Though AHN reported it nearly two weeks ago (March 16th), it doesn't seem to be getting much play in the antique media.
All Headline News
The New York Times as well as its former reporter Judith Miller are being subpoenaed for documents related to the disclosure of a covert CIA agent's identity.
The Associated Press reports that the subpoenas were issued by lawyers for I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.
You'd think that this would be pretty big news, considering the brouhaha that surrounded Libby's indictment. CBS has an article also on March 16th, and the NYT reports on having been subpoenaed in a subscription only article.
Until today. It took a Swiss source to come up with more details.
The New York Times, NBC News and a lawyer for a Time magazine reporter said they received subpoenas from the defence team for Libby, once chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. The Washington Post said it expected to receive a subpoena as well.
The subpoenas again thrust the news media into the thick of the investigation into who in the Bush administration revealed the identity of a CIA official after her husband criticised the administration's Iraq policy...
One of Libby's attorneys, William Jeffress, declined to say which news organisations he had subpoenaed.
A subpoena delivered to The New York Times on Wednesday asked the newspaper to hand over notes, e-mail messages, draft news articles and all other documents that refer to Plame before July 14, 2003, when her identity was made public.
Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said the newspaper had not yet decided whether to comply with the subpoena. News organisations have until April 7 to challenge the request.
Mathis said Miller, who has since left the Times, received a separate subpoena. A lawyer for Miller did not return a call seeking comment.
NBC News Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert and Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper also received subpoenas, said representatives, who declined further comment.
Washington Post spokesman Eric Grant said, "The Post has not yet received a subpoena, but we anticipate receiving one."
A subpoena to the Post could force star reporter Bob Woodward to reveal who in the government told him Plame's identity more than a month before it was made public.
MSM doesn't like making the news—let me rephrase that: MSM doesn't like people knowing that it makes the news. It's obvious discomfort at being criticized—and rightly so—for generally poor coverage of the broad picture in Iraq has been quite evident over the past week. It cannot be pleased at the prospect of being shoved back onstage. Particularly when it means a public examination of their methods and sources.
Update: Clarice Feldman has written, for The American Thinker, the first of a three part series on the Libby case, and on Patrick Fitzgerald's handling—or mis-handling— of the investigation that lead to the Libby indictment. She finds, and documents, enough holes in Fitzgerald's case to make it look like Swiss cheese. It is an excellent article, full of detail; read the whole thing. I will just give you her conclusion.
In sum, I think that Libby has made a persuasive hard-to-answer argument that the Prosecutor was improperly appointed and granted powers in a way that violates the Statute and the Constitution, and that the indictment should be dismissed.
And if there were an answer to this argument, I fail to see that Fitzgerald has made it.