I agree with you, I can't really put it all together any more than I could put Miller's article all together. He says he didn't know Miller was at the receiving end of a whisper campaign...so he thinks she went to jail only over the issue of the other sources that Fitzgerald gave her a pass on? And are these other sources related to the Islamic charity that was tipped off or some other trouble the NYTs finds itself in?
Initially I thought that the NYTs was trying to regain the credibility they believe they lost in their WMD reporting. But I'm not so sure it's just that. If we were watching a court case, this would be the moment when the defense team declares their witness hostile.
That's about a year after the initial meetings between Miller and Libby, so I guess that subpoena is how Keller "learned from the special counsel".
But, now it seems to me that Keller is more on the hook than ever. He said: "I wish that when I learned Judy Miller had been subpoenaed as a witness in the leak investigation, I had sat her down for a thorough debriefing, and followed up with some reporting of my own...If I had known the details of Judy's engagement with Libby, I'd have been more careful in how the paper articulated its defense."
OK, if that's his explanation NOW, just what was he supposedly defending when he stood behind Miller going to jail? He didn't ask who her source was but he stood behind the "principle" of protecting her source. It appears Keller is now defining the principle as: We'll protect our sources---depending on who it is.