Defending Judy Miller

Although you haven't seen many ringing defenses of Judy Miller on the pages of this blog over the last few years, in the last couple of days I seem to be mounting a stealth campaign for the Presidency of the Judy Miller Fan Club.

Well - Mark Kleiman sums up the latest evidence suggesting that Ms. Miller perjured herself, and cooperated with Special Counsel Fitzgerald on that basis.  A key point - the WSJ tells us that:

She first appeared before the grand jury on Sept. 30 to talk about two conversations she had in July 2003. She made a second appearance Wednesday to disclose a third conversation in late June that she had previously failed to mention to the grand jury.

Ahh!  Did she fail to disclose it in response to direct questioning?  That might be perjury.

However, let's not overlook this, from the WaPo:

One source close to Miller said it appears that the notes were Fitzgerald's first indication that Miller and Libby had spoken in June.

...After Miller testified before the grand jury Sept. 30, a source close to Miller said, Fitzgerald and her attorney urged her to go back through her old notes and turn over any that involved Libby or would be relevant to the case, the source said.

So, here is an alternative to the perjury theory - Ms. Miller testified to something vague, such as "I may have met with Libby earlier and had a discussion relevant to the inquiry of this grand jury; I would need to check my notes, which have not been subpoenaed."

No perjury there.  But afterwards, Fitzgerald will surely ask for the notes.  And since his subpoena called for notes relevant to the July conversations, and since the July conversations *may* have been a follow-up to the June conversation, those June notes are, arguably, covered by the subpoena as well.  If not, then a new subpoena looms.

Her attorney will advise her that this is a fight she can not win - she will (hypothetically) be advised that she went to jail to protect the July conversations despite a judge ruling against her, and she can either give up the new notes, or go back to jail.

And since the contempt order had not yet been lifted, the return trip to jail was imminent.

The upshot - cooperation, but no perjury.

The significance of this alternative "no perjury" view - other than to promote my secret candidacy, I am not sure.  But the Anon Lib has an idea about why the June 23 talk may be important - briefly, Russert spoke to Libby in July, and may have told him about Plame (we agree!).  However, if Libby told Miller about Plame in June, then Russert can't be an alibi witness for Libby.

Slick.  However, only the invaluable Murray Waas has reported that the June talk involved Plame, and his sourcing was odd; other reports say the notes are about Wilson.  Developing... [Score one for Waas - per Ms. Miller's account, the June talk did include Wilson's wife, although perhaps not by name.]

MORE:  Since I will be incommunicado until Monday, I am gloomily resigned to indictments Friday, and the Times report on Saturday.  KIDDING!  (Maybe.)

Comments

[Al]

Sorry, TM, but we just can't allow to go incommunicado until the Plame indictments come down (or the case is dropped). You are too valuable! Just pretend that the Yankees somehow actually beat the Angels and your presence is required for baseball-watching.

[emptywheel]

Hahahaha!

I'll be incommunicado next week too. You and I will have to set up a Plame indictment satellite response system.

Anyway, I generally respect the analysis you do. But I don't understand how when you read this:

One source close to Miller said it appears that the notes were Fitzgerald's first indication that Miller and Libby had spoken in June.

You didn't notice this: "One source close to Miller"

Judy Miller has every incentive--for legal and publicity reasons--to have you believed she didn't perjure herself. Hell, she's not even going to get her 1.2 million book contract if she can't claim to be a martyr for the first amendment anymore. So why is that you believe this point, coming from a Miller associate? Against all the countervailing evidence (particularly that Miller allowed the "two meeting" story to continue for several days after her testimony).

[topsecretk9]

hmmm...could "sources close" be wrong?

could Libby been the window to Fitz getting to June!

Judy's beef, of course, turned out to be about questions leading to 'other sources"...not waiver confusion...and for a long time Fitzgerald would not nudge on this...

until, poof...Libby says "I talked to Judy in June" --and she probably took notes too!

suddenly Fitz has his way into June...

Judy doesn't know because she is in Jail...

Fitz doesn't care about the "other sources" issue because he can ask about June! Thanks to Libby.

I only say this because when you read Matt Coopers "The Welfare Merry-Go-Round: Part 2" in Sept.22, 2003

you realize why the grand jury was microscopic about the issue of Welfare Reform, "he didn't recall"

they had his notes...Rove's email...and gee, from the Merry-Go-Round article no way for Rove to pick that out of a hat! I doesn't even have a quote or admin input.

they were microscopic all right...the prodded the lie all the through.

