"The Bottom Line: Judith Miller continued to carry WMD water for ...

[understandinglife]

... the Administration a long time after she left the field of battle and gave up her choice beat, making speeches all across the country in 2003-2004 as a "warhawk." (A characterization she shares with former columnist and executive editor Bill Keller.) In the case of the revelation of the covert identity of Valerie Plame, she and possibly a collaborating editor chose NOT—after all—to write about the White House campaign to discredit Plame's spouse, even though Miller obviously knew about it.

We have observed the selling of the birthright of The New York Times that has made a mockery of Ochs' legendary "without fear or favor" commitment. For this citizen, it is a sad, and repulsive, sight. All for a mess of porridge consisting of non-existent WMDs, and outright collusion between a once-star reporter and some of the highest officials of the land.

From The Satrapy at West 43rd: One Armchair Critic's Disillusionment On The Eve of Full Disclosure by William E. Jackson Jr. on October 15, 2005

Links:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-e-jackson-jr/the-satrapy-at-west-43rd_b_8889.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20051014/cm_huffpost/008889;_ylt=A86.I2QxOlBDLzoBYiD9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA-- (VOTE IT)

Mr Jackson says it all, and says it correctly. The full article is definitely worthy of your time.

Ms propagandist-in-chief Miller, I wish you a very long life, as to ensure the maximum exposure of you to the horrific consequences of your willful lies.

Mr Sulzberger and Mr Keller -- RESIGN IMMEDIATELY.


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

1. Judy Miller is a liar and a traitor and the NYT is complicit. nm

[Metta]

2. I agree.

They have supported her lying and they routinely make up facts, as I have come to believe.

[understandinglife]

14. Yes, and dig this ...

How did I interpret that? Mr. Fitzgerald asked.

In answer, I told the grand jury about my last encounter with Mr. Libby. It came in August 2003, shortly after I attended a conference on national security issues held in Aspen, Colo. After the conference, I traveled to Jackson Hole, Wyo. At a rodeo one afternoon, a man in jeans, a cowboy hat and sunglasses approached me. He asked me how the Aspen conference had gone. I had no idea who he was.

"Judy," he said. "It's Scooter Libby."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/national/16miller.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129435725-TX2wAfeJO/MyzUqGVMqXWQ&pagewanted=print

Jackson Hole, Wyoming ... Scotter Libby .... wonder why Scotter was in Jackson Hole on a summer afternoon in 2003 ... sorta recall someone Scotter knows vacationing in Jackson Hole ... gosh who might that be ????? ... wonder why Judith was there ... :shrug:

As Judith wipes the blood off the knife she just stuck in Cheney's back, I wonder how Mr Fitzgerald and the GJ responded ....


Peace.

[understandinglife]

17. Interesting how Adam Entous leads off for his Reuters wire report

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal prosecutor questioned New York Times reporter Judith Miller about whether Vice President Dick Cheney himself was aware or authorized her discussions with his chief of staff, Lewis Libby, about a covert CIA operative, Miller said on Saturday.

<clip>

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2005-10-16T031841Z_01_EIC446318_RTRUKOC_0_US-BUSH-LEAK.xml

:thumbsup: to Adam Entous


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

26. That makes two thumbs up.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[understandinglife]

25. Marty Kaplan: "... they could call it "the Libby rule.""

If you want to see the reality-based community in action, check out this excerpt from Judy Miller's account of her Grand Jury testimony:

<clip>

In recent years, many papers have come up with new rules for indicating a source's motive for being unnamed. But I don't recall a guideline that would generate an accurate attribution for this case. It would need to be something like, "said a former Hill staffer, who did not want his position as Vice President Cheney's chief of staff noted because it could lead to his being indicted and undermine the administration's case for sending thousands of American troops to their death."

Maybe they should update the journalism handbooks - they could call it "the Libby rule."

From This Is How It Works by Marty Kaplan on October 15, 2005

More at the link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/this-is-how-it-works_b_8944.html

Anyone in favor of the 'to tell the truth and state your name and position for the record' rule?

Let's remember something really, really basic - these folk work for us; we pay them, we provide them office space and lots of infrastructure and we allow them to make decisions about OUR money and OUR future.

