« "We don't do nation-building" ... but what if it's our nation? | Main | State of The Art: Rescue And Recovery »

September 17, 2005


The best thing about having Judy in jail is that her articles are off the Times front page. The worst thing is that we don't know why she's there.

Eventually the best thing will go away and the worst thing will likely go away, too.

I'm trying to follow along with your reasoning and implied conclusions.

It sounds like you're saying that you think the NYT might yet come out of this without legal problems and not smelling much worse than they already do? Or at least they think they will?

And if so, that it's because Sulzberger, Keller, Abramson and Judy have all presumably agreed to stick to stories that say that because Judy never got close to publishing a story, she never told them who her source was? And this is a plausible enough loophole to accomplish what? Prevent Fitzgerald pressing any of those three to testify? Avoid the public perception that the NYT sat on a story that would have tipped the election? Avoid criminal charges? Anything else?

So what's in it for Judy to cover for them?

And Bolton ... it's hard to imagine him setting himself up to be scrutinized for going to see her without a compelling reason, so would you agree that either Bolton is in danger of indictment or going to see her on behalf of someone who is? Was the purpose of his visit to get stories straight, as we suspect was the purpose of the meetings with the 3 NYT honchos? Was it to threaten her? Was it to find out what she was going to do so he could work out his next move?

And Fitzgerald. If he's just calmly playing out a checkmate scenario that he's already got locked in and which can't be jeopardized by giving them more time, then all of this maneuvering on the parts of the perps is pointless, and wouldn't they have to know that? And wouldn't we at least see some indications of desperation from the "21" and the NYT? Or might he have damning evidence or devastating strategies that even the principals aren't aware of?

If Fitzgerald is still trying to work out his path to checkmate, then it's pretty scary to be giving all these resourceful crooks so much time to contemplate their own future moves.

And FINALLY, we know that Fitzgerald already knows who Judy's source is, and what he really needs from her is some other type of testimony, right?

Not too long ago it was looking like her source was almost certainly Libby, but do we now think it may have also been Bolton?

I can't take much more of this! And it's still SIX WEEKS from October 28th, and even that may not even be a significant date since Fitzgerald can extend his investigation up to another 18 months without doing anything!

No, I actually think the NYT may be at risk. But if you believe the Arianna's posts (and again, at least one of her sources has proven to be golden by this), they've only recently realized that Floyd Abrams hasn't been giving them an accurate picture of their risks. I think the operative story HAS been that Judy was not reporting on Wilson for the NYT, therefore it wasn't work for hire, therefore any materials on it belong excluseively to Judy. But for some reason, that excuse is not going to be enough once things get publicized and once Judy gets indicted with a criminal contempt charge, replete with lots of details of how she was involved.

So what would that risk be? Well, I've long suspected that someone at the NYT, probably Judy, was ready with a story identifying Wilson in late June, around June 22, which is the reason he eventually did his article. If that article was anyone's at the NYT (but especially if it was Judy), then there would be material relating to a conversation between David Shipley (who said he could get Wilson himself) and Abramson and Lelyveld and maybe some more people. In other words, contrary to Keller's suggestion that they wouldn't know the identity of Judy's source unless she published a story, they also would know the identity if they were ready to go with a story and the editorial team weighed publishing the ID story versus Wilson's op-ed.

All of which suggests, of course, that the NYT may be at no risk for Judy's July activities. But that they may be at risk for conversations regarding the op-ed in June.

I'd be honestly surprised if Bolton visited Judy to shore up stories. That would be the height of stupidity. They both have to know that Fitz can subpoena details of their conversation. But I think there's a possibility he might be "touchign base." Or, I think it possible that Bolton was just shopping a UN Oil for Food story (Duelfer's presence supports this conclusion).

Also, FWIW, I doubt this is dead time in Fitz' investigation. We know, of course, that he's interviewing Rove's employees. We also may know (courtesy of Arianna) that Judy is trying to deal. She's probably got a pretty good idea she'll be indicted on criminal contempt charges, so it DOES make a difference for her to make a deal. And the timing on that is pretty important. She went for a few months happily being the martyr. THe impending deadline has apparently made her a lot more worried.

>I've long suspected that someone at the NYT, probably Judy, was ready with a story identifying Wilson in late >June, around June 22, which is the reason he eventually did his article.

I don't understand! Which Wilson do you mean when you say "story identifiying Wilson"? And When you say "which is the reason he eventually did his article", I don't get it. Wilson did his article because of ...??? Also don't get what you mean by "Shipley could get Wilson".

Sorry, I'm thick.

Arianna has a list of "off-the-record" quotes attributed to Karl Rove. The 900+ "comments" are painfully stupid trash talk on both sides of the "Cindy Sheehan is a clown" comment, but check this one out:

KARL ROVE On Judy Miller And Plamegate: "Judy Miller is in jail for reasons I don't really understand..."

Is it possible that Rove doesn't have some way of knowing what's in those redacted pages? Or that he does and hasn't bothered to find out?


Read this post.

Short version is that Wilson was warned by a journalist in late June that another journalist was about to identify him (not Plame) in a story. I think there's a decent chance the second journalist was a NYT journalist, if for no other reason than it provides an easy explanation for why the article was never published. Needless to say, Judy would be a likely writer at the NYT--if she were allowed to write whatever she wanted, which she wasn't.

Suggest changing the title of this diary to:

Soul-less on Ice

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad