Have I said lately how much I appreciate you guys? A huge thank you for all your work, one and all.
Posted by dorita at October 15, 2005 04:47 PMShe getting a freaking "First Amendment Award" from the "Society of (cough..cough) Professional Journalists" on the 18th.
http://www.spj.org/news.asp?ref=526
I think everyone should call up the contact on the Press Release and ask her WTF....
Guess this is her version of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Posted by jillian at October 15, 2005 04:49 PMJudith Miller is a liar and a propagandist.
The NYT, which still employs and defends her, is a corporate and right wing propaganda machine.
Guess what else? No one is going to want to read her book, not even her fellow propagandists.
Posted by James E. Powell at October 15, 2005 04:52 PMThe following is information from the SPJ website:
Society of Professional Journalists
Awards & Honors
Programs & Committees > Awards & Honors
This committee oversees most of the Society's awards, which are dedicated to recognizing outstanding achievement in journalism. Any changes in guidelines, judging criteria, categories or eligibility are reviewed by this committee.
Committee Chair:
Guy Baehr
Assistant Director
Journalism Resources Institute
Rutgers University of New Jersey
4 Huntington St.
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1071
gbaehr@spj.org
Julie Grimes
jgrimes@spj.org
are people to contact.
Clearer than ever. Cheney, not Rove, is the one, and Fitzpatrick knows it, though Rove surely committed some crimes along the way too. Libby has been busted irrevocably for perjury and obstruction of justice at the very least. He knows he's toast and knows that he must fall on his sword to protect Cheney (though he has no similar investment in protecting Rove). I SUSPECT that Fitzpatrick is now going after Rove to get at Cheney. Does he have enough on turdblossom to flip him? Will Rove be able (as he would like) to save himself while only implicating Libby, not Cheney? Or will Rove ultimately fall without flipping? Bottom line: justice is really served only if Cheney falls. (Bush should fall too, but that ain't gonna happen). If only Libby falls, the coverup more or less succeeds. If Rove falls without giving up Cheney, full justice would not be served, but something's better than nothing. Prediction: major charges against Libby, no pardon, minor charges against Rove who will get a pardon, and Cheney slips away with at worst a designation as unindicted co-conspirator. Let's hope my prediction proves pessimistic.
Posted by the exile at October 15, 2005 06:11 PMNo..they did not all get it wrong. Joe Wilson got it right but I guess you knew that.
Posted by Richard at October 15, 2005 06:53 PMMemory loss is so convenient.
Posted by The Heretik at October 15, 2005 07:32 PMMiller will wind up on Fox with her very own show. She will take questions, but give no answers. Her featured guests will be Rove, Libby, and whenever he's free....Punch Sulzberger, publisher of the former New York Times. In fact, Judy will do a nightly feature on Fox emphasizing the importance of transparent journalism which will give Sulzberger an opportunity to explain how it all went wrong at the New York Times and blame it on the left wing media.
Then, he and Judy will marry, and Fox will rename the show....Punch and Judy.
The Ronald Reagan defence does not work for reporters who routinely publish stories that hinge on the accuracy of the most minute details, ala WMD. That Judy even at this date is puling a Reagan indicates she both KNOWS just how much underhanded stuff the administration has done and has always been and remains a culpable player.
That Pinch has sold his papers legacy for a 50 year old lay is beyond pale. Keller and Pinch knew damn well what they were protecting and should accompany Judy out the door. Given the mea culpa for Jason Blair's rather timid, by comparison, faults the NYT must now suffer a massive public purge, and a serious investigation of ALL the players. When the nation's war machine is misused for private gain, there's no coming back for those involved in knowingly advancing this agenda.
We need to know in excrutiating detail just how much the Times pushed the war agenda, against the day staff's best judgement, at the owner's insistence. The public needs to see the effects of uncontrolled corporate collusion in the media within the media itself. This is the larger more important story here. That American opion was formed not by rogur journalists but by ownership whose interests were not the publics.
Posted by patience at October 15, 2005 08:14 PMHey exile,
Go see a head doctor. You need it.
Posted by The Real Truth at October 15, 2005 08:55 PMYou're absolutely correct, Steve, all roads lead to Cheney in the Nigerian forged documents case. Follow the bouncing ball.