Don't you think that every time one of OUR employees in the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of OUR government has something to say they should be accountable, beginning with having their name associated with every statement they make.

Basics. Simple, obvious, basics.


Peace.

[MADem]

40. Off the record with Dick, do ya suppose??? nt

[understandinglife]

3. Frank Rich: It's Bush-Cheney, Not Rove-Libby

<clip>

That stonewall may start to crumble in a Washington courtroom this week or next. In a sense it already has. Now, as always, what matters most in this case is not whether Mr. Rove and Lewis Libby engaged in a petty conspiracy to seek revenge on a whistle-blower, Joseph Wilson, by unmasking his wife, Valerie, a covert C.I.A. officer. What makes Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation compelling, whatever its outcome, is its illumination of a conspiracy that was not at all petty: the one that took us on false premises into a reckless and wasteful war in Iraq. That conspiracy was instigated by Mr. Rove's boss, George W. Bush, and Mr. Libby's boss, Dick Cheney.

<clip>

"Bush's Brain" is the title of James Moore and Wayne Slater's definitive account of Mr. Rove's political career. But Mr. Rove is less his boss's brain than another alliterative organ (or organs), that which provides testosterone. As we learn in "Bush's Brain," bad things (usually character assassination) often happen to Bush foes, whether Ann Richards or John McCain. On such occasions, Mr. Bush stays compassionately above the fray while the ruthless Mr. Rove operates below the radar, always separated by "a layer of operatives" from any ill behavior that might implicate him. "There is no crime, just a victim," Mr. Moore and Mr. Slater write of this repeated pattern.

THIS modus operandi was foolproof, shielding the president as well as Mr. Rove from culpability, as long as it was about winning an election. The attack on Mr. Wilson, by contrast, has left them and the Cheney-Libby tag team vulnerable because it's about something far bigger: protecting the lies that took the country into what the Reagan administration National Security Agency director, Lt. Gen. William Odom, recently called "the greatest strategic disaster in United States history."

Whether or not Mr. Fitzgerald uncovers an indictable crime, there is once again a victim, but that victim is not Mr. or Mrs. Wilson; it's the nation. It is surely a joke of history that even as the White House sells this weekend's constitutional referendum as yet another "victory" for democracy in Iraq, we still don't know the whole story of how our own democracy was hijacked on the way to war.

Link:

http://select.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/opinion/16rich.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Precisely.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

12. Link to dKos comments on Frank Rich's article (and DU link):

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/15/205649/37

Related DU link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5072162

Peace.

[mod mom]

4. AH UL, I was waiting for your sage commentary. I agree if the NYT wants

to show some honor they must immediately fire MILLER + SULZBERGER! How could the NYT let this happen? It appears Ms Miller had untethered oversight. First Jayson Blair, now this (which is unfathomly worse)? They have brought such disgrace to the Times.

[understandinglife]

5. "They have brought such disgrace to the Times." Unfortunately, what you ..

... state is exactly correct.

Mr Keller's eager-beaver support of all things neoconster enabled Ms Miller to convert the infrastructure of the New York Times into one of the most comprehensive propaganda machines in modern history.

Tragic for the New York Times; massively destructive and deadly for the innocent civilians of Iraq and for our Constitution and society.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

6. Arianna Huffington on CNN’s Reliable Sources at 10am EDT, Oct. 16 & ....

... When the Plame case broke open in July 2003, these notes were presumably no more than a few weeks old. But who had revealed Plame’s name was not seared on Miller's mind?

This is as believable as Woodward and Bernstein not recalling who Deep Throat was…

From Times' Judy-Culpa Raises More Questions Than It Answers... on October 15, 2005

And, do check the comments at the link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/times-judyculpa-_b_8938.html

Oh, sure Judy, sure, gotcha, right, ......


Peace.

