Posted on 10/23/2005 6:10:09 PM PDT by blam
BAM!
Boy...there's a face only a drunkard could love.
BTTT
Thought he did this before she went to jail. Story doesn't mention that now she doesn't recall who her source was.
Boy...there's a face only a drunkard could love.
Exactly what I was thinking....scary! Well, it is Halloween almost.
Although she never wrote a story about Mrs Plame, Ms Miller was asked to testify on her links to the White House. She refused and was imprisoned. Eventually, her key source, Mr Libby, signed a waiver permitting her to speak.
Libby gave her permission to divulge his testimony at least a year ago. Also she did not divulge her "key" source. She did not say where she got the name Valerie "Flame", other than it was not Libby.
No....Maureen's mad at her, the love is gone.
She did not say where she got the name Valerie "Flame",
That's what she wrote.
However, she could have said more to the Grand Jury then we know now.
She could have been forced to tell more and told not to repeat it.
That is true.
She can't talk about grand jury testimony, but I don't think that Fitzgerald could force her to not disclose who gave her the name.
How appropriate this thread be posted by you blam. I have the feeling the entire NY Times may soon become history!
The more these jounalistic whackos trash Miller, the more sympathetic she becomes. They just don't get it.
Problems at the National Inquirer?
Looks like a "mug shot" taken AFTER the mugging. Bwahahahahahaha!
I love it when Rats eat they're own.
"She could have been forced to tell more and told not to repeat it."
A grand jury witness can discuss their own testimony. They are not sworn to secrecy.
That almost cost a keyboard. The people over at teh Telegraph must be enjoying this.
There are Millier like misleading statements though (to use their repeated keyword).
Libby signed that waiver before she went to jail. She still says she doesn't recall her source.
I have speculated on this in another link, but Dowd's comment about Miller's stint in jail is very much insych with my theory. I have come to believe that Judith Miller's "protected source" was Judith Miller. There is no smoking gun to prove this, but it holds together logically.
Miller not only did not suffer any great loss from her time in jail, she avoided questions she has since proven reluctant to answer, and emerged in a state of near beatification as a hero for reporters rights. It seems likely her stunt will result in passage of a reporters' shield law by Congress, no small accomplishment.
I come to this theory after her testimony to the grand jury. This very savvy Pulitzer winner was suddenly befuddled and could not recall to whom her own notes referred. Her answers have been evasive, almost self-contradictory.
She and Plame, both top level specialists in a very limited universe of such people could hardly have been unaware of one anothers' existence and position. It had been several years since Plame had been an undercover anything. Plame was an analyst working a desk in Langley, and was taking no pains to conceal that. She had sometimes invited guests, personal friends outside the agency, to lunch in the CIA cafeteria, not quite the thing James Bond does while trying to maintain his "secret" identity.
Remember that Novak's column, the origin of this little storm, was written to suggest possible nepotistic influence used by Plame to get her husband Joe Wilson retained to investigate this possible connection from yellow cake ore, Niger, and Iraq.
I strongly suspect that Miller wrote of Plame from her own knowledge of Plame's position and perhaps only after the storm arose realized she might herself be accused of "outing" a CIA "undercover" agent. By inventing another source, and going to jail to protect same, Miller earned a bulletproof halo, and cast suspicion on her unknown, and apparantly unremembered "high level White House source". I further believe that the reaction of her superiors at the NYT suggest they have come to the same belief I hold.
To be sure, there is some major "butt-covering" coming out of her paper's bosses. Take it for the theorizing it is, but I'll lay dollars to donuts my theory proves out closer to the truth than anything put out by her bosses.
She can't talk about grand jury testimony,
Not sure about that.
They are not sworn to secrecy.
Yes, but Rove was asked not to discuss his testimony and apparently he has agreed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.