still seeking my place…
Friday, July 08, 2005
So Judith Miller has gone to jail. And journalists across the country are up in arms.
Bad judge. Bad prosecutor. Bad system. Bad laws. And look at this, now isn't it obvious that we need a shiled law to prevent such travesties?
No. As a matter of fact, we don't.
Some background: The hotshot New York Times reporter may be the one headed for jail, but she never actually penned the story that led up to all this silliness.
That honor goes to Robert Novak, who was the first person to publish Valerie Plame's identify as a CIA operative. In doing so, he and his "senior administration" sources committed a federal crime.
He should have known better. But he's a no-talent Cross Fire curmudgeon who sees red and blue in the way the rest of us see black and white.
The source's motives were highly questionable. Plame is the wife of Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador who was sent to Niger to investigate the contention that Saddam Hussein had attempted to purchase "yellowcake" uranium there. Wilson came back and told his bosses — the Bush administration — that the claim was false.
Nonetheless, Bush used the allegation in numerous speeches. Proof, he said, that Saddam was seeking weapons or mass destruction. Justifiation, he said, for preemptive war.
Wilson believes Plame was outed by Novak's sources as retribution for his public denouncement of Bush's "yellowcake" claims. Bush denied that claim and appointed a special prosecutor to determine who leaked the information to Novak, promising to hold the responsible leaker accountable.
Meanwhile, at least two other journalists — Miller and Time Magazine's Matt Cooper — reported also having been approached by the Whitehouse source. Both apparently decided it would be best if they didn't commit any federal crimes. They declined to publish Plame's identity.
But, having made a promise of anonymity to their sources, they didn't squeal when the special prosecutor came asking for information.
Cooper changed his mind in the 11th hour, after his source gave him permission to speak to the Grand Jury. Miller either didn't get the same deal or knew her status as a journalist would be up there with Ernie Pyle and Walter Cronkite if she took her lumps. She remained mum.
So why hasn't Novak hasn't been hauled into the pokey?
Three possibilities:
A) He's already sung like a BeeGee
B) He's a suspect in a federal crime investigation and has pleaded the Fifth
C) Both
In any case, prosecutors like to have more witnesses than less. Keeps courtroom surprises to a minimum. So the prosecutor in the case called Cooper and Miller to testify in front of the Grand Jury.
Cooper and Miller, having done nothing criminal themselves, can't claim a right against self incrimination. And there is no federal law protecting journalists from having to testify.
Ergo, they either testify or face the consequences.
I, for one, am perfectly happy with that arrangement and blame the judge not one bit. Judges should hold all people accountable to the law. And I'm simply not comfortable with the idea of giving journalists special rights. (As soon as the government grants reporters special rights, they'll get to say who 'counts' as a journalist.)
Should prosecutors go after journalists if they can get the information elsewhere? No.
But should journalists should give up their sources and notes if compelled by a court? The answer is also no.
Rather than claim special priviledge, journalists should accept the possibiliy of being jailed for protecting a source's identity. Consider it an occupational hazard.
I don't feel bad for Miller one bit. To me, she's simply doing her job.
She'll come out of this a hero. She'll write books. Make the lecture circuit. Pull in lots of cash.
The great irony in this is that Miller helped lead this country to war by reporting false claims about Saddam's WMDs, made by a man she knew to be a close associate of Bush, a man with his eye on the Iraq throne, a man with something to gain by a preemptive war.
The stories were so poorly reported, in fact, that The New York Times issued an apology on the front page of its newspaper.
So she's going to jail for a few months. I won't shed a tear.
She's simply doing her job. For a change.
Bad judge. Bad prosecutor. Bad system. Bad laws. And look at this, now isn't it obvious that we need a shiled law to prevent such travesties?
No. As a matter of fact, we don't.
Some background: The hotshot New York Times reporter may be the one headed for jail, but she never actually penned the story that led up to all this silliness.
That honor goes to Robert Novak, who was the first person to publish Valerie Plame's identify as a CIA operative. In doing so, he and his "senior administration" sources committed a federal crime.
He should have known better. But he's a no-talent Cross Fire curmudgeon who sees red and blue in the way the rest of us see black and white.
The source's motives were highly questionable. Plame is the wife of Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador who was sent to Niger to investigate the contention that Saddam Hussein had attempted to purchase "yellowcake" uranium there. Wilson came back and told his bosses — the Bush administration — that the claim was false.
Nonetheless, Bush used the allegation in numerous speeches. Proof, he said, that Saddam was seeking weapons or mass destruction. Justifiation, he said, for preemptive war.
Wilson believes Plame was outed by Novak's sources as retribution for his public denouncement of Bush's "yellowcake" claims. Bush denied that claim and appointed a special prosecutor to determine who leaked the information to Novak, promising to hold the responsible leaker accountable.
Meanwhile, at least two other journalists — Miller and Time Magazine's Matt Cooper — reported also having been approached by the Whitehouse source. Both apparently decided it would be best if they didn't commit any federal crimes. They declined to publish Plame's identity.
But, having made a promise of anonymity to their sources, they didn't squeal when the special prosecutor came asking for information.
Cooper changed his mind in the 11th hour, after his source gave him permission to speak to the Grand Jury. Miller either didn't get the same deal or knew her status as a journalist would be up there with Ernie Pyle and Walter Cronkite if she took her lumps. She remained mum.
So why hasn't Novak hasn't been hauled into the pokey?
Three possibilities:
A) He's already sung like a BeeGee
B) He's a suspect in a federal crime investigation and has pleaded the Fifth
C) Both
In any case, prosecutors like to have more witnesses than less. Keeps courtroom surprises to a minimum. So the prosecutor in the case called Cooper and Miller to testify in front of the Grand Jury.
Cooper and Miller, having done nothing criminal themselves, can't claim a right against self incrimination. And there is no federal law protecting journalists from having to testify.
Ergo, they either testify or face the consequences.
I, for one, am perfectly happy with that arrangement and blame the judge not one bit. Judges should hold all people accountable to the law. And I'm simply not comfortable with the idea of giving journalists special rights. (As soon as the government grants reporters special rights, they'll get to say who 'counts' as a journalist.)
Should prosecutors go after journalists if they can get the information elsewhere? No.
But should journalists should give up their sources and notes if compelled by a court? The answer is also no.
Rather than claim special priviledge, journalists should accept the possibiliy of being jailed for protecting a source's identity. Consider it an occupational hazard.
I don't feel bad for Miller one bit. To me, she's simply doing her job.
She'll come out of this a hero. She'll write books. Make the lecture circuit. Pull in lots of cash.
The great irony in this is that Miller helped lead this country to war by reporting false claims about Saddam's WMDs, made by a man she knew to be a close associate of Bush, a man with his eye on the Iraq throne, a man with something to gain by a preemptive war.
The stories were so poorly reported, in fact, that The New York Times issued an apology on the front page of its newspaper.
So she's going to jail for a few months. I won't shed a tear.
She's simply doing her job. For a change.
Comments:
Post a Comment