[understandinglife]

19. "Whoever gave Miller Plame's name was a pretty damned meaningful source to

Arianna Huffington adds a substantial amount of commentary to the original post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/timesselective-judyculp_b_8938.html


Peace

[understandinglife]

46. Several interesting items on Miller/NYT listed at Huffington Post. Here ..

....are the links:

Times Report on Judith Miller: Key Moments and Initial Comments

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-rosen/times-report-on-judith-mi_b_8971.html

Kaus: “Did Judy's lawyer scam the prosecutor?… Why is Pinch ashamed?…Isn't this a major blow against testimonial immunity for reporters?”…

http://slate.msn.com/id/2127853/&#takeout

James Wolcott: “They seemed to have taken the lessons of the Jayson Blair fiasco and strove to do a lousier job protecting the integrity of the Times”…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wolcott/flame-on-flame-off_b_8973.html

Atrios: “She's very good at playing the Sgt. Schultz defense. Who knew intrepid Super Reporters had holes in their brains”…

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_10_09_atrios_archive.html#112941464810541466

Steve Gilliard: “She placed Libby above the New York Times. Even now, she's protecting someone”…

http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/10/liar-judy-miller-story.html

Secy. Of State Rice Refuses To Say Whether She Testified Under Oath In Plamegate Investigation...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9684807/

Peace.

[understandinglife]

7. Jane Hamsher: "Noted fiction writer Judith Miller has her latest work ...

.... at the New York Times. Elsewhere in the Times others try to fathom why she is sometimes referred to as a journalist.

From "Judy," he said. "It's Scooter Libby." on October 15, 2005

Be sure to check the comments:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/judy-he-said-its-scooter-libby.html

Peace.

[understandinglife]

8. Mark Kleiman: "A Senior Moment for Miller?"

<clip>

Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.

To which, Mark notes:

A politician, it is said, needs a good memory and an even better forgettery. But I thought Judith Miller was a reporter, not a politician? My bad.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/10/a_senior_moment_for_miller.php

Judy, do you really, really, really .... do you think we are all as dumb as the gal-on-the-spot-ace-award-winning-super-duper reporter who believed what Chalabi was telling her ????

You know the gal, don't ya Judy ???


Peace.

[understandinglife]

9. Mark Kleiman: "What is Judith Miller hiding? And, why are her bosses ...

.... letting her hide it?

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/10/what_is_judith_miller_hiding_and_why_are_her_bosses_letting_her_hide_it.php

Mark has several other snapshots:

Yes, that's about right

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/10/yes_thats_about_right.php

I hope Joseph Tate (Libby's lawyer) has a good lawyer

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2005/10/i_hope_joseph_tate_has_a_good_lawyer.php

The spike

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/10/the_spike.php

How was the notbook found?

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/10/how_was_the_notebook_found.php :shrug:


Peace.

[understandinglife]

11. Think Progress: Did Libby Obstruct Justice

The New York Times published two lengthy pieces on the CIA leak scandal – one personal account by reporter Judith Miller and one investigative piece by staff. For two pieces that comprise over 8700 words, there isn’t much useful information conveyed.

One thing did stick out: both pieces suggest that Scooter Libby, the Vice President’s chief of staff, may have engaged in obstruction of justice.

More at the link:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/15/libby-obstruct-justice

Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

38. Hmm, what's the punishment for obstructing justice? nm

[texpatriot2004]

28. What is Judy Miller hiding and who is she hiding it for?Those

are my questions and they have been for months.

[understandinglife]

10. WaPo's Kurtz: "Miller would not allow the Times reporters to review ....

<clip>

... her notes and would not discuss her interactions with editors, the article said.

To a remarkable degree, Miller was calling the shots on dealing with Fitzgerald's inquiry. Keller and Sulzberger both told the paper that they did not press Miller for details of her conversations with Libby or ask to see her notes while battling Fitzgerald's subpoena in the courts.

Even after other news organizations disclosed that Libby was Miller's source, Times editors did not publish his name, discouraged some story suggestions by reporters and killed an article about Libby's role in the high-profile case.

The case, which cost the Times millions of dollars in legal fees, so constrained its coverage that the paper did not name Libby as Miller's source until well after other news organizations did. Keller said he largely ceded supervision of the story to managing editor Abramson because "it was just too awkward" for him while enmeshed in meetings about the paper's defense of Miller.

Asked what she regretted about the Times' handling of the matter, Abramson told the paper: "The entire thing."

Link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/15/AR2005101501465_3.html

Keller was too enmeshed in trying to cover-up his collaboration with Miller in the deception of the citizens of the United States of America, the US Congress, the UN and everyone else as he and Miller collaborated with Bush and Cheney in launching an un-Constitutional and otherwise illegal war of aggression on Iraq.

Period.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

13. Link to pontifcator's thread at dKos on the NYTimes/Miller whatever:

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/10/15/162153/54


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

29. Keller is playing coy. Sulzberger and Keller aren't innocent in this

drama.

[Neil Lisst]

15. understandinglife, Miller may be talking, but ...

... but she still was and probably is a shill for the likes of Libby.

[understandinglife]

16. Oh, she's still a shill for way more than Libby. Think Bolton, think ...

... Poindexter, think Feith, think Perle, think Chalabi, Cheney, .....

So, yes, I agree with you, and more.

Thank you.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

18. ReddHedd at firedoglake: "How should I say this..."

As many of you know, the NY Times finally published their initial version of the Judy, Judy, Judy story. Its...interesting. And at times infuriating. But mostly just chock full of what ifs for me. Thought I'd do a run-through of the things that jump out at me the most, as a quick pass, and then will go back and hit some points more in depth in individual posts today and tomorrow. I took two initial pages of notes on my first read-through, but I'm going to condense on this first pass.

<clip>

The one other bit that jumped out at me was the wording on what her testimony was limited to -- the article says "Libby and the Wilson matter." To me, it would be nice to know whether that was vetted wording from Bob Bennett. And, if so, that is worded much broader than just about Libby. Maybe. Or, it is just about Libby and everything dealing with Wilson, and no potential illegalities that Judy might know about prior to the Wilson matter coming up. Or...well, it is pointless to speculate on this, but some clarification from someone at the Times on how this was meant would be nice.

As I said, that's my first pass. I'm going to go line by line now and will post more detailed analysis this evening and tomorrow. As will Jane. Can't wait to wade through comments on this -- whew! For a weasel, she at least knows how to throw a lot of smoke up in the air.

UPDATE: And I see that Karl Rove cancelled this morning's appearance at the Kilgore pancake breakfast fundraiser in Tyson's Corner. Curious. Didn't go back to work yesterday. No appearance today. Hmmmm....

Much more at the link and do check the comments:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/how-should-i-say-this.html

Peace.

[understandinglife]

23. WaPo: Rove Cancels Appearance at Fundraiser for Kilgore

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/15/AR2005101501286_pf.html

Just to provide a link to the "Update" item in ReddHedd's firedoglake post, above.


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

39. Come out, come out wherever you are KKKarl, why is he hiding

what is he hiding? Do you think he's thinking of ways out?

[texpatriot2004]

31. Rove must really be sweating eh. Wonder if he'll check out? nm

[understandinglife]

20. David Corn: "CIA Leak Scandal: Judy Miller and the Times Speak"

Finally, The New York Times and Judith Miller speak, and the paper and reporter leave their readers with as many questions as answers. In Sunday's edition, the Times publishes a lengthy account by three reporters (Don Van Natta Jr., Adam Liptak and Clifford Levy) of what it calls "the Miller case" and a first-person account by Miller. Neither piece explains all.

<clip>

So much for without fear or favor. This is an awful acknowledgment for the nation's leading paper. Taubman and Jill Abramson, a managing editor, called the situation "Excruciatingly difficult." It was worse. As I've written before, Jayson Blair bamboozled his editors; Judy Miller handcuffed hers. If a deal could have been reached a year earlier, the Times would not be as embarrassed as it is today. No wonder, as the paper reports, when Miller made a post-release speech in the newsroom, claiming a victory for press freedoms, her colleagues "responded with restrained applause."

When the Times reporters interviewed Abramson and asked her what she regretted about the paper's handling of the Miller case, she replied, "The entire thing." That was a refreshing shot of candor. But Miller's account and the paper's extensive take-out do not totally clear the air. They leave the impression that we're still not getting all the news that ought to be fit to print.

Much more at the link:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=29143

And, Yahoo link - VOTE IT:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20051016/cm_thenation/329143;_ylt=A9FJqavN11FDE.kATAj9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--

So, David Corn echoes William Jackson, rightly so.


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

32. The original Sulzberger would be ashamed at this I think. So

much for "without fear or favor" indeed.

[understandinglife]

35. I think so, as well. These 3rd generation trust babies are truly lethal ..

... to every aspect of society. One of the many reasons why the notion of someone's kid being the next "king or queen" is such a lethal form of governance and society.

Thomas Paine did some elegant debunking of that approach to governance in "Common Sense"!! as you know.


Peace.

[texpatriot2004]

36. Yes. That's right, he did debunk that. n.t

[EFerrari]

21. Maybe we need a new paper of record, UL

I'd draft you as EIC.

Thank you.

:kick:

[understandinglife]

22. I agree that we do, in_deed, need a new 'paper of record.' And,

... I think we need to have that "paper of record" be as distributed as possible to avoid all the attempts that might well emerge to disrupt keeping citizens from the primary data, as well as, analysis and opinion.

I take your comment, very seriously, as you likely expected I would.

What I envision is a combination of a constantly expanding and distributed electronic archive - everything from 'memory sticks' to larger storage devices - being maintained by individuals as well as institutions (separate from governments). And, an expanding commitment of all those participating to be diligent in backing up the information they are personally most interested (including printed archives), be it studies of coal reserves in Montana or rights abuses in Darfur or the deployment (and ominous implications) of BlackwaterUSA mercenaries in New Orleans or ...

In other words, we must become our 'paper of record' or we will become ever more impoverished in our ability to access facts, discuss and analyze those facts, and exert policy direction and accountability on those we authorize (and pay) to be our legal representatives in conducting the tasks of government.


Peace.

[EFerrari]

24. Yes. We must become The Memories and we must have

a vehicle of dissemination.

I worry, in my limited way, that this gift of the internets will be shut down.

Let's find a way, regardless.

:toast:

[understandinglife]

27. I'll never forget the stories about Solzhenitsyn and samizdat!

How each person who got a copy of "Cancer Ward" or "First Circle" would type at least one additional copy and pass them on to others at the risk of their life.

Let's hope we can keep 'the internet' operational -- or, at least, circulate stuff on USB drives and memory sticks!!! ;)

But, we must be vigilant and committed, no matter what medium we use to expanding access to primary facts and discourse.


Peace.

[EFerrari]

30. I take comfort in thinking

once given this kind of access, this kind of freedom of exchange, that most people won't give it up very easily.

Just a thought. :evilgrin:

[understandinglife]

34. Share the same reason for comfort on this issue ...

... we just need to help even more folk have the experience -- strength in numbers kind of thing! ;)


Peace.

[EFerrari]

37. Will do. And thank you for your leadership, UL. n/t

[WHAT]

51. That's scary!...

given the devolution of DU. I hope/think you're wrong.

Third generation entropy might be clicking into place...leaving us with a real mess...something not discernible by third generation fiat?...

[understandinglife]

52. Reality -- typically is scary.

Peace.

[WHAT]

54. "Scary" is for babies, mistaken...

is a more precise word.

I think everybody has gotten it wrong. There is no safe haven in China...especially for a group that thinks everything can be controlled with language when language is a whole different deal when it is graphically representative...not abstract. Language does not necessarily embody concepts when concepts are frozen graphically in "language". Propaganda deals with manipulating concepts by way of abstract associations...but, when language, itself, is immediately graphic, a cogent lie is not the answer.

What to do...

[texpatriot2004]

33. Interesting "newspaper" idea. n.t

[understandinglife]

41. Greg Mitchell: Fire Miller

It’s not enough that Judith Miller, we learned Saturday, is taking some time off and “hopes” to return to the New York Times newsroom. As the newspaper’s devastating account of her Plame games -- and her own first-person sidebar -- make clear, she should be promptly dismissed for crimes against journalism, and her own newspaper. And Bill Keller, executive editor, who let her get away with it, owes readers, at the minimum, an apology instead of merely hailing his paper’s long-delayed analysis and saying that readers can make of it what they will.

