Now that it's pretty obvious that Fitzgerald is tying...

[rateyes]

all the loose ends together, what would make Judy Miller keep her mouth shut and remain in jail, rather than coming forward to confirm what's already known in front of the Grand Jury.

You think she might have something more to hide than a source who is already been exposed by all the other "journalists?"

IMHO, she was a willing participant in the crime. What do you think?

[havocmom]

1. I think Cheney is gonna be leaving "for health reasons"

and that somebody should pull his passport so he can't blow town ;)

[rateyes]

4. Well, I do imagine that...

he's pretty sick right now.

[JAK1941]

22. Yesterday the doctors gave him a "clean bill of health."

Does that mean: 1. Fit to travel? or 2. Fit to stay and share the sheist when it hits the fan?

[Swamp Rat]

12. Not just his passport...

[jaysunb]

14. Hey ! You forgot to add *B* to the loop.

Or did you ? :evilgrin:

[hootinholler]

17. THANK YOU!

That graphic is awesome. Took me all weekend to tease that info out. Sure supports my theory.

-Hoot

[pgh_dem]

31. great graphic, have you started a thread for it? n/t

[goclark]

40. Excellent visual - can you make it a post?

[spanone]

32. To 'spend more time with family'......

[woodsprite]

2. She's been arrested to be placed into protective custody? n/t

[rateyes]

3. yeah, maybe.

[Ilsa]

5. Some of her recent comments make it sound like

this is a definite possibility. And people on DU and a few smart non-DUers know this is something worth considering as a reasonable move on her part.

Can you imagine a conversation between Cheney/Libby/Rove in which the line "The bitch knows too much," is uttered?

[rateyes]

6. Yes, I can imagine it...and

the fact that the NYT actually apologized for its shoddy reporting (miller's) of the WMD issue in the run-up to war, makes it sound like to me they knew something like this was going to happen.

Edit: as if to say "it wasn't intentional, we just didn't dig deep enough--BS.

[JAK1941]

26. Now THAT is frightening.

n/t

[madaboutharry]

7. This thought has crossed my mind too.

I was thinking this the other day when I read she said something about the power of the government. Maybe someone here can get the exact quote.

[rateyes]

9. How would you complete this sentence:

If I was Judith Miller I would____________________.

My answer would be: If I was Judith Miller I would try to cut a deal for immunity and turn states evidence, then ask to be placed in the Witness Protection Program.

[madaboutharry]

27. I agree with your thoughts here.

She must know way too much for her own good. The Witness Protection Program might be what this woman is going to need.

[kevsand]

30. Full text of her statement here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4127811&mesg_id=4127863

In its full context, it's very clear that she is not talking about threats to herself personally.

[truth2power]

41. I posted something about that the other day,

about her saying "the govt. is too powerful" or something like that. Can't find the quote, though. It was in a thread the day she went to jail.

Yes, that is really creepy.



edit: Yikes! I found it!

"Lips Zipped, Reporter In Jail"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/07/national/main707048.shtml

(CBS/AP) A federal judge on Wednesday jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller for refusing to divulge the name of a source to a grand jury investigating the leak of the name of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame.

*snip*

"CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart reports Miller said: "I won't testify. The risks are too great. The government is too powerful." "

Someone should be asking about this.

[Hardrada]

8. Probably need something more like a witness program!

IMHO.

[rateyes]

11. Man, do great minds think alike, or what?

:D

[LeftHander]

28. I came to that conclusion as well...

Lots of people have had "accidents" that have stood in the way of the neocons.

[democrank]

10. Here`s the part I don`t get....

Partisans Novak, Miller and Cooper aren`t whistleblowers who deserve protection. They helped spread the (potential) crime. We`re not talking about the public`s right to know or the common good. These leaks were smear tactics. What was the purpose of outing a covert CIA operative?

[rateyes]

13. They just didn't help spread the crime...

IMO, they are criminals. It's not about a breach of the law against outing covert operatives--it's about a breach of the Espionage act, which basically says that if you spread classified information, whether or not you are authorized to have it in the first place, you are a spy against the U.S. Anyone who saw, confirmed, Plame's identity, the "front" company for which she worked---that file that Powell took on AF-1 to Africa---regardless of who you are is guilty.

She doesn't DESERVE protection--but, she probably damn well needs it.

Edit to add: Potential "stool pigeons" don't usually fare very well.

