Comments on: The Power of the Jump™: Those Non-Confidential Confidential Sources, Part 2 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/ Harangues that just make sense Sat, 05 Jul 2008 02:13:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Lighthouse12 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22557 Lighthouse12 Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:41:14 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22557 I suspect Judith had nothing to report in the first place but wanted to appear as if she did. She couldn't admit that - so opted to go to jail in order to be seen as a martyr instead of a liar. I suspect Judith had nothing to report in the first place but wanted to appear as if she did. She couldn’t admit that - so opted to go to jail in order to be seen as a martyr instead of a liar.

]]> By: Black Jack http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22551 Black Jack Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:14:23 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22551 Two little questions: Who or what might have the power to compel Miller to rush headlong into the very significant crime of alerting the "Muslim Charity" to an impending FBI search? Who knew about the warrant, and informed Miller so she could employ her journalist's First Amendment protections to shield possible terrorist activities from coming to light? Two little questions:

Who or what might have the power to compel Miller to rush headlong into the very significant crime of alerting the “Muslim Charity” to an impending FBI search?

Who knew about the warrant, and informed Miller so she could employ her journalist’s First Amendment protections to shield possible terrorist activities from coming to light?

]]> By: Sierra Faith http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22538 Sierra Faith Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:04:12 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22538 <strong>Much Ado About Nothing?</strong> I'm so confused.... Much Ado About Nothing?

I’m so confused….

]]> By: capitano http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22517 capitano Sat, 01 Oct 2005 01:34:06 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22517 The <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/30/AR2005093000553.html" rel="nofollow">WaPo article</a> linked by Powerline says she agreed to testify after receiving a second waiver from her source (Libby) and after <blockquote>her lawyer approached the special prosecutor in the leak investigation and received an assurance that her testimony would be <b>narrowly limited to her communications with the source</b>.</blockquote> Miller added: <blockquote>"Believe me, I did not want to be in jail. But I would have stayed even longer if I had not achieved these two things: the personal waiver <b>and the narrow . . . testimony</b>."</blockquote> The speculation is that she had more than one source and she is protecting someone other than Libby. But I have another interpretation of her conversion -- one that received minor attention when she first went to jail, namely that Fitzgerald would use Miller's appearance before the grand jury to question her under oath about <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8599914/site/newsweek/" rel="nofollow">this:</a> <blockquote>In an earlier, unrelated clash, Fitzgerald had accused Miller of compromising a probe into Islamic charities by phoning one of the groups just before a government crackdown. Launching a leak investigation, he tried to get ahold of Miller's phone records and those of a colleague at the Times. The Times claimed its reporters were following standard practice and that there was no evidence they compromised a federal investigation. A federal judge quashed Fitzgerald's subpoenas.</blockquote> More detail <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9890-2004Sep9?language=printer" rel="nofollow">here</a>. So it may be that WaPo misreported that Fitzgerald agreed to narrow his questions to those about <b>the</b> source when in fact it was to narrow it questions about any source related to the Plame matter (as opposed to extraneous matters such as the Islamic charity investigations). The WaPo article linked by Powerline says she agreed to testify after receiving a second waiver from her source (Libby) and after
her lawyer approached the special prosecutor in the leak investigation and received an assurance that her testimony would be narrowly limited to her communications with the source.

Miller added:

“Believe me, I did not want to be in jail. But I would have stayed even longer if I had not achieved these two things: the personal waiver and the narrow . . . testimony.”

The speculation is that she had more than one source and she is protecting someone other than Libby. But I have another interpretation of her conversion — one that received minor attention when she first went to jail, namely that Fitzgerald would use Miller’s appearance before the grand jury to question her under oath about this:

In an earlier, unrelated clash, Fitzgerald had accused Miller of compromising a probe into Islamic charities by phoning one of the groups just before a government crackdown. Launching a leak investigation, he tried to get ahold of Miller’s phone records and those of a colleague at the Times. The Times claimed its reporters were following standard practice and that there was no evidence they compromised a federal investigation. A federal judge quashed Fitzgerald’s subpoenas.

More detail here.

So it may be that WaPo misreported that Fitzgerald agreed to narrow his questions to those about the source when in fact it was to narrow it questions about any source related to the Plame matter (as opposed to extraneous matters such as the Islamic charity investigations).

]]> By: Bostonian http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22515 Bostonian Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:45:29 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22515 Tillman, it's called sarcasm. You might want to look that up. Tillman, it’s called sarcasm. You might want to look that up.

]]> By: Bostonian http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22514 Bostonian Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:44:38 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22514 Tillman, I've been quite consistent. I think it is ludicrous to believe that a NYT reporter would undergo any inconvenience (let alone serve jail time) to protect any Republican (let alone the evil chimpwhateverHalliburton guy). I'm amused by your highly entertaining interpretation of my remarks. *** Stu, I think you're quite right, and I don't think the prosecutor was right to go along with it. What criminal gets to choose the questions to answer? What criminal gets to choose the line of questioning? It's not right. Tillman, I’ve been quite consistent. I think it is ludicrous to believe that a NYT reporter would undergo any inconvenience (let alone serve jail time) to protect any Republican (let alone the evil chimpwhateverHalliburton guy).

I’m amused by your highly entertaining interpretation of my remarks.

***
Stu, I think you’re quite right, and I don’t think the prosecutor was right to go along with it. What criminal gets to choose the questions to answer? What criminal gets to choose the line of questioning? It’s not right.

]]> By: Stu707 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22512 Stu707 Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:59:15 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22512 The prosecutor's reported agreement to limit his questions to Libby is probably the reason she agreed to testify. http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011835.php The prosecutor’s reported agreement to limit his questions to Libby is probably the reason she agreed to testify.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011835.php

]]> By: lincoln http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22510 lincoln Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:48:58 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22510 Evidently, the same telepathic powers that allowed her to know the original waiver was given under duress,assured her this one wasn't.But,isn't it too much of an advantage over other journalists that she has abilities? Evidently, the same telepathic powers that allowed her to know the original waiver was given under duress,assured her this one wasn’t.But,isn’t it too much of an advantage over other journalists that she has abilities?

]]> By: Tillman http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22509 Tillman Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:01:36 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22509 Bostonian – you’re not being consistent with your argument here. At first, you want me to believe that she wouldn’t harm BushCo since she served time for them. Now you are implying that she is a just a leftist hack? Which is it? What do I believe? I don’t know. All I know is that she <i>says</i> that she stayed in prison to protect the identities of her informant(s). Bostonian – you’re not being consistent with your argument here. At first, you want me to believe that she wouldn’t harm BushCo since she served time for them. Now you are implying that she is a just a leftist hack? Which is it?

What do I believe? I don’t know. All I know is that she says that she stayed in prison to protect the identities of her informant(s).

]]> By: Bostonian http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22508 Bostonian Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:50:55 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/30/the-power-of-the-jump%e2%84%a2-those-non-confidential-confidential-sources-part-2/#comment-22508 Tillman, you're imagining (hallucinating really) that a reporter for the NYT would need to be *persuaded* to dish dirt on the Bush administration. You know, the NYT? The paper that regularly assassinates GWB's character? Tillman, you’re imagining (hallucinating really) that a reporter for the NYT would need to be *persuaded* to dish dirt on the Bush administration.

You know, the NYT? The paper that regularly assassinates GWB’s character?

]]>