Skip to comments.Journalist discusses potential jail time (Cooper/Plame)
Posted on 03/23/2005 2:19:24 PM PST by cyncooper
Time Magazine's White House correspondent Matt Cooper said he is still trying to find the right words to explain to his six-year-old son that "daddy might not be coming home for a while."
In a talk at the Law School Tuesday evening, Cooper explained the details of a case that could land him behind bars. Last month a federal appeals court upheld a ruling that Cooper could face time in prison for refusing to reveal the name of a confidential government source who leaked the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame in 2003. Judith Miller of The New York Times is also being prosecuted for refusing to comply with subpoenas, and the controversy surrounding the case has sparked a debate about the nature of journalistic privilege in regard to the confidentiality of sources, Cooper said.
Cooper said he may face sentencing this week unless he obtains a stay. When asked about the prospect of serving prison time, Cooper said he would rather go to prison than break the confidentiality of his source.
Cooper said he found the case proceedings and how it has been enshrouded in secrecy to be almost comic.
"Lots of the evidence of the case
is being kept sealed by the courts," Cooper said. "It's one of the ironies of this case that Judith Miller and I are being denied this information even though we've shown that we're pretty good for keeping secrets."
(Excerpt) Read more at yaledailynews.com ...
The excerpt cited in the court decision states the grand jury seeks from Cooper any documentation and information he received regarding Joseph Wilson and his trip to Niger in 2002, in addition to Plame and her relationship to the CIA.
Matt Cooper thinks the time may be close to having to do jail time.
The part about explaining it to the son was touching, don't you think?
BTW, I asked the mods to add (Cooper/Plame) to the title in order to alert those following the saga.
The reporters would love to know what evidence the grand jury has.
I wonder why they don't know if it's all a matter of simply who leaked Plame's name and it's presumably one person?
Could it be the investigation is broader than popular wisdom would have it?
I think so.
There is no Republican alive that Cooper would protect.
"There is no Republican alive that Cooper would protect."
My thoughts too.
Not the issue. If he gave up his source he would NEVER work in journalism again. NEVER!
"There is no Republican alive that Cooper would protect."
Clarke, Wilson, Thielmann, a couple of others he spoke to.
Cynically, there's a possibility none of them told them about Plame and his comments that two officials told him before Novak heard could be some kind of me-tooism.
Don't know that, but his comments about "arrogance" are well-thought and polite. Sounds like a thoughtful fellow.
The MSM has a code of conduct? The NYT? LOL.
He already has given limited testimony to this same grand jury telling them Lewis "Scooter" Libby of Dick Cheney's office was not the source.
Of course Libby had signed a confidentiality waiver as his name had been bandied about for months as the "leaker" (Chris Matthews would say "Scooter" or "Libby" or both dozens of times per show for weeks on end).
I also think it's interesting how Cooper references not being able to know all the evidence the prosecutor has. It's not the first time he or Judith Miller has spoken of wishing to know what the grand jury knows.
I just have to wonder why.
I agree, his comments on arrogance and having humility were measured and thoughtful.
The good doc is prinicpled and assumed with the past hoo-hah he'd get a big showing. Unfortunately the MSM locked themselves into the position of exposure of these contacts presuming it was Libby, Rove, or some "neo-con." Think the figured out it wasn't.
That's a very likely explanation for the low attendance. It's becoming more clear there is not going to be a high-profile Bush administration official frog-marched off to jail and no impeachment of Bush over Plame.
Boo-hoo. You're not above the law, Mr. "Journalist." Doctors and lawyers have privileges against testifying in order to protect confidential relationships, but in exchange they agree to be regulated by the state.
The message was sent via NYTimes article a month back saying, hey, maybe this investigation is not such a good idea after all.
Then deflecting to whether or not Novak testified. As far as I can tell that doesn't matter since the officials who told him already testified, according to one source.
I can't figure out the Judith Miller angle, but the fact she didn't write anything is doesn't make a leak of a CIA agent's name to her right.
Rightly so. No journalist who betrays their sources should be trusted.
Novak gave them a warning that the first one at least was not "a partisan gunslinger."
"No journalist who betrays their sources should be trusted."
Yeah, and how about Novak's argument? The CIA official who confirmed asked him not to reveal the agents name, but because the official didn't say her life would be at harm Novak went ahead anyway. Swell.
Apathy? Now if you're talking about manipulation of the truth that's another matter all together.
