was there someone in the CIA feeding them infomation? as always, there's more the to story than meets the eye.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

"I was unaware that there was a deliberate, concerted disinformation campaign to discredit Wilson "

Which is baaaaad.
But, the deliberate, concerted disinformation campaign to discredit Rove and Libby by everyone in the MSM and especially those at NBC and MSNBC- is good.
I swear Chris Matthews must have a voodoodoo altar in his home where he sticks pins in Rove and Libby dolls and then spreads chicken bones on the floor to divine Fitzgerald's moves.

[Timeout]

I've followed this story pretty carefully, and I just cannot make sense of something in Keller's memo to the NYT staff last night. (Interesting that he released it at 7:00 on a Friday night!).

Here's the passage I find unusual:

...I didn't know that Judy had been one of the reporters on the receiving end of the anti-Wilson whisper campaign. I should have wondered why I was learning this from the special counsel, a year after the fact. (In November of 2003 Phil Taubman tried to ascertain whether any of our correspondents had been offered similar leaks. As we reported last Sunday, Judy seems to have misled Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement.) This alone should have been enough to make me probe deeper.

What does he mean, "...I was learning this from the special counsel..."? Did Keller testify? We've been told throughout that everything he learned, he learned from Miller.

And he says he learned whatever it was "a year after the fact". What fact? He seems to be referring to Miller's original interviews in June/July 03. But that would mean Keller is saying he learned it from the prosecutor a year later: July 04. But that can't be. Miller was already on her way to jail by then (July 6th).

That entire passage is just plain confusing (or intentionally obscure). I keep going back and re-reading it, but can't make any sense of it. Am I reading too much into it? Or is there some "there" there?

[cardinal4]

Her stories pointing to the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Valerie Plame worked at CIA's office on WMD. Coincidence? I think not..Wilson outed his wife with Valerie's (wife number three, I believe) approval and her higher ups. A side note-any truth to the rumor that one of Wilson's other wives was a French agent? I read that here, I think..

[6SJ7]

A side note-any truth to the rumor that one of Wilson's other wives was a French agent? I read that here, I think..

Well now, that would be interestin'. Wasn't it the French who planted the false "yellow cake" report to cover their involvement in actually helping Iraq to procure weapons-grade uranium?

[manwiththehands]

Stories ABOUT the NYT are probably more accurate than stories FROM the NYT.

[Sacajaweau]

I basically wrote the same thing. If the June 23rd meet included info on Plame and Wilson; What did she already know in order to ask the question? Cooper did the exact same thing with his phone call with Rove and Libby.

I also take her Valerie FLAME (with a box around it) to mean the goal is to "burn Valerie"....and her Victoria Wilson to be "Victoria's Secret". Obviously, Miller has her own little code.

[mrsmith]

"What does he mean, "...I was learning this from the special counsel..."? Did Keller testify? We've been told throughout that everything he learned, he learned from Miller."

It might be because Floyd Abrams was not Miller's attorney- he was the NYTimes' attorney. (Not sure how that works when a lawyer works on a case for another party).

[cardinal4]

I dont know if its true, I just heard it recently. Jaqueline, I think. You would think CIA vetting processes would include questioning someone of their own who is/was married to someone who was married to a foreign agent..

[Sacajaweau]

They're trying to get a FEDERAL law passed to protect these reporters in the future. Miller is "chief proponent/witness" for this law. It's going on now. This is all for Hillary. She can produce more liars, including Bubba, than anyone I know. Just look at Rathergate, Plamegate....

Wonder if/what Hillary has on Miller??

[gitmo]

I have been out of the loop a few days. Didn't she testify she doesn't remember who told her about this?

[cardinal4]

I have been out of the loop a few days. Didn't she testify she doesn't remember who told her about this?

She did, but the waters have been so muddied since, I dont what to think..

[Timeout]

From the Jan, 2004 Vanity Fair article:

...in Burundi, Wilson met his second wife, then the cultural counselor at the French Embassy there. They spent a year back in Washington on a congressional fellowship, during which time he worked for Al Gore, then a senator from Tennessee, and Tom Foley, then House majority whip. "It was," Wilson says, "happenstance" that he worked for two Democrats.

That would have been about 1986, because elsewhere the article says: " Records show that Wilson and his second wife, Jacqueline, to whom he was married for 12 years, were divorced in 1998".

Lot's more here.

[Sacajaweau]

How do you say you're protecting your sources if you don't know who your sources are? So you go to jail? Who the hell is this broad kidding?

[cardinal4]

...in Burundi, Wilson met his second wife, then the cultural counselor at the French Embassy there.

I knew I saw it somewhere. And if their "cultural counselor" is anything like our "commercial attache" or the Soviet's "Third Secretary" ot "trade representative", than she must be a spy!

[gitmo]

She did, but the waters have been so muddied since, I dont what to think..

I guess she got caught in a lie and is now trying to divert the focus. Who knows with these types?

[p23185]

Yost writes: "Her stories pointing to the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq helped clear a path for the administration's arguments in favor of going to war. No weapons of mass destruction have been found, and Keller said he regretted waiting a year before confronting problems with Miller's reporting."

Man I am so tired of hearing about "No WMD found, Bush lied and thousands died". How about invading Syria and looking for Saddam's WMDs?

[okie01]

I should have wondered why I was learning this from the special counsel, a year after the fact.

I can understand your confusion over this sentence. I indulged in some head scratching, as well.

My impression is that the reference to the special prosecutor is third person -- it was only when the SP asked Judy the question that Keller himself learned his reporter was actually involved.

Seems to me the awkwardness of the expression evolves from Keller now embarking on a spin mission of his own -- asserting that he had "no idea" Miller knew "anything about anything". As if her being subpoenaed in the first place was all a big mistake. In other words, this whole farce has been "Judy's fault...not mine."

But, if that's the case, why was the Times so enthusiastic about one of their own going to prison "to protect a source." It is as if Keller is asking us to believe that he believed Miller wasn't involved and had no source...at all.

The year probably dates from Miller's discussion with Taubman, when she evidently contended that she had not been a conduit for a misinformation campaign.

Of course, since that time, Judy has evidently forgotten everything she ever knew about Flame...and might've told Keller at the time...if he'd only asked...

At any rate, Keller is trying to re-configure the story, so that it doesn't redound negatively on the Times (or him), shedding any all blame into Miller's lap.

My head hurts...