Ms. Mitchell's time is coming - here is lots of material and transcripts of her past efforts on this subject.
And let's recap some commentary on her detailed coverage of the Iraq/Niger/uranium story.
On June 23 she broke the State-friendly scoop that a State dissent on Iraq's nuclear aspirations had been misplaced in the NIE.
On July 6, she interviewed Joe Wilson on Meet The Press while Tim Russert was on vacation. [And who arranged the booking? Why, Ms. Mitchell herself called him - she had his phone number since she had tracked him down after the Pincus article on June 12.]
On July 8 she told us that CIA "operatives" had sent Joe Wilson to Niger without the knowledge of the top CIA brass. In his July 14 column Bob Novak used "operative" to describe Ms. Plame, who he also linked to the decision to send Wilson. Coincidence, same source, or what? FWIW, Novak got the Plame leak from Armitage of State on July 8.
On July 20 she got laughs by going public with a bit of a snit that Richard Armitage would no longer return her phone calls.
And in late September she broke the news of the CIA criminal referral that ignited this story.
She was covering this pretty carefully and talking to the same people in State who leaked to Novak, yet never got a leak herself? Even though she said the Wilson and wife link was "widely known"? Even though Armitage at State had no reason to think the Plame news was confidential or classified? Even though Armitage had also leaked it to Bob Woodward?
Whatever. It's easy to see why, if Ms. Mitchell has not disclosed that yet, she won't disclose it now - if she admits to having received an Armitage leak, that will be his third strike, and even the ever-patient Fitzgerald may become fed up with Armitage.
As a matter of source protection, she really needs to help Russert, NBC, and Armitage by keeping quiet *IF* he is, in fact, her source - obviously I am merely speculating as to scenarios and motives here.
Or, she could blurt out that she has a source, expose Russert to perjury charges (never happen, of course), expose her source to possible perjury charges, and, uhh, move on. Make the call!
SINCE YOU ASKED: My prediciton is, she has a story and is sticking to it. Let's hope the jury can't hear the snickers and laughter from the media room.
AND BACK IN REALITY: The prosecution wants to keep out the Mitchell tapes, and the judge is leaning their way. No worries - The Decider will pardon Libby this afternoon if we don't hear from Mitchell. (Hyperbole, folks.)
MORE: Cathie Martin (of Cheney's press office) testified that Bill Harlow (CIA press guy) mentioned that Andrea Mitchell was calling. Well, that is not a surprise, considering her July 8 report.
C&L has one of the Mitchell appearances on Imus.