Let’s put aside for the moment Miller exhibiting the same selective memory favored by her former friends and sources in the White House, in claiming that for the life of her she cannot recall how the name of “Valerie Flame” got into the reporter’s notebook she took to her interview with Libby; how she learned about the CIA operative from other sources (whom she can’t name or even recall when it happened).

Bad enough, but let’s stick to the journalism issues. Saturday's Times article, without calling for Miller’s dismissal, or Keller’s apology, made the case for both actions in this pithy, frank, and brutal assessment: "The Times incurred millions of dollars in legal fees in Ms. Miller's case. It limited its own ability to cover aspects of one of the biggest scandals of the day. Even as the paper asked for the public's support, it was unable to answer its questions."

<clip>

Saddest of all, Sulzberger tells his reporters today that he let Miller run this entire show "because she was the one at risk." He apparently doesn't realize that the newspaper he runs was at far greater risk, and will suffer much longer than she did.

Much more at the link:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001306699

Couldn't agree more, Mr Mitchell.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

42. Jane Hamsher: "I'm guessing she was playing Let's Make a Deal."

If Entous is right about the appearance in the July notes, and the second "Flame" source was already indicated by Bennett and dismissed by Fitzgerald as not being "meaningful" when he cut a deal for Judy to exclude any testimony that was not about Libby, Fitzgerald wouldn't be able to ask about that, right?

Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred.

What's that? Why, that would be Patrick Fitzgerald asking questions at the time outside the scope of the deal to limit her testimony to Libby. Moreover, she did not refuse to answer. Which means that her original deal with Fitzgerald was, indeed, bustado.

So what was Judy doing in Fitzgerald's office all day Tuesday with her criminal -- not First Amendment -- lawyer Bob Bennett?

Much more at the link:
http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/judy-obscure.html

In some correspondence I had with Mark Kleiman a few days ago (that I posted here at DU), I suggested three reasons why Miller only spent ~ 75 min on Wed., in front of the GJ.

Seems more and more that reason # 2 is the likeliest:

Perhaps you will want to consider three aspects that are consistent with the "mouse trap" theory, Mark:

1. Judith Miller spent 75 min responding to every question with a 5th Amendment plea - he'd lift her contempt citation because she's headed to trial and he's more than willing to let her talk to reporters or whomever with the admonishment of really bad things to come if she makes any statements about anything he asked her that she used the 5th to shield herself from answering.

2. She did spend ~ 8 hours with him (and members of his staff), on Tuesday the 11th. If that produced a "script" of statements that he then went in front of the GJ, yesterday, and did the -- "You state, Ms Miller ....., true or false"; one could cover a bunch of territory in 75 min. It's not as if Fitzgerald and his team are just getting started in this investigation, so you can imagine they have some rather elaborate documentation that they could well have confronted Miller with on Tuesday (and, before -- i.e., we don't know if she has been spending time with Fitzgerald or/and his staff, at other times);

3. Someone(s) "rolled over" on Judith and he had her sit for 75 min, in front of the GJ, as he described to them exactly the sworn statement(s) he has obtained and basically asked Miller to confirm or deny. He'd have no reason to maintain her contempt citation at that point because she's going to be indicted for ..... (who knows how long the list could be).

Peace,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5038953&mesg_id=5051908

I suspect Judy will be on the witness stand more than a few times in the next several years -- Bush, Cheney, Bolton, Libby & Rove (as well as a bunch of WHIGers) one can imagine have been spending lots of time with their respective criminal lawyers.


Peace.

[glitch]

43. Reading UL posts on a Sunday morning is better than reading the NYT. nt

[EuroObserver]

44. Amen to that

...even if it's evening here :9

[understandinglife]

45. Thank you, glitch and EuroObserver!

Peace.

[understandinglife]

47. Check this from Josh Marshall on Judy and Keller -- and, Chalabi.

The only editorial accountability imposed on Miller was that she not write on Iraq or unconventional weapons. And yet, Keller concedes, she seemed to self-assign her way back into the same territory. I don't know what examples Keller has in mind. But a good place to start is Miller's inexplicable coverage of the UN Oil-for-Food scandal as recently as this past summer.

Not only is the whole Oil-for-Food story by definition about Iraq, it is also far more deeply tied to the weapons back story than it appears to on the surface. One need only note that the purported documents which gave birth to the most inflammatory charges were 'discovered' by Ahmed Chalabi.



http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_10_16.php#006754

Anyone not yet disgusted, should now be ....


Peace.

[mod mom]

48. Question on Chalabi: Is Miller's relationship w Chalabi prior to his

break-up with the * administration? Hasn't he defected from the neo-cons to Iran? (sorry, I haven't been following his illustrous career). Was it over missing funds in the Iraq government?

[understandinglife]

49. Judith Miller's "relationship" with Chalabi is extensive and is the ...

... basis of much the propaganda she published in the NYTimes prior to March 19, 2003. Her relationship with Chalabi, once "in country" after the illegal invasion of Iraq, is even more disgusting.

Here are a few links:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4235387#4237510

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4235387#4237900

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4025134#4029782

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4028517&mesg_id=4028816

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4030434

These are just a few of many that detail the extensive and long "relationship" of Miller with Chalabi.


Peace.

[mod mom]

58. thanks.

[understandinglife]

50. For those needing a quick link to just how well Miller and Bolton know ...

... one another:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4167671#4169909

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5057250


Peace.

[Independent_Liberal]

53. Kick and thanks for posting this UL!

[understandinglife]

55. Steve Cobble: "Just remind voters that the son was more deceitful than ...

... the father.

As the Plame outing scandal erupts, with new revelations every day, there's one more sinister manipulation to remember -- the timing of the run-up to the Iraq War.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post examined the White House's motivation at the time (9/16/02): "Two weeks ago, the headlines were about a lethargic economy, a depressed stock market and corporate misdeeds; the news about Iraq was about policy disagreements among Bush advisers. Now, the debate has shifted almost entirely from Democrats' preferred domestic issues to preparations for military action, a GOP favorite."

Note the salience of this next point (emphasis added):

"It's hard not to notice that the sudden urgency of war with Iraq has coincided precisely with the emergence of the corporate scandal story, with the flip in the congressional numbers and with the decline in the Republicans' prospects for retaking the Senate majority," said Jim Jordan, director of the Democrats' Senate campaign committee. "It's absolutely clear that the administration has timed the Iraq public relations campaign to influence the midterm elections . . . and to distract the voting public from a failing economy and an unpopular Republican domestic agenda."

From The War Propaganda Timing Was a Fraud, Too by Steve Cobble on October 16, 2005

Link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-cobble/the-war-propaganda-timing_b_8979.html

And, the Propagandist-in-Chief for that neoconster illegal war of aggression was none other than Ms Judith Miller, aided and abetted by the enormous media infrastructure of the New York Times.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

56. CondiLiar -- "Did she have an investment in discrediting Wilson's claims?

Does a bear shit in the woods?

She wouldn't be sending up that trial balloons like this for nothing. I'm not saying she's definitely going to be indicted, but I bet she wants to get out in front of that particular news flash and it's a good sign even she thinks this whole thing is going to crack wide open.

While you're over at C&L you can enjoy watching Bill Kristol predict that Rove and Libby will be indicted. (Oh you know THAT ONE'S gotta hurt.)

Be good to yourself. You've earned it.

From Big Day For CondiLiar by Jane Hamsher on October 16, 2005

More at the link:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/big-day-for-condiliar.html

Take Jane's wise advice -- you have definitely earned it my fellow DUers.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

57. An almost deafening "chomp, chomp, chomp" now pervades the Beltway ...

And, here is just another example of it:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aSuj1d8CcYAk&refer=top_world_news

Cheney, Condi, Miller, Libby, Rove, Bolton, Matlin, Hadley, Powell, Ari, ....., they've all been eating each other and the folk on the outside of the tank looking in have been, and continue to be, Mr Fitzgerald, his staff and the GJ.

Quite a show ... and, until just recently, it's all been a pre-release 'private viewing.'

Let the show begin ....


Peace.