Miller/ Cooper decision makes clear WHY they have to testify on Plame

[BurtWorm]

Judge Tatel's explanation is very clarifying:


http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html

As the rest of us enjoy the luxury of wondering who told Jeff Gannon what about Valerie Plame -- and as Robert Novak, the man who actually outed Plame, continues to bloviate freely on TV -- the New York Times' Judith Miller and Time's Matthew Cooper moved a little closer to jail today for refusing to give up the goods on what confidential sources may or may not have told them.


...


In his 40-page separate opinion, Tatel weighed the news value of the information about Plame's job against the need for prosecuting those who leaked it. He said Plame's identity wasn't particularly newsworthy, but that the harm caused by leaking it -- and thus, the need to prosecute the leakers -- was great. Tatel noted that Miller never actually identified Plame in the Times and that Cooper did so only after Novak outed her. But rather than providing them a defense, Tatel said the reporters' lack of interest in Plame's identity only underscores the fact that the illegality of the leak was more important than the news the leak provided.

"In essence, seeking protection for sources whose nefariousness he himself exposed, Cooper asks us to protect criminal leaks so that he can write about the crime," Tatel wrote. "The greater public interest lies in preventing the leak to begin with. Had Cooper based his report on leaks about the leaks—say, from a whistleblower who revealed the plot against <Plame's wife,<sic> Joseph> Wilson—the situation would be different. Because in that case the source would not have revealed the name of a covert agent, but instead revealed the fact that others had done so, the balance of news value and harm would shift in favor of protecting the whistleblower. Yet it appears Cooper relied on the Plame leaks themselves, drawing the inference of sinister motive on his own. Accordingly, his story itself makes the case for punishing the leakers. While requiring Cooper to testify may discourage future leaks, discouraging leaks of this kind is precisely what the public interest requires."

Tatel said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has proven that he needs the information Miller and Cooper may have and that he can't get that information any other way. Why couldn't Fitzgerald just ask Robert Novak? We may never know: The eight blank pages in which Tatel discusses Fitzgerald's need for the information are blank, redacted because they contain secret grand jury material.



The link to the decision in PDF form is here:

http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/04-3138a.pdf

[realFedUp]

1. good to read the opinion...and why isn't Novak the Judge's focus?

[BurtWorm]

3. That's an excellent question

But as the article states, eight pages have been redacted because they include secret grand jury testimony. The asnwer probably lies there. I will be totally baffled if Novack isn't called to spill the beans over this, though it won't totally surprise me.

[Eloriel]

12. People keep asking that and I don't know why they ask -- he's NOT

been questioned yet or charged with anything; he's simply not a legal SUBJECT at the moment, if that makes any sense.

If I'm not mistaken, this case was brought by Cooper and Miller (or their news organizatinos) because they were being asked to provide info they didn't want to divulge. What would Novak have to do with that? NOTHING. What would the judges hearing the case have to do with Novak? NOTHING. He's completely irrelevent to this, except that he's part of the subject matter but with no legal standing in THIS case.

I'm not an attorney (which should be real damn obvious), but I hope I've made my point clear at least. Novak has nothing to do with this case -- no legal standing IN the case, period.

[BurtWorm]

13. That makes sense.

But I think people are wondering why Novack hasn't been flat out asked to say who his sources are. Isn't that peculiar?

[Old and In the Way]

2. Makes you wonder if Novak might be CIA in deep cover.

That might explain why he's been untouchable.

[BurtWorm]

4. That's an interesting theory.

More plasuible than Gannon being CIA, for sure. But what would Novack's purpose as a CIA agent be, other than to spread disinformation or propaganda (which he's doing anyway)?

[realFedUp]

5. Why would a CIA agent out another's cover harming many in the process?

Doesn't make sense...I believe Novak's in deep cover
though...

[JohnnyRingo]

6. Just a theory....

Maybe it's the fallout from a purge of Clintonistas in the Agency.

....Leaving Neocon loyalists in the wake.

[Old and In the Way]

7. Politics inside the CIA?

It would surprise me not if Novak is helping this administration to rid themselves of any NOC's and CIA people who have the goods on this criminal administration. Let him leak, then use his CIA creds to make him untouchable. With Goss in command of things, I'd assume he'd protect Novak's (and by proxy, this administration's) interests.

I can't think f any other reason why he's not first in line for some jail time.

[BurtWorm]

8. That is a bizarre circumstance.

Branzburg, you would think, has Novack's name all over it. This decision keeps pointing out that Miller and Cooper can't show how their case is any different from Branzburg's in the original SC decision that ruled that journalists are not permitted by the First Amendment to protect persons accused of crimes.

So if that's true, why isn't Novack's case even MORE identical? :wtf:

[LeftHander]

9. Unless Novak has already rolled....

Then as a "target" and one that knwoingly participated in the outing of Plame with intent to harm Wilson and protec tthe President...then Novak is in a position to be offered immunity for testimony agains the leaker.

Fitzgerald thoguh needed to be very throuough and thus he pursued coroborating testimony from the other journalists.

Make no mistake about it. Novak is way deep into this affair. We wonder why he seems untouchable because he is going to be the star witness for the prosecution. The last pieces of the puzzle are in place.

When the hammer falls it is going to smash the Bush administration and lay to waste his presidency. As it will uncover a vast web of treason and arrogance the like the U.S. has never seen.

It is going to get ugly.

Blackmail, corruption and maybe even murder.

[Old and In the Way]

10. Perhaps you are correct. The wheels of justice seem to move

excrutiatingly slow these days. But if Fitzpatrick is getting all his ducks in order to make a case that can't be refuted, I'll be happy to give him all the time he needs to take this criminal administration down.

[BurtWorm]

11. I just hope he doesn't take until sometime during the next administration.

:eyes:

[giant_robot]

14. So true.

I'll be happy to give him all the time he needs to take this criminal administration down.

I'd rather wait 3 years and see the bad guys go to jail than prosecute now, have a round of hand-slaps and resignations, and then see the bad guys get rich working for thier corporate cronies.

edit: I need "HTML for dummies"

[oasis]

15. Wolf Blitzer's spin on Plame story coming up next, aprox. 5:30 est.

We'll see to what extent he'll go to keep the story away from Gannon's doorstep.

It's 5:35 Looks like Leslie is stalling again.

[oasis]

16. It's not on yet???Leslie, quit stalling. Hmmm. Leslie Stahl.