Miller: Key Witness, After All

By: William E. Jackson, Jr. The New York Times, in dozens of editorials, statements by the publisher and the executive editor--and comments by high-priced legal talent--over the last two years questioned, and at times ridiculed, the idea of reporter Judith Miller being a key witness in the CIA leak case. Now it turns out that not only was her "source" the only one indicted for major crimes, but her testimony obviously was the falling domino that led to his indictment and much of what has transpired since she struck a deal to get out of jail.

Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald even suggested at his press conference that Miller had delayed today's action by many months or a full year, the Times reported today. "Instead, Ms. Miller fought the case, appealing it all the way to the United States Supreme Court," wrote the Times' Katharine Seelye and Adam Liptak.

The arrogance of "Miss Run Amok" put the judicial system and the press and the public through the wringer over the last year or more. She knew what she was doing, and Libby's culpability, all along.

In Watergate, a secret government source ("Deep Throat" as whistleblower and witness) talked to reporters at The Washington Post resulting in the public revelation of impeachable offenses within the White House. In
Plamegate, the top command of The New York Times effectively was in step with the government in suppressing evidence of a felonious crime and in avoiding public scrutiny.

Judith Miller, as the prime nongovernmental witness to a crime committed within the White House (first on June 23, 2003), protected a source--Scooter Libby--who was intent upon punishing dissent from the official line on the war against Iraq, a line she herself helped promote.

Miller was sort of a "Deep Throat" in reverse. In the Watergate case, the press ran great risks to protect the people's right to know. In the Plame case, a major journalistic institution ran great risks to prevent the
prosecutor and people from knowing--with Miller as the most cognitive participant. The Times was most concerned with saving an individual reporter from prosecutorial and public knowledge of her compromised role.

For The Times and its reporter to cover up the three relevant conversations between the Vice President's chief of staff and Judith Miller was to aid and abet the Bush Administration's attempts to hide the official lies and
misrepresentations that were instrumental in leading the country to war in Iraq. This was quite a contrast with the role of The New York Times when it courageously published "The Pentagon Papers" that extensively documented
official legerdemain in selling the war in Vietnam.

In the process of Plamegate, The Times has undermined public trust in the press as a provider of "all the news that's fit to print" on the government. Whereas The Post on Watergate and The Times on Vietnam increased the public's
confidence in the "fourth estate" as the provider of reliable news to inform the citizens of a democracy.

Special prosecutor Fitzgerald today asserted that "truth is the engine of the justice system." Justice is subverted when this country's heretofore leading newspaper participates in protecting the government from the
consequences of officials' felonious acts. A very high price is paid in loss of skeptical detachment when, in order to obtain and maintain access to sensitive information, the press gets in bed with the powers that be in the White House.