Gil Hamilton wrote:
> I've never heard it disclosed how the prosecutor discovered that Miller had
> had such a conversation but it isn't relevant anyway.  The question is, can
> she defy a subpoena based on membership in the privileged Reporter class that
> an "ordinary" person could not defy?
Why not? while Miller could well be prosecuted for revealing the identity, had
she done so - she didn't. Why should *anyone* be jailed for failing to reveal
who they had talked to in confidence? I am all in favour of people being tried
for their actions, but not for thoughtcrimes.

>> On the other hand - Robert Novak got the same information, REPORTED it -
>> and isn't in any sort of trouble at all. Somehow this isn't the issue 
>> though... and I wonder why?
> I don't know this either; perhaps because he immediately rolled over when he
> got subpoenaed?
And yet Novak is the one who purportedly committed a crime - revealing the
identity of an agent and thus endangering them. So the actual crime (of
revealing) isn't important, but talking to a reporter is?

Reply via email to