Posted by sf at October 15, 2005 09:58 PMI know this might sound tinfoilhattish, but the weirdness of Miller's final paragraph makes me suspect that it has something to do with Cheney, who just happened to be vacationing in Jackson Hole around the same time that Miller was there watching her rodeo.
Posted by wg at October 15, 2005 10:21 PMJudy claimed she had 2 preconditions for testifying to the grand jury: (1) she had to have her source's uncoerced waiver to testify, and (2) she had to have Fitzgerald's promise not to ask her about her other sources.
Let's leave aside Judy's mendacity on point #1. (After all, Libby's recent waiver was no less coerced than his previous one. On the contrary, one could easily argue that Libby's renewed waiver was even more coerced, both by Judy's plea for help and by Fitzgerald's implied threat that Libby was failing to cooperate). What's most interesting is the way Judy's memory suddenly went dim when Fitzgerald asked her about the source who gave her the "Valerie Flame" name. Maybe Judy felt Fitz wasn't living up to precondition #2: his promise not to ask about her other sources. Perhaps she felt she had no recourse other than to blame a conveniently faulty memory.
The most interesting nugget of information to come out of this latest batch of news is the fact that Libby was not her only source. That's why I'm so surprised Fitz is done with her. At the very least, he should have left hanging the possibility of a future indictment, just to force her to admit who her other source was. I wouldn't be surprised if that other source was the Veep himself.
Posted by You Know It at October 15, 2005 10:44 PMCheney is the one responsible for feeding the original forged docs to the Italians. Everything else is just damage control and subterfuge.
Posted by sf at October 15, 2005 10:54 PMIn addition to everything else, expect Libby and his attorney to be charged with obstruction of justice -- i.e., attempting to influence Miller's testimony before the grand jury. Libby's attorney's "leak" to Miller of what Libby had testified to had no "legitimate" purpose whatsoever -- which leaves only the "illegitimate" ones.
Posted by Michael Scott at October 15, 2005 11:10 PM"She's still lying and protecting someone else, hoping to get away with it..."
Ah, the call of the aspens!
Second Source: John Bolton.
Posted by Tuli at October 16, 2005 12:44 AMSomebody said That Pinch has sold his papers legacy for a 50 year old lay is beyond pale.
See, I don't think he did it for sex. I hung around those Times people for a couple of years as a temp secretary in the Legal Dept; worked for the corporate counsel and others who worked with the top brass at the Times. I think that AOS Jr. and the other Times folks live in a world of their own construction; information that doesn't fit their world view tends not to filter in. The whole paper can be like that, but the top brass is really susceptible.
AOS Jr. (Pinch, or young Arthur Sulzberger, the current publisher) seems to have stood by Judy because he thought he was standing up for freedom of the press.
George Freeman used to keep Pentagon Papers news clips framed in his office. The NYT legal dept's fight to protect whomever they were protecting in the Daniel Ellsberg case was very important to that dept. even twenty years later.
It's just my guess, but I'll bet that sex with Judy is indeed not a motivating factor for AOS Jr. He has a nice wife, and in his position he could have all manner of scintillating mistresses, much more interesting than Ms. Miller. Furthermore, a man in his position doesn't compromise a family legacy which means everything to him for the sake of a romantic or sexual liaison. No, press reports say that Judy & AOS Jr. were friends back when he was a cub reporter; he thinks he's being loyal to an old friend and colleague. Until his reporters told him *Thursday* about the date of the Valerie "Flame" reference, he thought he was protecting an honorable reporter who was protecting an honorable source.
Clueless? Maybe. But I'm guessing that Pinch (and his brass) are all too retrograde to read the blogs -so they really had no clue about what was happening with most of this story.
Too bad for them, but I hope they get their comeuppance. And I'm hoping Adam Liptak gets a freer reign to investigate. He's smart and not as gullible as some over there on 43d street.
Posted by Leila at October 16, 2005 06:56 AMGreat thread. Judy may play like she dictated terms to Fitzgerald but that too is a lie. When she did her memory loss routine before the grand jury this week I'm sure it was all Fitzgerald could do to keep from convulsing with laughter.
Judy thinks she's smart but what she doesn't understand is that her non testimony told Fitz everything he needed to know.
