Saturday, October 01, 2005
Don’t you just know already that morons like Chris Matthews and many of his cable ilk will celebrate Judy Miller’s post-jail conversational finickiness as a sign of Princess Judy’s evolved sensitivities toward news peas buried in her reporter mattresses?
The secret source
According to the New York Times, the strange elfin news waif who helped burnish the swing of the illegal Bush drive to war, said following her 3 hours of testimony before Patrick J. Fitzgerald’s Grand Jury:
"Oh boy, am I happy to be free and finally able to talk to all of you.”
Princess Judy, not quite as free as her statement indicated, then proceeded to clam up and refused to name the source her very lawyers and her source’s lawyers had previously identified to the assembled media, the euphonious VP chief-of-Staff I. “Scooter” Lewis Libby.
Additionally and curiously, the source and his lawyer have stated that they freed Judy from her journalistic obligations and then-looming jail time last year in written correspondence with the infamous NYT star reporter and her counsel Floyd R. Abrams.
Judy, ever-fussy Gray Lady news maven she hopes, apparently has difficulty parsing simple declarative sentences and according to this morning’s New York Times’ reporting:
"The message you sent to me was viewed by Ms. Miller as inherently 'mixed,' " Mr. Abrams wrote. He said Mr. Libby's failure to contact Ms. Miller as the case proceeded had also led her to conclude that he did not want her to testify.
Another of Judy’s vast legal team, a New York Times staff counsel, suggested Judy, in a triumph of retro teen angst, chose a long stretch in the slammer because Mr. Libby did not telephone and release her secrecy oath personally:
The phone call between Ms. Miller and her source had been crucial... "This was a call," he said, "that lasted about 15 minutes, and Judy could measure the timbre and tone of the source's response and real feelings regarding whether or not he was being coerced and whether or not he really wanted her to testify."
Additionally, in a recent letter from secret source Libby to Miller, according to the Times, the powerful Cheney aide repeated his desire that Judy testify and, tellingly, that “he expected her testimony to help him.”
All this, culled from various places in two different articles in this morning’s New York Times, is a bit too much and, to use a favorite TV pundit phrase, defies credulity.
Are we expected to believe that Princess Judy’s highly refined Manhattan 5-star restaurant taste buds freely chose 12 weeks of eating 3 squares off a jail tray because she lacked a personal evaluation of her source’s “timbre” and “real feelings”?
Our dear Judy had no such delicate qualms over rushing every secret source and Ahmed Chalabi WMD fib-alabi into page one boldface so why, when faced with the loss of her personal freedom, was she even fussier than her own vast legal team?
Princess Judy and the corrupt administration she’s protecting are demonstrably more interested in defending the concept of storyline rather than overarching principals of truth with these tissue-thin oaths of protection, secrecy and, most importantly, deniability.
The gasbags of the pundit class, Bush enablers and aficionados of self-aggrandizing convolutions, are sure, over the next few weeks, to fall prostrate before Princess Judy’s veracity-stained and now prison flip-flop-less feet.
We pray Mr. Fitzgerald’s case is airtight and fatally damaging to the continued power and pretensions of these self and mutually-grooming elitist baboons.
Modified Image: Sacramento Bee