"In sum, based on an exhaustive investigation, the specialcounsel has established the need for Miller’s and Cooper’stestimony. Thus, considering the gravity of the suspected crimeand the low value of the leaked information, no privilege barsthe subpoenas."
Since you seem to have a reading comprehension, let me explain this very complicated passage for you.
The judge is saying that the 1982 IIPA is a law. If it was broken, it's a serious felony. That was why he thought it was important for Mr. Fitzgerald to get testimony from Ms. Miller.
Prosecutors often have to prove that a serious law--such as a felony--is in play to compel reporters to give up their so-called "journalistic priviledge" of protecting their sources.
So, on the basis of a possible felony, the judge agreed to throw Ms. Miller in jail for not testifying.
After 85 days, Ms. Miller decided she should testify and she did. She testified that Libby did NOT give her Plame's name, and thus no felony has occured WRT her.
Got it? LOL
You have one of those maniac tendencies to always laugh. There are pills for that - see a doc. Because you shouldn't be laughing when you're displaying ignorance. Neither you nor I know what's in those redacted passages. For you to say that you can mind-read judge Tatel and visualize the redacted pages - that's not funny, that suggests you might need help.
We'll see soon enough what it's all about - if there are indictments. If there aren't, we may never know, since Fitzpatrick might be prohibited from issuing a report.
Either way, consider getting help, bucko.
If this is the case why did Miller spend 85 days in jail? What was she protecting her source from?
Are you saying that Miller is a complete idiot especially when Libby not once, but twice gave her a release before she went to jail?
What's your theory on why Miller went to jail? Do you actually buy her explanation?