Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Scooter Libby gave Judy Miller "permission" to talk? WTF is going on?

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
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:09 PM
Original message
Scooter Libby gave Judy Miller "permission" to talk? WTF is going on?
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 06:12 PM by Blue_Roses
Okay, I'm totally confused here. Evidently I have missed something here. I haven't been following this story the last two days 'cause of being in overdrive with school stuff, but am trying to play catch up today. I heard Bay Buchanan talking about this on Wolf and she said that Libby gave Miller "permission" a year ago to speak :shrug: If so, why didn't we hear about this and why all of a sudden the go-ahead from Libby to testify?

Someone please fill me in. Is this their plan--to totally try and run this straight over our heads? Thank-god for the internet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. The entire "permission" story is just propaganda for the public.
His "permission" has NO legal weight in this matter: ZERO!

Miller simply persists with her nonsensical
"heroic principled reporter/ first amendment defender"
FAIRY TALE for one reason:

To cloud and confuse the issue in the minds
of those who don't bother to learn the facts
of the matter at hand.

It's bullshit, spin, propaganda, you name it.
Don't TRY to make sense of it;
it DOESN'T make sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. thanks
I think this is the method to their madness--to spin this so much it makes us :crazy:

and no, it sure doesn't make sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buzzard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. But I am sure Fitzgerald doesn't pay attention to the spin. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. You are absolutely right.
Judy Miller was in jail simply because she didn't want to talk. Period.

She's talking now because she was looking at a longer sentence for criminal contempt. Period.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. kick
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. It's a long story...
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 06:23 PM by longship
Libby, already fingered by Cooper, has released Miller from her pledge to keep his connection silent. What's very strange is that Libby had apparently released Miller last year and the whole thing was an apparent misunderstanding. :shrug: What's with that?

She also made a deal with Fitz to limit her testimony to Rove/Plame and not include Miller's WMD cheerleading prior to the war. :shrug: Go figure that.

Now the whole net is abuzz with crazy rumors, conspiracy theories and other rubbish. :popcorn:

One thing is for sure. Reports are that Fitz is onto some big shit. Also, the probe is apparently close to coming to an end. :woohoo:

Rumors are that next week is W-week. :popcorn:

on edit: Other than these things, nothing substantive is being reported, only speculation. Fitz and grand jury have their mouths tightly closed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. no wonder the whole thing
is confusing. So bottom line: Libby knows he's in deep shit and he's trying to cover his ass.

Miller sounds like she's sick of covering his ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StClone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Miller's Deal avoids Discussions of Plame/Cheney
Rove may not be the original nexus. So limiting the scope to discussions of Rove/Plame may have an advantage in their minds but I can not think of what it could be with Fitz's thorough knowledge in the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Sorry, you're 180 degrees out of wack here.
Miller's deal avoids discussing WMD equivocations prior to the Iraqi invasion.

She was happy to discuss Rove/Plame with the grand jury, but not WMDs. That's the deal she made with Fitz. You've got it all backwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Sorry I am not buying
the "misunderstanding" part. You can't tell me here lawyers wouldn't have made every possible attempt to get her a waiver before she went in and certainly while she was sitting there. Obviously that is a weak weak weak cover story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. It's simple. She's not a object of the investigation.
None of the reporters are objects of the investigation. None of them have done anything wrong (with respect to Rove/Plame). Talking to Libby/Rove/Whoever is not illegal. Even Novak publishing Plames name and status, as dispicable as that was, broke no law. Unless there is perjury, the reporters are not going to be charged with anything. These are facts which are beyond dispute.

The only thing Miller was worried about was her WMD cheerleading prior to the Iraq invasion. She agreed to talk to the grand jury on condition that the focus of the questions would be limited to Rove/Plame and not her WMD equivocations. Fitz is not investigating WMD lies, but the outing of a CIA NOC so he was more than happy to accomodate her.

That's what's being reported. I see no reason not to accept it as fact.

Now you can speculate on a myriad of conjectures but it won't make it true. Miller has not violated any law with respect to Rove/Plame.

Think, people. Think. Remember the Pentagon Papers? Remember the First Amendment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I understand what civil contempt is
thank you. But what you said has nothing to do with what I am talking about. She went to jail for civil contempt because she refused to reveal her source, whom she asserted had spoken to her in confidence and had not given her permission (ethically not legally) to discuss the conversation. The explanation which was given yesterday was that she had just now received a "personal waiver" of confidentiality from her source (Libby) such that she no longer felt ethically bound to refuse to testify. Of course Libby was also Russert's source and he waived confidentiality for him over a year ago. But we are supposed to believe that he only now gave a waiver to Miller because of some "misunderstanding" and either he didn't know that he was the source she was protecting or she didn't know that he had already waived confidentiality? Sorry, there is no chance that is true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Well, that was explained today, also.
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 11:04 PM by longship
She did not want to testify if the scope of the testimony included her writing about WMD's before the war. Clearly she understands that she had been a cheap whore for the administration. Apparently she had used the same sources for her cheerleading for the neocons as she used for Rove/Plame and, for whatever reason one can only speculate, she did not want the investigation to probe those conversations that happened prior to the Iraqi invasion. When Fitz was willing to agree to limit the questions to just Rove/Plame, Miller and Fitz were able to come to an agreement.

It appears that the secret source business and the alleged lack of release from that source (Libby) was just a ploy by Miller to keep from testifying about a possibly nefarious relationship with the same sources prior to the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. makes sense now
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 11:10 PM by Blue_Roses
tonight on Tweety, this was the HOT topic. Judy Miller was never supposed to be the topic of all this discourse. She didn't even publish the article. With her "agreement" to not talk about WMD's I now see the TRUE motive for this circus.

People have missed the boat. I see now--very clear. Diversion and Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney are masters of this.

Sad we don't have anyone in our party that sees this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
8. Libby had released
several journalists, including Miller, a year ago. That wasn't a secret. It was reported on the "Plamne threads" numerous times.

While his release carries little legal weight, it certainly carries an ethical significance among journalists, and should be appreciated as important. I'm not, of course, suggesting that either Libby or Miller deserve respect. But those releases certainly are worthy of note.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. I must have missed this tidbit
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. WANTED
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 Sep 30th 2014, 07:21 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