[TahitiNut]

15. If she's implicated, she could plead the 5th ... but she didn't.

That means she's still carrying on the facade of "wronged journalist." She's NOT a journalist. She's a propaganda pusher. Rather than anything close to objectivity, she's allied with corrupt special interests who have a stake in what she writes. It doesn't even come close to being a 'conflict' of interest for her, since her interests are solely aligned with Rove, Perle, Wolfowitz, Chalabi, and the cabal of war criminals behind the most massive public fraud this country has yet seen.

[rateyes]

16. Which is what she will do when she is indicted...

which will make her look all the more guilty.

[barbaraann]

33. That post deserves its own thread.

Freedom of the Press should only apply to actual and independent journalists and to not people on the CIA take or operatives of a special interest group like AEI. Or co-conspirators in some evil scheme.

Judith Miller is not a journalist.

[Hamlette]

18. making sense of the parts

Rove "confirmed" to Novak and outright told Cooper

Libby also told Cooper. (or confirmed what Rove said?)

Then there is this vague rumor, that Rove and perhaps Libby insist they got the story from a reporter but they don't remember who (ohyeahright). If the rumor is true, Rove and Libby are either lying to protect Cheney or the ppl on Air Force I on their way to Africa, or a reporter called them for confirmation. Since Miller is in jail, it stands to reason she's the one. So who told Miller? Maybe she really IS a WH agent undercover as a reporter? It's secret information laundering. Someone calls Miller, she calls Rove and Libby. Rove and Libby get to say "we didn't leak stuff from a classified doc. We didn't even know it was classified."

What these people won't go to to preserve power.

Rove had a message from earlier in the week from Cooper asking to talk about welfare reform. In his effort to coverup, and thinking Cooper would never give him up (remember Rove was making these statements while testifying to the GJ and at the same time, Cooper was resisting the subpoena all the was to the USSC), Rove thought he could "embellish" his story, to say the Plame stuff was off hand in a larger conversation about welfare reform.

I'm thinking the longer Miller and Cooper went without talking, the braver Rove got and started puffing at the GJ. With any luck at all he'll at least get it for lying to an FBI agent, the GJ and obstruction of justice.

How many years did Martha do? And that was over a few lousy dollars, not nat'l security.

[KharmaTrain]

19. Magic 8 Ball Say...

Let's play detective. Cooper's source is Rove, also notes a source was Libby. One of those (we don't know who...doesn't matter), gives Cooper the green light to testify. You'd think if this was the same person Miller spoke to, she's be sititng home eating bon bons right now.

Mark Felt was a confidential source whose protection made it possible for a criminal investigation to proceede. Miller's "confidential source" and Miller are actively involved in impeding an investigation.

[goforit]

21. Hmmmm........I do believe you're onto something.

Hats off to your voodoo science!!!

[KharmaTrain]

25. It Was Done Using Fuzzy Math

or was that a fuzzy navel?

:rofl:

[lateo]

20. She is just trying to become a conservative icon.

Even more so that is...

[Alien8ed]

23. Well, Not To Put Too Fine a Point On It, But...

I think that she spends a really unusual amount of time hanging out with "lobbyists" for another country, and that people keep turning up dead not terribly long after they've failed to support the preferred version of reality being promoted by Judy, her "lobbyist" friends, the other country that they seem to prefer, and that nation's fairly infamous spook services, one of which has a really naughty reputation for killing formerly cooperative people who suddenly decide to publicly disagree...

... but, perhaps that's just me.

[barbaraann]

34. It's not just you.

The thing that is unraveling here seems to be huge.

[Just Me]

39. I certainly perceive her as a co-conspirator.

I don't anticipate that she will be at all cooperative in spite of the fact she is covering up crimes rather than protecting whistle-blowers revealing crimes. She may be called as a hostile witness but that is unlikely to have any success since she could assert the 5th. She may end up being charged with criminal contempt and/or obstruction to justice. Would that be incentive enough for her to testify? :shrug: Dunno.

Have you read, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"?

[Peace Patriot]

24. It's hard to tell--we don't have enough information--whether she's a

patsy, or some sort of neocon Mata Hari. I'm leaning toward the latter, on circumstantial evidence. (That doesn't mean that her life isn't in danger, though.)

Here's what got me into a suspicious mode about Miller (aside from the obvious--that she pumped the war with false WMD info from Ahmed Chalabi, on the front pages of the NYT, such that some even call it "Judith Miller's war"--and seems to be protecting Cheney, Libby and/or Rove):

It's something she didn't print. Time-frame: Novak outing of Plame on 7/14/03. Death of Brit weapons expert Dr. David Kelly on 7/17/03, under highly suspicious circumstances, three days later. General context: The post-invasion hunt for WMDs in Iraq (in which Miller was an active participant).

