At this point, Judith Miller SHOULD be issued a "subject" letter

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

and hauled back in. Talk about obstruction! Her own account in the NYT shows she has been playing fast and lose with Fitzgerald and had another source other than Libby. It is not credible on the face of it that she cannot "remember" who her second source is and who initially revealed to her the identity of Valerie Plame. I also think she needs to be quizzed more about her time in Jackson Hole, which Libby reminded her of in his coded letter to her. I also wonder if they have supoenaed her hard drive.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Valorie Flame

I believe is how she spelled the name in her notes-and says she didn't get it from Libby. Hope Fitzgerald has found out who she got it from, and that it comes out--soon.

[McKenzie]

2. now that's a good idea...any prosecuter

who knows how these things work might already have ran a file recovery proggie over it. Hope she used the Gutmann standard to erase deleted files.

[ewagner]

3. Transparent lies

Fitzgerald MUST realize that Judith is lying through her teeth to cover for Libby (and maybe others...like Bolton) but he still has the pesky burden of proof . I'm really pissed off just thinking that she can get away with this.

[NNN0LHI]

4. Shouldn't her unindicted co-conspirators at the NYT get one too? n/t

[longship]

5. Re: "subject" letter. Lawyers, what are the requirements?

The RW media has been spinning this. What's the real deal here?

What are the standard procedures here?

Can't a GJ just go ahead and indict anybody they want?

I understand that no letter is necessary if the putative perp has been informed verbally. Is this wrong?