Victory for journalism! Miller released! VP's right-hand man leaked CIA name!

Why this is important:

Basically here's what went down:
- Leading up to the war in Iraq, former ambassador Joe Wilson criticized intelligence that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from African countries for nuclear programs.
- Ultimately, the criticism was dead-on, leading to the embarassing 9/11 report with all the faulty intelligence, including these bogus "deals".
- A mystery person recklessly leaked the name of Wilson's wife - Valerie Plame - as a CIA operative.
- Robert Novak, a CNN journalist and right-winger, publishes the information that he had gotten from the mystery person.
- Novak apparently got his info from Judith Miller - a pulitzer prize winning reporter from CNN
- Valerie Plame was undercover, and the leak blew her cover, potentially killing years of work on various projects, and endangering her life and other Americans
- A federal investigation was started into the leak - since revealing a CIA identity is a federal crime.
- Miller was brought to court but refused to identify her anonymous source, standing up for the integrity of journalism.
- Miller was jailed for 86 days.
- In July, Bush's cronie Karl Rove was fingered as a source by a Time Magazine reporter, and Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Libby, was said to have confirmed the information.
- Yesterday, Libby released Miller of her obligation to silence, and announced he was the leak. Miller was released.

- Today, Libby will testify before a Grand Jury.


I think this says a lot about journalism. If journalists can't get anonymous sources, then some stories will never be told. To see someone hold their convictions is great - and in this case - it's helping to force someone to go public with information about political corruption at a very high level of government. Miller's 87 days in jail is a public service!



http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/30/cia.leak/index.html

Jailed reporter reaches deal in CIA leak probe
New York Times' Miller: 'It's good to be free'

(CNN) -- After spending 12 weeks behind bars protecting a confidential source, New York Times reporter Judith Miller was released from jail after receiving permission from her source to provide evidence to a federal grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA operative's name.

Miller will appear before the grand jury Friday, after her attorneys reached an agreement with prosecutors on the scope of her testimony, "which satisfied my obligation as a reporter to keep faith with my sources," she said in a statement.

"It's good to be free," Miller said after her release Thursday. "I am leaving jail today because my source has now voluntarily and personally released me from my promise of confidentiality regarding our conversations."

She did not identify the source.

Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, called Miller in prison September 19 to personally free her from the pledge of confidentiality, a move that apparently contributed to her release, Libby's attorney, Joseph Tate of Philadelphia, told CNN.

New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. said the newspaper supported Miller's decision to testify.

"We are very pleased that she has finally received a direct and uncoerced waiver, by phone and in writing, releasing her from any claim of confidentiality and enabling her to testify," he said in a statement.

Miller was released from a federal facility in Alexandria, Virginia, about 4 p.m. after a contempt order against her was vacated by a federal judge, a source with detailed knowledge of her case told CNN. Her whereabouts were not immediately known.

Had refused to testify about sources
The chain of events that led to the contempt charges against Miller began in July 2003, when syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who is also a CNN contributor, identified Plame as a CIA operative in his column. He cited unidentified senior administration sources for the information.

Plame's husband is Joe Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to Iraq. Wilson charged that his wife's name was leaked to retaliate against him after he disputed Bush administration statements that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase uranium in Africa.

Because federal law makes it a crime to deliberately reveal the identity of a CIA operative, the Justice Department launched an investigation, headed by Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney in Chicago.

As part of his probe, Fitzgerald subpoenaed a number of journalists to testify about their sources, including Miller. Despite the fact that she never actually wrote a story on Plame or Wilson, Miller refused to testify about sources she developed during her reporting, and she was jailed for contempt in July.

She could have been held in jail until October, when the grand jury's term will expire.

New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller said that until recently, Miller had received "only a generic waiver" of her confidentiality promise, "and she believed she had ample reason to doubt it had been freely given."

"In recent days, several important things have changed that convinced Judy that she was released from her obligation," Keller said in a statement. He did not provide details of what those changes were.

Miller said in her statement that she would not comment until after she testifies before the grand jury.

'Why didn't someone call us?'
Tate said Libby signed a waiver of confidentiality more than a year ago, which Tate followed with a phone call to New York Times attorney Floyd Abrams assuring him that Libby's waiver was voluntary.

Over the Labor Day weekend, Miller's attorney, Robert Bennett, tracked Tate down in Martha's Vineyard to tell him she had not accepted the waiver as valid because "it came from lawyers."

"I assured Bennett that it was voluntary, and he asked, 'Would Scooter say that to Judy?' And I said, 'Scooter doesn't want to see Judy in jail,'" Tate said.

"My reaction was, why didn't someone call us 80 days ago?" he said of his conversation with Bennett.

After receiving assurance from Fitzgerald that a call between Libby and Miller would not be obstructing justice, the call was set up by Bennett and both attorneys listened in, Tate said.

"Scooter said to her, 'Judy, Joe Tate talked to Floyd Abrams more than a year ago and said it's voluntary. Joe assured me you understood,'" Tate recalled from the conversation. "'But we want you to know the waiver was voluntary.'"

Tate said Miller responded that she and Abrams had discussed it but that she was not willing to "rely on lawyers."

Libby said, "Well, why didn't someone call us?" Tate said. "There was no answer."

Tate told CNN Libby testified before a grand jury about his "conversations with Judy Miller and everyone else," appearing two or three times in 2003 and 2004. But he said he has not gone before the grand jury since, and until called by Bennett in early September had not been contacted by anyone in connection with the case in more than a year. Tate said he has no reason to believe Libby is a target of the investigation.

Libby testified he talked about the Plame matter with a few reporters, including Miller and Time magazine's Matt Cooper as well as two Washington Post reporters, Glenn Kessler and Walter Pincus. He said he had assured Kessler and Pincus' attorney that Libby's waiver of confidentiality was voluntary. "To me, that was the end of the story," Tate said.

He said he and Libby assumed Miller was jailed for protecting another source or for another unknown reason, and said he did not know why it took 10 days to release Miller following her conversation with Libby.

CNN's Kelly Wallace and Dana Bash contributed to this report.

Minor point, she works for the New York Times.

I'm glad to see reporters who are willing to face jail terms to protect their sources and maintain our ability to find out what is really going on.

now the juicy bits:

Did she really have premission to reveal her source before she even went to prision? I didn't hear this bit on NPR (ok, I listen while getting ready in the morning so I don't always hear entire stories). Do you buy it? Did she take the prision sentence for publicity? or does she really mistrust lawyers this much? (ok... I can actually see the point there... especially lawyers in washington)

is it really a victory though? the source basically gave her permission to talk. if that hadn't happened, she would still be in jail for not revealing him/her.

How telling is it that there are even leaks from the White House? Regardless of journalism's "integrity", or whatever, which in my opinion has gone down the drains (mostly) anyway.

Novak should have been the one in jail. He's the one who first printed the info about Valerie Plame. Judith Miller never even wrote an article about it! Oh, and WTF kind of name is Scooter anyway?!

That fucking Karl Rove! He should step down! Karl Rove is the leak! He needs to be fired!

Oh ... wait... it wasn't Karl Rove. I guess even Democrats can be wrong sometimes.

This was no public service. She was protecting the identity of someone who is suspected of committing a felony. Hiding his identity was not just an obstruction of justice but a disservice to the public by leaving this felon in a position of power within the government.

~Ulrika~

Exactly. Protecting sources is one thing, obstructing justice is another. Do we want to protect people who leak information right and left that can endanger countless people?

Oh yeah. That explains a lot, actually.

and you know this because?