One of Kelly's last emails was to Judith Miller--the one in which he is worried about the "many dark actors playing games." Miller also used Kelly as a major source for her book, "Germs." In the news article she wrote about Kelly's death (NYT 7/21/03), she fails to mention the "dark actors" email (it was disclosed later by his family) and fails to disclose her close connections to Kelly.

David Kelly had some kind of change of heart about the war--he had supported the invasion--sometime in spring/early summer '03, and began whistleblowing to the BBC about the Blairites WMD exaggerations (the "sexing up" of the intel docs). He was hunted down by his own gov't, interrogated in secret, and forced to partially recant before a Parliamentary committee; they outed his name to the press without warning him, and then let him go home without protection, where he was soon found dead, near his home, under a tree out in the open, in the rain, supposedly having slit one wrist and taken painkillers, and having slowly bled to death all night. (The man was a scientist! A biochemist! And a tough guy--stood up to Saddam Hussein on WMDs.)

Whatever one thinks of the inquiry into his death (utter rot! --in my opinion), it does seem very strange, indeed, to have TWO gov't weapons experts disabled within three days of each other, one by outing, the other by death--with Miller somehow mixed up in the first, and omitting her connection to the victim in the second.

I also suspect her of inventing paragraphs 15 and 16 in the news article (or coloring Kelly's unquoted statements--especially his criticism of US military not looking hard enough for WMDs--to her own purposes). (It just doesn't fit with the whistleblower, who was basically telling the BBC that Bush/Blair had lied. And it was Miller herself who was hounding the US military, in the field, while they hunted for the WMDs.)

See

"Scientist was bane of proliferators" - Judith Miller (NYT, 7/21/03)
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/scibaneprolif.html

"More about Judith Miller" (Miller/Plame/David Kelly)
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/3/17138/30618

"Plame...the tip of the iceberg..." (Plame maybe investigating Cheney arms deals when they busted her CIA weapons op)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2178477#2180220

Hints. Clues. Snags in the tapestry. Why would she hide her connection to Kelly, and suppress his "dark actors" email?

One theory I have is that Kelly had stumbled upon, or even foiled, a plot to PLANT WMDs in Iraq. (This would explain a lot about his change of heart, the Blairites' extraordinary panic at his rather mile whistleblowing--he knew much more?--and a lot of other things, including puzzles about his character--not a suicidal type at all, looking forward to his daughter's wedding and returning to Iraq--the very unlikely manner of his death, and the many anomalies at the death scene.) But the only known connection between that possibility and Miller is that she very much WANTED to find WMDs in Iraq, personally went on the hunt, and seemed very put out that they weren't found. So it's just a theory--but an interesting one, and perhaps useful as an investigative hypothesis.

(Note: Joseph Wilson recently said that his wife and Judith Miller were "collateral damage" in the Bush regime's war on dissent. Nothing he has said supports my suspicions or my theory.)

[Jose Diablo]

36. Hmmm, a very interesting coincidink

You wrote:

"it does seem very strange, indeed, to have TWO gov't weapons experts disabled within three days of each other, one by outing, the other by death--with Miller somehow mixed up in the first, and omitting her connection to the victim in the second."

Is Miller covering for a source, or is she soiling her drawers, seeking protection?

Class; Any volunteers care to answer? Anybody? Believe in coincidences?

[Norquist Nemesis]

29. Book royalties?

I can't figure it out. IMO, she's not protecting a whistleblower. She's shielding a criminal. Whoever that person is, he/she has no regard for her, America, or our laws.

The only thing that would make sense for her to be protecting this person is that the individual must have something on her. :shrug:

[sam sarrha]

35. they just put her name on the propaganda.. she isnt a writer/journalist

[thinkingwoman]

37. why not plead the 5th?

If she's protecting herself she could simply plead the 5th.

I'd say she's protecting Cheney.

[ProfessorGAC]

38. A Paradox

While our jurisprudence says that taking the 5th is NOT a tacit admission of guilt and cannot be introduced as evidence, the situation here would be the death of her "stand" on journalistic and 1st ammendment principles.

If she won't talk about HER invovlement in the whole conspiracy, that is an explicit admission of said involvement that goes beyond merely reporting.

The 5th puts her between two even harder and rockier places than she finds herself now.
The Professor

[TahitiNut]

42. Yep. She'd be admitting the possibility of her participation in a crime.

Instead, she's posturing. She'd rather do jail time through October 2005 than prison time through October 2015. She'd rather pretend to be a martyr for principles she has never believed in than even acknowledge the possibility of being an accomplice in treasonous acts.

It's interesting that the root for the word 'incrimination' is the same as the root for the words 'crime' and 'criminal'.