The Straight Scoop?

So, it seems at long last we've arrived at Judy Comes Clean Day. The New York Times prints two stories in their Sunday edition, one objective, straight-ahead, third-person piece by other reporters about Judith Miller, her sources, and her time in jail and one first-person account by Judy herself. And let me tell you, they're pretty boring.

Throughout this story, The Times has had trouble getting scooped by other sources. That's not exactly what's happened here, but there's not much we haven't heard already. Some of the new tidbits include the fact that publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and executive editor Bill Keller knew who Judy was protecting but didn't know why. They felt it was important to stand behind their reporter, but Keller admits to misgivings: "I wish it had been a clear-cut whistle-blower case. I wish it had been a reporter who came with less public baggage." We also discover that Judy understood Scooter Libby's lawyer to indicate to her that, although he had signed the presidentially decreed waiver, Libby didn't really want her to testify, a charge the lawyer vehemently denies.

Despite her newfound status as a First Amendment icon, Judy doesn't seem to want to be very forthcoming. According to the third-person story, "In two interviews, Ms. Miller generally would not discuss her interactions with editors, elaborate on the written account of her grand jury testimony or allow reporters to review her notes." (So then, what did she talk about?) And it's a good thing that she's got some notes, because her memory doesn't seem particularly strong, either. In her own story, Judy wrote: "Mr. Fitzgerald asked if I could recall discussing the Wilson-Plame connection with other sources. I said I had, though I could not recall any by name or when those conversations occurred." A regular brain like a sieve, she has.

There are references, though not with a lot of detail, to tension at The Times itself over the situation. Judy's return to the newsroom after her jailtime is awkward, to say the least:

At a gathering in the newsroom, she made a speech claiming victories for press freedom. Her colleagues responded with restrained applause, seemingly as mystified by the outcome of her case as the public.

"You could see it in people's faces," Ms. Miller said later. "I'm a reporter. People were confused and perplexed, and I realized then that The Times and I hadn't done a very good job of making people understand what has been accomplished."

And here are two more opportunities to do just that slipping right through their fingers.