Wouldn’t that mean Scooter Libby is the leaker?
E&P:
Judith Miller, The New York Times reporter who has been jailed since July 6 for refusing to identify a source, has been released, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on its Web site tonight. Knight Ridder’s news service then carried the account to other newspapers.
It said that an unnamed jail official had revealed that Miller left an Alexandria, Va. jail late this afternoon, at 3:55 pm., adding, “She was released after she had a telephone conversation with the Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, sources said. In that conversation, Libby reaffirmed that he had released Miller from a promise of confidentiality more than a year ago, sources said.
“It could not be immediately determined whether Miller has now agreed to testify.”
Scooter Libby is the vice-president’s chief of staff. What involvement did Vice President Cheney or President Bush have in this matter – are they, like Tom DeLay, also parties to a criminal conspiracy or at the very least treason (as defined by George H.W. Bush)?
Related
It’s About Perjury, It’s About Obstruction Of Justice
Obstruction of Justice?
Scooter Denied
Will the circle be unbroken?
Time for the wingers to start defending another evildoer. The noose tightens.
Now that you’ve asked the question, Oliver, I guess it’s time to try and run Libby out of town.
We don’ nee’ no e-stinkin facts!
Yeah, right, Zappa, and I wasn’t being sarcastic!
While we appreciate the sentiments Judge Bean – we Dem’s feel that it is best to investigate get the facts and when the conviction is guilty send the perp to jail…
So Mrs. Ahmad Chalabi’s been sitting in a jail cell for almost 3 months because the chief aide of the second most powerful government official in the country couldn’t be bothered to pick up a phone?
Am I missing something here?
The stench rises to heaven itself…..
So what are you being not frank? Certainly not an apologist for the accused?
Matty,
What you’re missing here is the fact that Judith Miller could have simply told the judge who her source was, and walked out of jail a free woman. Unfortunately her source wasn’t Karl Rove — how stupid would the Democrats, the New York Times, and everybody else have looked when that fact came to light?
And I’d like to know, from all the wiz-kids in this blog’s comments section, how you “leak” the name of a woman whose identity, family ties, and vocation were well-known to (at least) dozens of Washington insiders before Robert Novak published his story?
And I d like to know, from all the wiz-kids in this blog s comments section, how you leak the name of a woman whose identity, family ties, and vocation were well-known to (at least) dozens of Washington insiders before Robert Novak published his story?
Complete and utter bullshit. Right-Wing talking points. She was an NOC. If any of what you’ve said, had even a modicum of truth, do you REALLY think the investigation would have lasted more than a single day?
Remember, a judge and a grand jury felt there was enough evidence to throw a reporter in prison in order to compel her to testify.
Looks like it may have worked. Good Day, sweet apologist.
Well, Zappa, I’ll explain: You know damn well Oliver is getting ready to launch one of his “______ must go” campaigns. What do you think “Wouldn t that mean Scooter Libby is the leaker?” means?
To me, looks like there are two possibilities:
1) Fitz promised her an extended stay, and she caved.
2) Fitz doesn’t have enough info, did his best to outline her testimony. So essentially, he caved.
I don’t see this guy caving though, not at this point. The NYT, Libby and Judy all seem to be working overtime to save face. The ‘waiver’ story is bullshit.
My money is on more bad news for Bush Co.
Mike –
What Mr. Curmudgeon says. Don’t make us rehash all the facts that make your suggestion that there was no “leak” utteryly, utterly stupid on its face. People knew Valerie Wilson’s name so there was no leak? Her name? Are you so dumb that you swallowed that talking point whole? God. Oliver, what kind of bait do you have to lay to attract better trolls?
Frame, that’s what happens when you od on Kool-Aid.
one of his ______ must go campaigns.
Olivers notes.
Condi’s election certain..Must start “Condi must go” campaign now before christmas rush.
HUFFPO TODAY;
What made her refuse Libby s waiver when it was first offered but accept it now? (Especially since Judge Hogan had told Miller that she was mistaken in her belief that she was defending a free press, stressing that the government source she alleges she is protecting had already released her from her promise of confidentiality. )
Was Miller s sudden eagerness to find a get-out-of-jail excuse prompted by Fitzgerald s planning to ask for an extension of the grand jury?
