Say It Ain't So

Everyone's favorite investigative reporter, Judith Miller, may be returning to the New York Times sooner than expected. Some people predicted (and hoped) that she would never be allowed back to what is now only half-jokingly referred to as "America's newspaper of record."

The New York Observer is reporting that, despite the damage to the Times' reputation, not to mention the animosity on the part of their other reporters, Miller is in negotiations to return as early as next week.

Judy's misleading and mendacious interactions with her employers in the CIA leak case would be a firing offense for any other reporter in the business. Note: by employers I meant the New York Times. I have no evidence that she misled her neo-con bosses in the administration.

It is amusing that Ms. Miller testified only about her July conversations with Lewis Libby when she first appeared in front of the grand jury. After all, Mr. Libby's letter to her in jail, between passages of purple prose, mentioned his July conversations with other reporters as exculpatory. Mr. Fitzgerald must not have found it as amusing as I did when he had to recall Ms. Miller to explain her late June talk with Mr. Libby which was not at all exculpatory.

What is not so amusing is the fact that she attempted to use journalistic privilege to stonewall the leak investigation. She was helping to enable malfeasance, not to protect a whistle-blower. Some are complaining that Judith Miller ultimately pushed the investigation back a year, past the presidential election.

I doubt that an early resolution of "Plamegate" would have had any effect upon the 2004 election. My money is always on those who control the electronic voting systems.