And yes all roads lead to Cheney.
Posted by Daryl at October 16, 2005 07:33 AMI STILL think Jeff Gannon/Guckert is part of the mix.
Posted by dolfina at October 16, 2005 07:51 AMAnd of course, Frank Rich (see Kos diary) agrees that it's Cheney/Bush.
I think we need some new words to describe these people, these situations, these policies. I'm finding that the standard ones leave me feeling unsatisfied. How many times can you yell "F--k you, you [deleted] [deleted] [deleter]f--ker!" at the television? And I'm afraid one of these days I'll break my computer. Thanks for your work.
Posted by catherine at October 16, 2005 09:40 AMany chance she is just "another" times reporter making up a story. she started what she thought was a cool idea about outing a CIA operative and lo and behold the story was picked up by another reporter and that got the ball rolling. miller is just another reporter from my age group (baby boomer generation) that has no standards. just like the ceo's and pol's of my generation. the majority of them thinks its okay to say whatever they want whenever they want if it will help their cause. meaning their own egos. interesting theory. probably as good as the ones going around on the blogs.
Posted by rich at October 16, 2005 11:13 AMcan fitz forensic test millers notes to determine if correct age, or just another shroud of turin beachtowell?
Posted by tiki al at October 16, 2005 02:57 PMDoes anyone have any idea how H*U*G*E this story is? I mean...here we've got every newspaper in the country fighting for its life, newspapers are watching their circulation plummet, the average age of the typical big-city newspaper subscriber is now 55 (!) fer cripes sake, the newspapers cash cow, the classified section, is getting eaten alive by craigslist... And now what?
Along comes Little Miss Made Up Some Lies to wreck what's left of the newpapers' only remaining asset, their credibility.
That was the ONE and ONLY thing newsprint publications had going for them. Rags like the nytimes could still, before Miller, point with pride to their reporters and crow, "yeah, sure, craigslist eats our lunch and the AP wire online gets breaking news ahead of us and CNN beats us all hollow with up-close-'n-personal live reports...but we employ professionals! Our reporters are solid trained experts! We value the truth! You can _rely_ on us print journalists!"
Yeah. Right. Thanks, bozos.
It's a whole lot bigger than just one newspaper. Judith Miller just took down the whole newspaper industry. I mean, think about it..the blogosphere outed her. And, in articles like this, is STILL outing her. The print journos are still covering her ass, and the blogosphere is still outing her distortions and her fabrications and her lies! It wasn't the nytimes that came down on Judtih Miller's made up B.S. stories like a ton of bricks, it was online bloggers.
So remind me again -- exactly what do we need newsprint papers for?
Not classified ads (craigslist). Not breaking news (AP and UPI online). Not photos (CNN has that covered). Not spin (faux noose has got that nailed). And now, not even credibility or reliability or basic professionalism, because from what I can see, the blogosphere is now eating the nytimes' lunch courtesy of Judith "Just Pay Me To Make Up Some More Sh*t That Isn't True" Miller.
So what's left?
Anyone?
This Judith Miller debacle is a big, big story. It's the crossover point where the blogosphere eclipses the print newspapers. The print rags screwed the pooch, and the bloggers nailed the story. Print journos, for al ltheir supposed professionalism, got it horribly grotesquely astounding wrong, while bloggers got it dead right. From now on, I'm more inclined to believe the blogosphere than some hack at an allegedly professional rag like the nytimes. After all... Think about it -- the great claim to fame of the print journalists has always been: "We have editors! We EDIT our stories! We don't just let some yoho without a journalism spew purple prose into the aether willy-nilly, no sirree bob, we editors are PROFESSIONALS who take our journalistic responsibilities SERIOUSLY!"
Yeah. Great, guys. So where exactly were your f*#@ing professinoal motherf#@*ing editors when "Miss Run Amok" was dragging the world's biggest superpower into an unjustified war of aggression based on lies, fantasies, distortions, and outright delusions?
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out of my life, nytimes. Stick a fork in yourself, print journos -- you're done.
Posted by laertes at October 17, 2005 04:45 AMLaertes--brilliant, great, dead-on comments. Thanks.
Posted by ophelia at October 23, 2005 04:53 PM