Judith Miller of the NY Times has been subpoenaed in the investigation into the Valerie Plame leak, the NY Times reports.
The Times reminds us that "The Times has not published any articles saying it received information about Ms. Plame's identity.
We do recall the eerie media silence that fell over this case last summer. If we can believe our timeline, Paul Krugman mentioned the case in a July column; the first story by a Times reporter was on August 8 by Douglas Jehl.
In fact, from this list of stories with Ms. Miller's byline, only this one stands out as vaguely relevant. Our guess - folks remember her as sympathetic to the Administration spin on WMDs - she might have been mentioned as a recipient of a White House leak meant to discredit Ambassador Wilson, even though she never went on to publish a story using the information.
And what does it mean? "One x Two x Six" refers to one source leaking to the WaPo the news that two White House staffers leaked the Plame connection to six reporters. We have puzzled over Pincus, and mulled over Miller, neither of whom have any obvious bylines on this story. Perhaps the special counsel has found The One, and is subpoenaing the six reporters who received leaks. (Hmm, a blogger's dilemma - the sequels were so lame that I hate to go with the Matrix wordplay; can the phone call to the WaPo be the "One Ring-a-ding to nab them all"?)
On a related note, the Times had an editorial whining that this leak investigation, with the aggressive subpoenaing of reporters, might have a chilling effect on investigative reporting.
First of all, no kidding - that endgame was always obvious, which was why I speculated a year ago that the press was deliberately avoiding a walk down this road.
Secondly, what is the Times thinking about with this:
To unmask a confidential source as part of a criminal investigation, the government should have to show two things: that the information is central to the investigation and that it cannot be obtained any other way. In Mr. Cooper's case, the information could more than likely be provided under oath by government officials, including those implicated.
Boy, will their jaws drop when they read the rest of the Bill of Rights (past the bit about press freedom) and get to the Fifth Amendment.