Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Criticism of Miller Could Complicate Case Against Libby

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 12:37 AM
Original message
Criticism of Miller Could Complicate Case Against Libby
Criticism of Miller Could Complicate Case Against Libby


WASHINGTON - A recent barrage of attacks on the credibility of a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller, could affect a prosecutor's decision about whether to bring indictments of White House officials in an investigation of the leak of a CIA operative's identity, according to legal analysts.

Attorneys closely following the case said the sharp criticism Ms. Miller has received from her editors and colleagues may discourage the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, from bringing perjury charges against Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby.

According to Ms. Miller and others who have testified before the grand jury investigating the leak, Mr. Fitzgerald has shown significant interest in whether Mr. Libby or other White House officials testified truthfully about their involvement in an alleged effort to discredit a vocal critic of President Bush, Joseph Wilson IV, by disclosing that his wife is a CIA employee.

The prosecutor's intense interest in Mr. Libby may be related to an alleged discrepancy about how he came to learn that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. Mr. Libby has reportedly testified that he learned of the link from journalists, but the Times reported on its Web site last night that the White House aide's own notes - obtained by Mr. Fitzgerald - indicate that Mr. Libby learned of the connection from Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2005, more than a month before the CIA operative's name appeared in the press.

snip>

http://www.nysun.com/article/21975
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
punpirate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. More wishful thinking from a Murdoch tabloid...
Edited on Tue Oct-25-05 12:46 AM by punpirate
... and to not much effect. Libby is hog-tied and fuuuuuuuuuucked up because he lied in testimony. At the very least, Fitzgerald has him on perjury, probably obstruction of justice, and maybe on the original charges of outing an agent.

What the Times says about their own reporter has not a damned thing to do about it.

Nice try, Rupert. Not only did it not fly at all well, it just crashed. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. This has nothing to do with anything
if nothing else, one could argue that Miller has been protecting Cheney all along and that it was Cheney who first told Judy about Valerie Plame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. That's a good point about Miller's loss of credibility.
Regardless of her use as a witness, I doubt that Libby will get off the hook so easily. Fitzgerald may have other witnesses against Libby; no one outside the grand jury room knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. Uninformed speculation from "attorneys following the case." Here's
another way to look at it. Miller's credibility as far as her testimony re: Libby might be strengthened by the fact she spent time in jail to avoid talking and that she neglected to mention her June meeting with Libby in which he told her about Wilson's wife and place of employment and failed to disclose related notes that had previously been subpoenaed.

She only testified about it after Fitz nailed her on it. While that doesn't mean Ms Judy is a paragon of virtue or candor, it does add credence to her second round of testimony re: Libby since she had to have the info squeezed out of her. A reluctant witness for the prosecution.

And as noted by an attorney who knows Fitzgerald, it's likely he's not relying solely on Miller's testimony. Apparently if I recall, reportedly Libby also neglected to mention his June meeting with Miller? oops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 06:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. odd... as logic would suggest just the opposite
her loss of credibility is tied to her acting more as an administration, pro-war mouth piece - the Libby story, the "Flame" notes, the agreement to refer to him in an intentionally deceptive way to readers ("former capitol hill staffer") fits with this story - that she is one Libby would go to in order to get their story "out" - and do so because she was no longer objective as a reporter - but had proven herself willing to print what ever story they were pushing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-25-05 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. I Hope Judith Miller Gets Indicted, Too.
She worked hard for this distinction, she earned it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC