So, Ms. Miller gives a 'carefully worded statement,' according to truthout. It's pretty obvious she was led to jail through her sources, she believed them, printed what they wanted her to print. I'm sorry, but I can't feel sorry for her. She was cultivated and harvested, and still likely believes what she was told about WMD and the 'CIA's backpedaling' on the intelligence concerning the existence of them in Iraq. It's a page right out of a BDSM handbook, she becoming their slave. Where was any effort to corroborate her sources? She just blindly accepted opinions upon documents and intelligence interpretations. Libby drips over her and she melts...Why would she think that he'd be afraid of her testimony? Again, the emphasis is that she thought that he could be incriminated, and even in her statement, shows Libby as anything but an objective source, one with an agenda to promote. She alludes to no suspicion of the information from such a source. The Times, too, should have been held to higher standards. There's no victory for the press here. We, though, should be thankful that they've showed us, through this, their methods and what little regard they have for objectivity. Because of the Judith Millers, the 'news'papers for whom they work will not question, fortunately, more and more of us are.
Hope you had a nice time in jail, Judy. I also wish you'd learned something there, but, apparently, you're too much of a toilet slave to come back now.