[Syl]

Actually, the notes as first indication of an earlier conversation sounds plausible to me.

"Libby said blah blah, which is slightly different from what he said last time, try to confirm."

or

"Libby re-iterated earlier comments and added that..."

Ms Huff said that Judy did not look happy when she exited from the second testimony and had no comment at all for reporters. A marked contrast from her first testimony when she came bouncing out, all smiles.

She thought she was in trouble for perjury or something?

She thought she had burned a source (Libby) and felt guilty?

She thought this was not the end, but the beginning of even more hassles?

She had to go to the bathroom, like real quick?

[Anonymous Liberal]

TM, I actually considered the same scenario you describe (though I didn't write about it). I think it is a plausible alternative to the perjury trap idea. There are a couple of difficult facts which it has to overcome, though. First, presumably Fitzgerald asked the same questions to Miller in his jailhouse proffer that he did before the grand jury. If she gave the vague answer you describe about prior conversations with Libby, why didn't Fitzgerald instruct her to go find the notes then and bring them to the grand jury? Why did the notes only surface after her first grand jury appearance? Second, Miller and her attorneys seemed very upbeat immediately after her initial grand jury testimony. They very much acted like they thought she was entirely off the hook and in the clear. That makes me think they were not informed until later that day (or the next day) that Fitzgerald wasn't done with Miller yet. That fact seems to be more consistent with the perjury trap scenario than the cooperating all along scenario. But, I think either scenario is possible.

[topsecretk9]

From no help from the media...we only have to assume that the indication that spells bad news for Libby...but like Cooper got burned from Rove's email and Coopers own notes (WR), how do we know that Libby is not the one who told Ftiz. "we talked in June"?

If Libby said it...it would resolve the issue of why Judy is still in jail...no questions about other sources

but it Libby says June, then Fitz has a window to go to June!--no worries about Sup's (July) and give her her "no other sources" deal that put her in jail.

[clarice]

I think differently. I think the whole matter now relates to the second part of her subpoena. I think Libby testified that Judy had in June told him something about the Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium, June (I maintain by error) is outside the time period in the subpoena, but notified about this testimony, Judy and her counsel conferred and since she now had the promise of the SP not to go into her other sources, she agreed to expand the discover request and her testimony to voer this.

As for the kabuki dance about appearance as a clue to the story we can't see,(blink, blink) how fake can the already fake news get? Risible doesn't begin to cover this crap.

[topsecretk9]

Clarice

my hairbrain...here how I see it

Libby tells Fitz I talked to Judy in June
Fitz is able to get around Judys reasons for jail...no specific source questions but

did you recall talking to Libby in June
Do you have any notes from THAT TIME

Judy goes back and probably sh. her you know what when she read what it said in her notes back then

kind of like when Luskin came out with Roves email after Cooper testified and wrote what he told the grand jury

[topsecretk9]

Of course Libby is up to snuff on Wilson...

"the names were wrong, the dates were wrong"

really? how do you know?

[owl]

I still say all that "respectful silence" we hear from the Media means they are all holding their collective breaths. Tip-toeing, gently gently, come on Fritz.....

Wouldn't it be a coup if after 1001 attempts to do a "gotcha" with the Media/CIA leaks against the WH, if they really hit? Remember the Media was shouting the loudest for an investigation. The Times decide this case doesn't apply to their iron rule. Their CIA and hubby have a protective wall. The only witnesses are Media. Bam Bam!

[Kate]

Owl-exactly right. They are really rooting for indictments. These things have a way of playing out differently than intended however. If Fitzgerald overplays his hand and the indictments look weak, the conservative base could reunite, not unlike what happened on the left with the Clinton impeachment.

WAPO columnist Richard Cohen, a committed leftist, wrote today the Fitzgerald should go back to Chicago and prosecute some real crime.

He said he investigated something that wasn't even a crime to begin with, but as happens with these things there was probably a coverup, but according to Cohen, a coverup of something not that important. Ouch!

The media will report this next week, but quickly tire of it. They will be glad that Rove is gone, but Rove hasn't been batting a thousand lately either. Maybe some new blood in the WH fighting the vast left wing conspiracy and its overzealous Espionage Act prosecutor will do some good.

[JoeDuke]

I am guessing Miller already knew about Wilson by June 23rd based on Wilson's big mouth as it relates to 1) Kristof's May 6th article, 2) Pincus' June 12th article and probably 3) Wilson signing up with the NYT to write his July 6th article...and I'll add 40 all of Miller's research with the CIA on WMD (Valerie's area).

In addition, per the WaPo, the accounts of Miller/Libby July 8 and 12 meetings are:
"According to a source familiar with Libby's account of his July 2003 conversations with Miller, the two first met for breakfast on July 8, when Miller interviewed Libby about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. At that time, she asked him why Wilson had been chosen to investigate questions that Cheney had posed about whether Iraq tried to buy uranium in Niger. Libby, the source familiar with his account said, told her that the White House was working with the CIA to learn more about Wilson's trip and how he was selected.

Libby had a second conversation with Miller, a telephone call on July 12 or July 13, the source said. In it, Libby said he had learned that Wilson's wife had a role in sending him on the trip and that she worked for the CIA. Libby never knew Plame's name or that she was a covert operative, the source said."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/30/AR2005093000553.html

So this report states the July 8th meeting was about Iraq WMD (just as clarice suggests the June 23 meeting was probably about). But on July 8th meeting Libby says we are looking into the details of Wilson's trip and it is not until July 12th that Wilson's wife comes up. So it seems very possible that Miller set up a meeting on June 23 to discuss Iraq WMD and she brings up Wilson first. She was fishing and Libby had no info...nor did he have much by July 8th (except 2 days earlier he read Wilson's article)...by the 12th the wife came up. But by July 12th, plenty of reporters call asking about Wilson’s trip and his wife's role.

No one has shown Rove or Libby to lie about anything to date. Wilson and Cooper, so far, are another story.

[topsecretk9]

Joe Duke

good points..although, because remember, Judy never wrote a word on the subject...so here wanting to protect other sources is peculiar

no it is funny when you go back and read things...
October 1, 2005; Page A2
"Early in the investigation, in January 2004, Mr. Libby had signed a general waiver of confidentiality at the request of prosecutors. Technically, such a waiver could have released Ms. Miller from a pledge of confidentiality.

But Ms. Miller had said she doesn't consider such general waivers acceptable because they might be coerced by prosecutors.

Even so, Richard Sauber, a Washington lawyer who represented Time's Mr. COOPER, said his client had "obtained what was clearly a voluntary and complete waiver from Lewis Libby in 2004." He added: "I presume Judy could have had it then."

huh? what? Come again...so tell me Mr. Sauber how is that Libbys general waiver over a year ago was fantastically clear to Cooper (and should be to Judy too!) but Roves's EXACT SAME WAVIER--CONFOUNDED AND CONFUSED---COOPER

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB112808713430456757-XkH3iFP9jNODhcvLB4Eu_TeJr24_20061001.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

[topsecretk9]

and sorry if TM pointed this out before...there are so many aggravating aspects it is easy to forget and then get frustrated once again

[clarice]

Joe Duke--Kudos Excellent job...

[kim]

PERJURY

Cooper, Miller, Wilson AND Russert.
===================================

[clarice]

I don't see how.

BTW all those letters Wilson wrote--to the SSCI and Pincus and Kristof--are to cover his ass re a perjury conviction for lying before the SSCI. They are to establish that he made a mistake in testifying and did try to correct the record. It'll make a perjury count rather harder to sustain.

Miller? Why? Her subpoena did not cover notes before July 6 and the notebook she brought in later goes to a date in JUNE.

Russert was deceptive in describing his gj testimony, but we aren't the gj, and there is no reason to believe he lied to it.

Cooper seems to have lied to his readers but if that were perjury we wouldn't have much of a press corps left. As to whether he discussed wr or not with Rove--whether or not he did is not material to the inquiry and therefore would not constitute perjury. He did lie to the public in his initial report of his conversation with Rove. Again, if lying to readers were perjury, there'd be a very small press corps.
The only way he'd be in trouble would be if the SP had evidence that he willfully lied to the gj about something material.

[kim]

Thanks, Clarice, but facts only confuse me.
===========================================

[clarice]

Joe Duke --I told you Libby was a good lawyer--Look at this part of what you posted:

the source familiar with his account said, told her that the White House was working with the CIA to learn more about Wilson's trip and how he was selected.
_______

They handled this correctly it seems to me.The WH gets charges about something that happened in the CIA, they have no independent knowledge about it. They make inquiry of Tenet to explain what it is about.
I do not think the dimwits who plotted this imagined they were dealing with grownups..

