NY Times' Backs Miller Again in Editorial

[WhiteTara]

such posturing from the NYT that they had turned a new page.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001392397

NEW YORK Criticized by many for standing so belligerently behind Judith Miller in her legal tangle, and then failing to comment on the current Miller controversy at the paper, The New York Times editorial page finally returned to defend the embattled reporter today.

But in a news article, the paper observed that the federal prosecutor seemed to believe that Miller's refusal to testify last year delayed yesterday's results by up to a full year, going back to before the 2004 election. "Instead, Ms. Miller fought the case, appealing it all the way to the United States Supreme Court," wrote Katharine Seelye and Adam Liptak.

In its editorial analyzing the indictments of "Scooter" Libby returned yesterday by a federal grand jury, the Times reiterated its backing for Miller's original decision in refusing to testify, and said it had "no reservations" about backing her in jail, while noting that perhaps her struggle could have been handled somewhat differently:

"Journalists from some news organizations testified after trying to fight the subpoenas; others testified on the basis of a document White House officials were compelled to sign that said they waived any promises of confidentiality from reporters. Ms. Miller says she believed the waiver was coerced, and she went to jail unteil Mr. Libby assured her directly that he was freeing her from her promise.
:grr:

[merwin]

1. NYT might back her, but nobody else does...

[onehandle]

2. The NYT is now as reputable and trustworthy as Fox News.

Murdoch might as well buy them out now.

[Pirate Smile]

6. True. I guess both BushCo and the NYT have decided no "housecleaning"

is necessary.

I will give them both the same level of credibility.

[goclark]

3. NY Times should be indicted nt

[ClintonTyree]

4. Never again will I buy the NYT...........

or anything connected to their operations. Standing behind Judas Miller is the absolutely worst thing they could have done. This scum of a human being was an active participant in the bush White House's treasonous endeavors and bot only should be fired in shame, but be put back into jail for her role in this heinous crime.

Fuck you, Judas Miller and fuck you New York Times. You've now joined the Weekly World News in being the least believable tabloid on the market. The Times is a joke now and I can't wait for their ensuing financial ruin.

[Seansky]

5. afraid she'll spill the beans, that's all

[Kagemusha]

7. Isn't this saying Judy obstructed justice 'till Libby said not to?

Isn't that what this is amounting to? Obstructing justice via claiming journalistic privilege?

This is something we should be proud of because justice is inherently abhorrent to American journalism?

[RamboLiberal]

8. Besides all the other damage the NYT allowed

Little Miss Run Amok to cause, backing her refusal to testify that allowed this to be delayed by a year also helped put BFEE back in office for another 4 years of hell!

Only reason now for the NYT to exist for me is Rich, Krugman and Herbert - they're the only people left there with integrity and truth! How can they stomach working there?

[Jacobin]

9. Then she forgot whose identity she was protecting?

When she testified? After spending 85 days in jail?

The NYT is even more idiotic and demented and insulting to its readers than I remember

They take take a flying leap.

I'm done with that rag

[daleo]

10. Bad memories seem to be affecting people connected with this story

There seems to be an epidemic of amnesia.

[WHAT]

11. "Miller was a witness to a crine."...

that's what Fitzgerald said.

[Gyre]

12. Is a monumental understatement

which completely ignores her complicity before the crime was complete. An "accessory before the fact" is as guilty of the crime as the criminal they "aid and abet".

Gyre