Resistance is futile..........we are the Blog
It must be a Democrat. :-)
Exactly. This way he's in a win-win situation. He goes to jail and protects his source, becomes a 'victim' of 'Republican dirty tricks' and a martyr for the MSM. Plus, he will surely write a scathing book while he's imprisoned and then write his own ticket in the almighty world of journalism after his release. (And I don't imagine he'd be bothered one bit by having to 'get married' to a fellow prisoner either.)
He should be forced to go without food and water.
isn't Cooper married to Mandy Gruenwald?
I freepmailed someone wondering how long before a Terri Schiavo mention was made and you're it.
FWIW, Cooper can swallow and is cognizant. This is relevant when drawing equivalencies. I would have liked to have seen guardianship turned over to the parents but so far it doesn't look like that will happen, but it is not the same as locking a healthy person away and withholding food and water.
I posted a picture of the happy couple at #6. He is indeed.
Which one is the guy?
Yep. No such thing as a journalistic privilege.
Created out of thin air by lefties.
Seems like a nice guy, but he needs to got to jail.
She more than likely hadn't been under cover for many more years than the law would cover.
Novak did a service, IMO, in telling us why Wilson was sent off to Niger (his wife suggested him).
It is my theory that this investigation is into illegal leaks from the CIA of more than her name, which most likely was not illegal to give.
Time will tell.
Silly liberal........I can assure him that Patrick Fitgerald is quite serious about the law.
They should be treated as harshly as Benedict Arnold and hung as spies.
You two might be interested in the ruling I linked in the first post. Each judge of the three judge panel wrote individual opinions affirming their unanimous decision and the first is Judge Sentelle (remember him? vilifed during the Ken Starr days).
Judge Sentelle ponders whether the privilege shouldn't cover bloggers in their pajamas, and if not, why not.
He'd be hard-pressed to find a man as (ahem) masculine as Mandy.
You don't see Novak going to jail, do you?
That's fine if the agent was in a position to be outed.
Evidence to date is Plame was not.
Evidence to date is she, her husband and her fellow rogues at the CIA were out to undermine a sitting U.S. President at time of War.
That's what I'm concerned about.
I don't know if you're aware, but another investigation this prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, is conducting is to do with New York Times reporters Philip Shenon and Judith Miller tipping off Islamic charities to imminent raids on their offices.
Fitzgerald is investigating who in the government leaked the raid information, as well as the reporters telling the charities the raids were about to take place. He also says he has evidence that as a result of tipping off the charities that they in fact destroyed evidence.
When did the leaking of these raids and tipping off take place? Why in 2001, very shortly after 9/11.
Don't forget Tony Blair. But Wilson's contribution to that project paled in size to the "45 minute" claim the Brits made.
Thanks for making those points.
cyncooper...maybe this grand jury is lookin for something else. Since Judith Miller wasn't involved in the Wilson/Plame stories, is there another subject in which the paths of Cooper and Miller intersect?
I know she was writing about the search for WMD's early in the Iraq war. I kind of lost track of her after that.
Oh, I hadn't read your post yet about those Islamic charity raids. I am wondering if the same person tipped the reporters about the raid and later spoke to Cooper about the Plame/Wilson thing. This is quite interesting.
I think it is very interesting that the reporters really really really want to know all the evidence the prosecutor and grand jury have and that the courts have sealed.
How much evidence would be accumulated just to document a leaker or two of Plame's name?
Either Patrick Fitzgerald is laboriously dotting all the i's and dotting all the t's in order to pursue that narrow point in the wake of evidence that seems to more than hint that Plame hadn't been undercover in years, or there is more being looked at here.
crossing all the t's
This is what the court said about Miller:
"..In the meantime, on August 12 and August 14, grand jury subpoenas were issued to Judith Miller, seeking documents and testimony related to conversations between her and a specified government official occurring from on or about July 6, 2003, to on or about July 13, 2003, . . . concerning Valerie Plame Wilson (whether referred to by name or by description as the wife of Ambassador Wilson) or concerning Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium. Miller refused to comply with the subpoenas and moved to quash them."
That week was the time between Wilson's and Novak's articles. The topic are are 1. Plame and 2. Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium.
Who's the "specified government official?
Hey, if there is a specified government official, maybe the government already knows who it is. Maybe it was .....a sting!
Note "or" not "and". Again, a hint of a broader inquiry. At least it appears to go afield of the narrow Plame's name issue.