Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Interesting notes and questions about the Judith Miller story

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 » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:57 AM
Original message
Interesting notes and questions about the Judith Miller story
From The Wall Street Journal

A long story, I just picked interesting notes:

July 7, 2005

- Mr. Novak has never said whether he has spoken with Mr. Fitzgerald, nor has the prosecutor made public statements about him. Many observers assume Mr. Novak has communicated with the prosecutor as part of the probe.

= Several major questions remain unanswered. Chief among them: Who was the source for Mr. Cooper and Ms. Miller? Was it the same person? Were there multiple sources?

- Another unanswered question is whether Ms. Miller received a waiver from her source but refused it. Ms. Miller and Mr. Cooper both referred in court to "coercive" waivers from sources which they didn't consider to be true waivers. The waivers, said people involved in the case, were signed by a number of executive-branch employees during Mr. Fitzgerald's investigation, and automatically waived their rights to keep their names confidential if they provided information to reporters who were later subpoenaed.

- Yet another puzzle is that Mr. Fitzgerald's office hasn't said what crime it is pursuing. To charge someone with violating the antileaking statute, prosecutors need to show that there is intent to damage national security. Mr. Fitzgerald could be pursuing a perjury charge against a source for lying to the grand jury, or a charge for illegally revealing classified information.


URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112067431587178606,0...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
grumpy old fart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. My thought is that Novak is a target of the investigation.................
this would account for his not saying anything, and for his not being brought before the Grand Jury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
2. this could answer the 'Intent' question...Link>>
http://s93118771.onlinehome.us.DU/AMERICANJUDAS.pdf

it is pretty plane that Chaney didn't want Plame to discover his connection with the distribution of WMD's ...Plames assignment was to discover WMD's in Iraq and elsewhere... all EVIL leads to Chaney
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 Fri Oct 24th 2014, 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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