Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Miller Doing Time While Novak Enjoys CNN

For those of you who read the New York Times, you probably know of the case involving Judith Miller, the Times reporter who has been sentenced to 18 months in prison for refusing to release her sources before a Federal Grand Jury.
What Miller did to receive a subpoena was miniscule: she gathered information relating to a case involving the syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who, during a rant about former U.S diplomat to various African nations, Joseph C. Wilson, disclosed that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a secret officer of the CIA, investigating weapons of mass destruction in Niger. Although what Novak did is grounds for a federal offense, since he not only ruined Plame's career as a secret agent but put her in immediate danger, no law enforcement authority seems interested in prosecuting him.
What's more interesting is that despite the possibility that a high level official might have leaked this information to Novak, he has not received a subpoena to testify. Furthermore, Judith Miller, who was merely reporting on the potential leak that may have occured in the Novak case, is now going to prison for contempt of court. What or who is protecting Novak from the wrath unleashed on the Miller?

4 Comments:

At 2:10 PM, Blogger wfoley said...

I think he cut his own deal--and it's incumbent upon the press to cover that. But have you been seeing all the blog traffic about how this affair could affect Karl Rove (the presumptive leaker)? That's a story for the press to jump on, too.

 
At 3:56 PM, Blogger Sam said...

Jack--

Nice going here... this is great stuff. I'm going to be a loyal reader.

To answer your question, at least to the extent to which it can be answered, check out http://slate.msn.com/id/2113610/

 
At 4:05 PM, Blogger Sam said...

About what wfoley said, I have a feeling that this whole story could get overshadowed, big-time, by the Supreme Court nomination and the huge role that the White House will play in it. Of course Rove is now denying involvement and there's not a whole lot of reason to believe that he'll be forced to admit anything any time soon.

What's more interesting to me is the push that's now going on for greater protection under the law of journalists when it comes to revealing sources. In light of the administration's likely involvement in this case, the White House's support of or, more likely, opposition to this fight to safeguard the free press will be very interesting. As a strict constructionist of the Constitution, Bush may have a bit of a tough time explaining how restricting reporters' right to cite anonymous sources will not constitute "abridging the freedom of the press."

 
At 6:41 PM, Blogger Jack said...

Thanks Sam, you are officially the 4th reader to comment on my blog (take a moment to let this honor sink in). If you know anyone at Cornell who would be interested in any of the pieces, tell them to comment. I'm sure students studying politics in the summer would have plenty to say.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Counter
Web Site Counters Who Links Here Listed on BlogShares