[kim]

Well, actually I looked at your post a little, Clarice. You mention Wilson 'lying', Russert 'deceptive', and Cooper 'to have lied'. Miller's mention is of a notebook she may have committed perjury about. Now, I grant that does not make formal 'perjury'. But they are all 4 liars, and that's what perjurers are convicted of doing.
=============================================

[HonestAbe]

How did the reporter's find out Plame's name and employer?

[kim]

They pounded the pavement, cried "Open, sesame" and the words sprang forth like thunder, heard for miles around.
============================================

[clarice]

kim--Again. Judy was only obligated to provide documents relating to conversations beginning on JULY 6. The matters in her notebook relate to a conversation in JUNE. Therefore, there is no problem with her late production of the notebook.

As to how widely known it was that Valerie was a CIA agent, I referred you to Richard Cohen's article in the WaPo where he says everyone knew that. (And of course TM has documented that many, many reporters seem to have figured that out on their own.)

Now, it is possible that the people you list may be in legal peril but going on what is publicly known, I wouldn't make that assessment.

[justicurious]

Can thunder spring? Maybe crash? Or bolt or burst?

[kim]

Oh, yes, C, the facts actually do make some sense. I certainly couldn't indict with what is publically know, but of course, no one has to do that, yet.

The June notes will present a problem, and may have come to light for this reason, if she first testified after her release that she had not discussed Wilson with Libby in June. Then she has already committed perjury, and only can get out of it by claiming poor memory, and by producing the notes.

I'm sure you understand this. When I sound dumb, I'm sometimes purposeful about it. I do believe intuition is a better guide to this matter than the spinning swirl laid out on the newswires. I argued this with JBG when he sneered at my paucity of knowledge of facts. I was screaming Joe, Joe, Joe, way back then, too, but I more suspected a CIA plot. Now I think it was more cynical, self-conscious MSM amusement. I know nothing, but enjoy wondering.
=========================================

[kim]

And I suspect Val is innocent of wrongdoing, if only because of Joe's outrage at her 'outing'. Were she involved he wouldn't dare object. And were she not, he may have figured that blaming someone else might mollify her.

And I think her sabbatical was over upset at the ruination of her career rather than for her husband's exposure as a liar before the SSCI.
==================================================

[kim]

From April thunder spring May flowers.

I don't know about you but I've sure felt the air spring around me as the blasts of a nearby lightening stike vibrate the atmosphere.
============================================

[kim]

Sometimes thunder leaps with the quickness of a cat.

Thunder springs. Look at the water bursting from it.
================================================

[topsecretk9]

the press core outing was before Novak...very few would take Joe seriously on his own.

[topsecretk9]

corp

[kim]

Now we know why Fitz seems not to be after Novak. Judy was long out by then, a point fiercely opposed by so many posters here in the past.
==============================================

[kim]

corpse
======

[kim]

Uh, Val was long out by then. Has anyone checked out the possiblility that Judith Miller and Valerie Plame are one and the same person?
================================================

[Jim Rockford]

I don't understand how anyone can get a conviction though on Karl Rove, Libby, Miller, or Cooper over outing Valerie Plame. Considering there is likely to be testimony that so many people heard different things and what looks so far like a giant game of telephone.

The only way I see a conviction is if Rove, Libby, or Miller get a hold of a super-secret classified document saying "Valerie Plame is a super-secret CIA agent don't tell anyone!" and then disemminate that information. Considering Andrea Mitchell said on MSNBC that Plame's identity was common knowledge in Georgetown, the various Who's Who entries for her, Wilson's high-profile conduct, I have a hard time believing any serious prosecutor would go ahead based on testimony from either WH officials or Press either of whom a defense attorney could tear to shreds on the stand.

Finding leakers? Of serious classified info? Now THAT I do believe Fitzgerald (courtesy of Judy Miller and Islamic Charities) WOULD go after, based on phone logs from the CIA; or people's private residences; or various meetings where Judy Miller took notes that match classified info to restricted people in the CIA. It would explain Miller sitting in jail (not wanting to divulge various CIA sources told her classified things she wasn't supposed to know).

People at the CIA are talking, to people they shouldn't (the press) and now it looks to me like the Press has realized that the net is going to be CIA NOT talking to anyone in the Press since it's going to simply get another SP inquiry, and possible dismissal/jail time.

The OTHER lesson here is don't trust the Press ala Matt Cooper of Time; since they are literally in bed with Dems (Cooper's wife is a top Hillary staffer). Press has only itself to blame when Reps simply cut off access.