Or was it prompted by Fitzgerald s gearing up to charge her with criminal contempt?
If all it took for Miller to feel properly released was a phone call, why did she wait 85 days to make it?
And so we don t forget what this story is really about, and given that the aluminum tubes crap that Miller put on the front page of the New York Times was being heavily promoted by Cheney, how much of that bogus information came to Miller via Libby?
Arianna poses some questions the NYT should answer
Had a Plame/Wilson story been assigned to Miller or not?
What, if anything, did she say about the story to anyone at the paper at the time& and what did they say back?
Why did the Times hold back the story about Miller s release and let multiple other news sources scoop them? Were they trying to miss the evening news cycle and avoid the overnight thrashing their spin has rightly received?
So, as the image of Judy as a principled, conscience-driven defender of the First Amendment gives way to the image of Judy wearing her “new” waiver as a fig leaf allowing her to get out and sing, the big question remains: What is she hiding?
Mike,
Moe Berg was a catcher for the Chisox in the ’20s – ’30s.
He also happened to be a very effective spy for the precursor of the CIA during that time. His work greatly helped us when we went to war against Japan.
But since all those millions of baseball fans knew his identity, I guess it wouldn’t have been a big whoop to you if someone — maybe a government official out to discredit his spouse — revealed to the world he was a spy.
OYE, can I borrow that explanation? That’s as good as any that I have seen.
However, I think it is wasted on the Con apologists. If a liberal said the sun was shining, and showed you the sunny day, the cons would say it is raining and blame it on Clinton’s penis.
What if Moe Berg had been travelling to and from CIA headquarters 5 days per week for the past 5 years?
Neocon…
I prefer the term “Clenis.”
If no law was broken, why is everybody in the middle of this Plame thing behaving like there is something to hide? Does anyone buy Judy’s story about why she was even in the slammer that long?
JWG apprently believes all intelligence agents use Maxwell Smart/James Bond-type techniques to mask their identities.
The fact is if someone followed Ms Plame to and from the CIA each day for 5 years, they’d already have a strong suspicion she was an agent prior to following her. And, even so, that she went to the CIA each day doesn’t mean she was an agent–after all, the CIA HQ holds over 10, 000 employees, contractors, and others–not all of whom are agents.
The first paragraph in my previous comment was supposed to be a blockquote from Janegold. The second paragraph is my response. Sorry. (Preview would be nice!)
JWG,
Actually Jade is correct here. The CIA is a massive organization. The huge majority of employees would not be agents of the type typically depicted in popular culture. In fact, if they are an active agent on undercover assignment, they likely would never be seen at Langley. The CIA does lots and lots of correlative analysis involving mind numbingly tedious tracking of people and things over time. There are contractor employeess at the CIA. And it is neither productive nor very possible to survey (secretly) employees coimng out of the “gate”. Still something of this nature could ultimately be done – but it would be costly and not productive- for reason above.
Dugger
The fact is if someone followed Ms Plame to and from the CIA each day for 5 years, they d already have a strong suspicion she was an agent prior to following her.
Er…can’t someone just watch who comes and goes through the gates? If undercover agents are traveling to and from Langley with the hope that others will think they are just cafeteria workers, then that goes a long way towards explaining why our intelligence community is having so many problems.
In fact, if they are an active agent on undercover assignment, they likely would never be seen at Langley.
This has been refuted numerous times.
Most effectively, here
Jadegold, Bullsh*t.
That is an article by a group of embittered Bush haters. It refuted NOTHING. I said active agents on undercover assignment. Your political hacks stated officers working at the CIA are often undercover – meaning they have a classified identity or are working on classified projects. Huge difference. Agents in the field don’t come back into Langley any more than possible. C’mon. You must be smarter than that. BTW, Johnson got out of the CIA over a decade ago.
Dugger
Again, Dugger, these are the words of folks who have been active undercover CIA agents.
Who to believe?
Someone who has been an actual, Honest-to-Jeebus, agent (BTW, one of the signers is still an active agent) or someone who has been wrong about most everything (you)?
Hmmmm.
Believe who you want. But Johnson and his rabid pals have long since been out of the CIA and eschewed rationality and logic. They are Bush haters, pure and simple. And gain, notice their too careful wording. I know how it works. Active, undercover field agents don’t show up at Langley – unless absolutely necessary.
