Fitzgerald on Subpoenaing Journalists

During the press conference this afternoon Patrick Fitzgerald was asked about Judy Miller's incarceration and the proposed journalist shield laws. This was the very best explanation I have heard for needing to subpoena Judy Miller even though she had never printed anything.

I think what people don't understand, I understand why it is that newspapers want sources. And I read newspapers. And I'm glad you have sources. This is different. This was a situation where the conversation between the official and the reporter may have been a crime itself. It wasn't someone saying, "Hey so-and-so is doing something really, really awful down the hall and I might get fired if I tell you." If you're transmitting classified information is the crime itself, but also, the reporter is the eye witness. And what I think people don't appreciate is that we interviewed lots of people, very high officials, before we ever went to the reporters. And if, as apparent, the grand jury is investigating to find out whether Mr. Libby lied under oath about his conversations with reporters, how could you ever resolve it without talking to a reporter? You couldn't walk in and responsibly charge someone for lying about a conversation when there are only two witnesses to it and you talk to one. That would be insane. On the other hand, if you walked away from it with a belief that that conversation may have been falsely described under oath, you are walking away from your responsibility. And that's why, when the subpoenas are challenged, we put forward what it is that we knew and we let judges pass on it. So I think people shouldn't read this exceptional case as being something more than it's not and I think there's a pendulum that shifts. I'm not recommending that reporters be subpoenaed to my colleagues, this is not, we have to maintain a balance. I think what people are recognizing is this was narrow grounds, that they were justified, followed the Attorney General guidelines, that the court found that we satisfied those guidelines, the court found that we met any bar, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals found unanimously, the Supreme Court denied certiorari. I think we need to step back, take a deep breath, and appreciate what the facts were here. That it was not the ordinary case before we rush into debates about balancing two very important things, the first amendment and national security. I don't take either lightly.

(emphasis mine) She wasn't subpoenaed to "give up her source", she was subpoenaed to be a witness to a conversation that she was one of two participants in. Political Teen has the video here and also has the video of Joe Wilson's attorney pleading "privacy" and the picture from Vanity Fair magazine... Welcome Political Teen readers! Please look around. Welcome GOPINION readers! Welcome Wide Awake Cafe readers! Please look around.