[kim]

Here's another small point. Supposedly the notes of the June conversation were found in Judy's notebook in New York. Surely she turns the whole notebook over to Fitz. Can she specify that he can only read one page?
===============================================

[clarice]

She can redact it to cover only the narrow thing he is looking at as her other notes were redacted.(I suspect her counsel did this in both instances.)

See, you are absolutely entitled to the ownership of your own records. Therefore there is nothing improper,unlawful or "unwise" to not turn over one extra jot or tittle than the law requires.
Not the government's business.

[kim]

And what you hide piques the prosecutor's curiosity. You are arguing law, and I am arguing human nature.
=============================================

[kim]

And what are the laws of scandal?
==================================

[kim]

And I maintain all this redacting and dealing is a charade. What is to limit Fitz's questions?
===============================================

[topsecretk9]

a little of topic, or not...intersting timing ?---

Washington - President George W Bush has approved the creation of a national clandestine service within the Central Intelligence Agency to oversee all US espionage operations, the government said on Thursday.

The action was the latest in efforts to overhaul US intelligence following its failures on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the 9/11 attacks on the United States.

...The statement described the NCS as "the national authority for the integration, co-ordination, deconfliction, and evaluation of human intelligence operations across the entire intelligence community".

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1816680,00.html

[kim]

Resolution has devolved to deconfliction.
===========================================

[kim]

Fitz is serious. He could have taken the obvious Big Bob deal to have Judy be Libby's source and Judy innocent because Plame was already outed(which may yet be the denouement of that), but his curiosity has been aroused now about earlier events.

What's to stop him? Not Bob Dole, not Bob Bennett. Cohen's crying uncle, prominent Dems are silent as the tomb(Well, Repubs, too) and the press is on strike, for what I don't know. Dumber readers, probably, which they are getting, effortlessly.
==================================================

[clarice]

Kim, I'm sorry I am unable to persuade you. Pretend you had a diary in which you kept a record of all your conversations with everyone. You are subpoenaed to testify and produce records of all conversations you had with Mr. X in July 2003. Normally, you would ask your lawyer to go through the diary for that month, copy all pages on which that material appears and block out anything on those pages (redact) which relates to conversations with others.(Now those matters may reveal confidential things about you or the other person or not. But the point is, you are not obligated to nor does the counsel subpoenaing them have a right to them.

After you produce them and testify, it turns out that there was something in June as well which the prosecutor wants. You can make him get a new subpoena or just agree thru counsel to produce that as well.

That is what appears to have happened here.

I do not see what the scandal is. That yentas in the press --who hate you any way --try to make something out of that,so what? There's nothing the least bit scandalous about your behavior. Nothing at all.

In fact, it appears, she was quite accommodating to the prosecutor because she could have refused and made him get yet anothr subpoena.

[topsecretk9]

but his curiosity has been aroused now about earlier events.

or it's just been really boring for the past 2 years.

[Intensive Care]

Now retired, Carl Ford of the State Department drafted and sent the memo regarding who, what, and when....( Wilson to Niger), to POWELL,while he was in Africa. IS THIS THE SAME CARL FORD THAT TESTIFIED AT THE SENATE HEARING'S AGAINST BOLTON??????????????????????????????????

[kim]

I agree she has behaved properly; if guilty, it was prudent. But I believe the manner in which she has behaved toward Fitz has made him suspicious of her guilt, and if she is innocent she should turn on her ability to communicate like a firehose.

I don't believe I have offended you but please pardon me if I have. Your posts are consistently among the more judicious on the blog, a standard I can recognize if not achieve, and I look forward to them.
===============================================

[topsecretk9]

Clarice--

on LCJ as a Novaks bug and source...would there be any likelihood Novak would be asked about the chance meeting

and if Wilson was ever questioned, would he be asked the same?

[kim]

Oh, and by 'scandal' I didn't mean her failure to earlier pony up her notebook. I was talking about toute l'affaire Plame.
=========================================

[clarice]

Kim, You haven't offended me at all, but the point is she behaved properly. Period. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence.

top--Wilson said he was questioned by the FBI sometime ago but I see no sign that he has been called before the gj. Since I don't know how that encounter would come up --that is what the scope of the inquiry is I don't know.

I don't know either if Johnson has been interviewed.

No one knows if Novak was interviewed or if he testified, but ,again, it depends on the scope of the inquiry.

[kim]

So was being contemptuous proper? I know this is moving the goalposts a little on you but Fitz has the whole stadium.
================================================