Dugger
Once more, Dugger.
You seem to believe people who have never served one nanosecond in the CIA–at any time–over folks who have served (and are serving) as covert agents. Your weasely excuse is that they “hate” Bush (unsubstantiated) and haven’t been with the CIA within the last 5 seconds.
Yet, you can’t seem to produce one person who meets your criteria (loves Bush, has served as covert agent in CIA within the last 5 seconds) who will say undercover agents don’t work at Langley.
And, no…you have no clue how it works.
5 seconds=15 years? Sure They do hate Bush. They are extreme partisans, but then I wouldn’t expect you to acknowledge that. I take my word for what I have observed first hand and mere common sense. But I’m giving it a rest. I don’t care enough to ty and convince you because you are never reasonable.
BTW as we speak there are new reports that Plame was already fully compromised well before Novak.
Dugger Im Off for the week end
I wonder why there are so many “Bush Haters”? That seems to be a constant deal from some righties – oh…they are bush haters…right them off. But what is the root cause of this…people just wake up and say “hmph, for no good reason I hate this guy!” Or could it be that a large group of folks take the time to see beyond Fox’s Spin Zone and look at the situation and come to the conclussion that Bush is Bad for America.
I mean how silly of an argument is that – oh don’t listen to the critisizm or the facts from those guys – they are just bush haters…
Let me try – Don’t listen to Dugger1, he is just a freedom hater.
The key element of Miller’s release, as I understand it, is that the prosecutor agreed to not ask her about any other source besides Libby. So any other people that might have given Miller the information about Plame can breathe easily. As soon as Miller had that agreement, she walked.
So the question I have is: Miller is apparently sacrificing Libby to protect another source. Who is that other source?
Another question: back to the “best evidence” principle — why the hell didn’t Robert Novak face the same situation as Miller? He’s the one who broke the story; Miller never published a goddamned thing.
J.
Zappa — The answer to the question lies not in who is hated, but in who is doing the hating. Most of the people who disapproved of Clinton got to the point where they were laughed out of town (like that “Judicial Watch” guy)
But the people who hate Bush started with Molly Ivins (”Shrub”) that Chait guy, and tons and tons of notables in and out of show business.
It’s OK to hate Bush — many people (on the left, of course, don’t even believe he was elected either time! What’s not to hate?
Even though Clinton treated the White House like it was a finished basement, and his Mama wasn’t home, he was considered to be elected — even by the most rabid of right – wingers. I thought he was full of it in 1991 when the campaign began, and I still do today. I wonder how he got elected — the same way you’ll wonder how Condi Rice got elected (Hee, hee!) — but he did get elected.
Nobody is saying “I disagree with him, but he is our President”, on the left , anyway, because there are people who believe he “isn’t our President.”
Interesting take on it F_D – but of course he is the president – I think that you are confusing the concern with SCOTUS stopping the recount and intervening with who actually sits in the chair.
Now if I do harm locally there might be a few that hate me – and of those that hate me you might not have a problem with them – if I do enough harm where there is recognition on a national/global scale then there will be more that ‘hate’ me and you have a greater chance of finding someone that you find distasteful in the haters club. Does not mean that my harm is any less – it just means that my harm is recognized by a wider audiance.
If you base your love or hate not on the action of the individual or group but on the make up of the lovers/haters then I can see how you can get confused. Thanks for clearing that up.
But I’m not confused! And you didn’t disagree with me!
You said something completely different from what I said — and I disagree with you.
Zappa – are you actually trying to me that there are no people out there who think Bush was “selected”? There are no people out there who believe that Bush is not the legitimate President of the the United States? That he didn’t “steal” the election of 2000? That he didn’t steal the election of 2004?
Of course there are, and you know it. You actually want to believe that Bush is hated because he has done “enough harm where there is recognition on a national/global scale” — in other words, he has done so much harm that that is why lots of people hate him?
You and liberals won’t accept any responsible for the visceral animosity you feel towards this man? You really want to believe you hate him because of his performance as President?
Then why do you think the Clinton haters hated Clinton? Because he did bad things on a grand scale? I hated Clinton, and I can tell you that wasn’t why. Carter was a pitiful incompetent, and I never hated him. Why do you suppose that was?
Think, man, think!