What Confidence Was There to Keep?

If you're interested, here is the Times 'full review' of the Miller / Plame matter.

The Miller Case: A Notebook, a Cause, a Jail Cell and a Deal

It's long, and not particularly revealing.

Here, Judy tells us, in her own words what she said the grand jury. (Sorry, no open link, or at least not yet). I've yet to read Judy's version,...and don't know that I ever will.

Having read the Times account, I have a question.

The Times tells us that Judy met at least twice with Scooter prior to Novak's now famous column. She was working on another story but Scooter did bring up the Wilson/Plame affair during these meetings. Despite the fact that Judy's notes from both days (but not necessarily meetings -- read the story for the details) contained references to Wilson's wife including an entry of "Valerie Flame," Judy does not believe Scooter outed Plame to her -- and claims to have said as much to the grand jury.

Long before Judy went to jail she found out from Scooter's attorney that Scooter had testified to the grand jury that he did not reveal Plame's name to Judy.

So, forget the issue of whether Judy had been released from her agreement of confidentiality. If Judy is to be believed, why would there even be an agreement of confidentiality?

If Scooter's testimony was that he never outed Plame to Judy and Judy's testimony was that Scooter never outed Plame to her, there is no confidence to keep. Judy through her attorney could have negotiated with Fitzgerald a 'proffer' (basically a sworn statement to be read in lieu of testifying) that essentially said Scooter never outed Plame to me.

The only way that Judy's actions make any sense is if Scooter had outed Plame to her.

And since it is inconceivable that Judy spent 85 days 'in the hole' for a non-confidence, something is missing from this story.

Could it be 'the truth'?