Judy Miller: A, "Was she Rove's Source?" Scenario.

(Very interesting possibilities)

Judy Miller: Do We Want To Know Everything or Don't We?

Not everyone in the Times building is on the same page when it comes to Judy Miller. The official story the paper is sticking to is that Miller is a heroic martyr, sacrificing her freedom in the name of journalistic integrity.

But a very different scenario is being floated in the halls. Here it is: It's July 6, 2003, and Joe Wilson's now famous op-ed piece appears in the Times, raising the idea that the Bush administration has "manipulate" and "twisted" intelligence "to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Miller, who has been pushing this manipulated, twisted, and exaggerated intel in the Times for months, goes ballistic. Someone is using the pages of her own paper to call into question the justification for the war -- and, indirectly, much of her reporting. The idea that intelligence was being fixed goes to the heart of Miller's credibility. So she calls her friends in the intelligence community and asks, Who is this guy? She finds out he's married to a CIA agent. She then passes on the info about Mrs. Wilson to Scooter Libby (Newsday has identified a meeting Miller had on July 8 in Washington with an "unnamed government official"). Maybe Miller tells Rove too -- or Libby does. The White House hatchet men turn around and tell Novak and Cooper. The story gets out.

This is why Miller doesn't want to reveal her "source" at the White House -- because she was the source. Sure, she first got the info from someone else, and the odds are she wasn't the only one who clued in Libby and/or Rove (the State Dept. memo likely played a role too)… but, in this scenario, Miller certainly wasn't an innocent writer caught up in the whirl of history. She had a starring role in it. This also explains why Miller never wrote a story about Plame, because her goal wasn't to write a story, but to get out the story that cast doubts on Wilson's motives. Which Novak did.


More at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/arianna-huffington/judy-miller-do-we-want-_4791.html

The CIA would not have given top secret information to a Times Reporter.

The CIA would however give that information to someone in the Admin who had security clearance like say, Libby or Rove who then passed it on to Judy Miller.

She's up to her eyeballs in the lies and crimes of this mis-administration. Who told her of Plame's identity? She should stay in the Many Bars Hotel until she reveals the name of the criminal.

This story gets deeper with every twist and revelation, including the reminder (via Podhoretz) that Fitzgerald had a previous run in with Miller over her actions in a national security case, and the speculation (via Jeralyn at Talk Left) that Fitzgerald is considering seeking to put Miller under criminal contempt, rather than the civil contempt she's now under.

So, assuming this to be true -- and keep in mind, we do not know -- what would be the potential charge? I think espionage applies to gathering information to provide to another nation, so that can't be it. How about some sort of conspiracy to commit fraud or just plain fraud? This is getting more and more interesting. Maybe fraud on Congress? Maybe fraud on the government? Hmmm???

that's what she is

James Woolsey is a big-time neocon. In the run up to the war he was parading INC informants directly to the DIA, bypassing the CIA. He was helping make the case for Iraq having WMD. Woolsey used to be the head of the CIA. He could have possibly known Plame from his time as CIA Director.

Here's Woolsey's plan to take out Saddam from December of 2001:

(snip):

http://archive.salon.com/people/feature/2001/12/20/woolsey/print.html

The midnight ride of James Woolsey
The former CIA director presents himself as the Paul Revere of the terrorism age, trying to waken America to its greatest threat -- Saddam Hussein. Should we be listening?

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Asla Aydintasbas

Dec. 20, 2001 | If the United States finally decides to extend its war on terrorism all the way to Baghdad, it will be thanks in no small part to former CIA Director James Woolsey. While the Bush administration must speak circumspectly about a possible war with Saddam Hussein, Woolsey has become its unofficial point man in the growing war of words with the Iraqi dictator. In the past few weeks, Woolsey has been dispatched to London by the Pentagon to investigate possible links between Saddam and the Sept. 11 blood bath and has popped up on nearly every TV news program to argue the hawks' position on Iraq. While Secretary of State Colin Powell, leader of the administration's dovish faction, has tried to keep Woolsey at arm's length, his views are increasingly influential in the Bush White House.

Woolsey has not held government office since leaving the CIA in 1995, but this consummate Beltway insider has worked effectively over the years in Washington's shadow government. A conservative Democrat (or a liberal conservative, depending on where you stand), Woolsey has served on every commission and board that matters in the world of defense and national security, such as the Defense Policy Board and the Rumsfeld Commission on missile defense. He is widely respected in a town riven by spiteful feuds. (end snip)

Just because this story is wrapped up in Miller-bashing doesn't make it any less a Rove-positive story: Rove's lawyer has been shopping the story that a reporter told him about Plame.

I don't buy that the CIA just drops NOC info over the water cooler.