CommunityFDL Main Blog



We’ve long suspected that when Scooter Libby’s attorney Joseph Tate was busy burning the midnight oil, telegraphing to Judy Miller what she should testify to in her grand jury appearance, it was billable time well spent.  Judy’s answers were vague and evasive, and let’s not forget that the existence of both a third meeting with Libby and a notebook documenting it completely slipped her mind until Fitzgerald presented her with proof (viz:  The Indiana Jones of Dustbunnies ).   

Scooter’s motion the other day to subpoena Miller’s notes (which Christy outlined in Pt. I, II and III) indicate that his defense team is all too willing to take advantage of the openings Judy offered them.  But I imagine the brittle-egoed Miller was expecting something along the lines of "If Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Judith Miller can’t remember, how can Mr. Libby be expected to remember?"  What she got instead was an invitation to play scapegoat.  And from her latest response, let’s just say Judy is less than thrilled at being cast in this new role:

Mr. Libby asserts that he "has established a ‘sufficient likelihood’ that the documents he seeks are relevant to his defense." (Response at 6). In support, he maintains that "the documents sought are likely to contain evidence that some, if not all, of his testimony about . . . conversations [with reporters] was correct and that it is the reporters who have an unreliable recollection or have misstated the facts." Id. He also makes the startlingly baseless claim that it may have been Ms. Miller who mentioned Ms. Plame to him. (Response at 15). These contentions are unavailing. How can it possibly be maintained that Ms. Miller’s notes of discussions with persons other than Mr. Libby, regarding topics unrelated to the instant case, have any bearing on his, hers, or anyone’s recollection of the salient facts regarding her conversations with him?

Is it just me or does this sound reminiscent of the purple prose of Judy’s Iraq reporting?   

Then there’s this:

Mr. Libby claims that "Movants admit" they have "[d]ocuments showing that [he] and other officials talked to reporters about Mr. Wilson . . . but never mentioned his wife . . . ." (Response at 7). Ms. Miller has made no such admission, and has not located any such documents.  

It doesn’t sound like Intrepid Girl Reporter is cottoning to the notion of life under the bus, does it?

The networks should take heed.  The soaps are going to tank when this trial gets going.  Nothing on Desperate Housewives will be able to hold a candle to it. 

Thanks to Jeralyn for hosting the PDF.  She has more here

Update:  The responses of Andrea Mitchell, Matt Cooper and Time Magazine are now in and Jeralyn has them in her extraordinarily helpful archive.  If you were wondering what I’m going to be doing this evening, loading up on Klonepin and engaging in sexual eliminationist fantasies should probably not be your first guess. 

Previous post

More family values

Next post

King of the hill at HUD

Jane Hamsher

Jane Hamsher

Jane is the founder of Her work has also appeared on the Huffington Post, Alternet and The American Prospect. She’s the author of the best selling book Killer Instinct and has produced such films Natural Born Killers and Permanent Midnight. She lives in Washington DC.
Subscribe in a reader