E&P: Miller Attacks Calame Critique, Calls Keller Memo 'Ugly'

[Hissyspit]

Greg Mitchell continues his excellent work at Editor and Publisher. Judith Miller acting desperate. Popcorn anyone?

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001350291

Miller Raises Stakes: Attacks Calame Critique, Disputes Abramson, Calls Keller Memo 'Ugly'

By Greg Mitchell
Published: October 24, 2005 7:30 AM ET
NEW YORK
Byron "Barney" Calame, public editor for The New York Times, posted at his Web journal late Sunday a reply from reporter Judith Miller, strenuously taking issue with his critique of her actions in the CIA leak issue published in the newspaper earlier that day.

In it, among other things, she raises the volume in her dispute with Executive Editor Bill Keller, as she now terms Keller's memo to staff on Friday "ugly." Also, for the first time, she names Jill Abramson as the editor she talked to about supposedly writing an article about the Plame outing -- then attacked her version of events.

- snip -

Here is Miller's e-mail to Calame:

Barney,

- snip -

While you posted Bill Keller’s sanitized, post-lawyered version of the ugly, inaccurate memo to the staff he circulated Friday, which accused me of “misleading” an editor and being “entangled” with I. Lewis Libby, you declined to post the answers I sent you to six questions that we touched on during our interview Thursday. Had you done so, readers could have made their own assessment of my conduct in what you headlined as “the Miller mess.”

You chose to believe Jill Abramson when she asserted that I had never asked her to pursue the tip I had gotten about Joe Wilson’s trip to Niger and his wife’s employment at the C.I.A. Now I ask you: Why would I – the supposedly pushiest, most competitive reporter on the planet -- not have pushed to pursue a tantalizing tip like this? Soon after my breakfast meeting with Libby in July, I did so. I remember asking the editor to let me explore whether what my source had said was true, or whether it was a potential smear of a whistleblower. I don’t recall naming the source of the tip. But I specifically remember saying that because Joe Wilson’s op-ed column had appeared in our paper, we had a particular obligation to pursue this. I never identified the editor to the grand jury or publicly, since it involved internal New York Times decision-making. But since you did, yes, the editor was Jill Abramson.

MORE AT LINK

[glitch]

1. boohoo judy good bye.

tell it to the Iraq casualties.

[Hissyspit]

3. but, but... people are talking bad about her!

/sardonicism

[Marnieworld]

2. so like when are they going to fire her?

Really how much shit will they take from her without seeming completely in her control. Can her ass and write a ten page article ripping her to shreads and apologize for backing her. Enough is enough.

[Spazito]

4. LOL, Miller's response is a transparent attempt to refute the facts

because of her testimony in front of the Grand Jury. Her naming of the editor is purely a defense against a possible perjury charge, imo. This woman has an incredibly overblown and delusional picture of herself, imo. She really does see herself as a victim rather than the traitorous propagandist she is.

[LizW]

5. Whee!! Hair-pulling ensues! n/t

[Justice]

6. If tip was so tantalizing, wouldn't you remember who told you the name?

She makes no sense at all.

[ProfessorGAC]

7. Last Line Of Defense: Attack Others Tangentially Involved

When you've got no other defense, you use the "She made me do it" defense. So, all she can try to do to defend her actions are to through Jill under the bus.

An act of desperation.
The Professor

[tanyev]

8. Ugly is as ugly does, Judy.

[Straight Shooter]

9. Judas Miller, a symphony of "poor little me"

:nopity:

[Neil Lisst]

10. Dowd v. Miller. Two women enter. Only one leaves.

I'm backing Maureen.

[Toots]

11. So Judy wanted to out the CIA Agent but her Editor wouldn't let her..

And that is supposed to make us more sympathetic to her cause???? :rofl: