If WAPOST ran a story that was very damaging to the Bush Administration

[Egalitariat]

and 1) was based on illegally leaked classified information, and 2) the Justice Department forced the reporter to either go to jail or reveal her source, would you consider that a spiteful act by the Shrub or simply law enforcement that is consistent with the Cooper/Miller/Plame case?

[eleny]

1. Since none of the playing field is fair or just these days

Frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a damn that Miller is in jail.

Just sayin'.

[lvx35]

2. It wouldn't be consistant with the Cooper/Miller/Plame case

Because this case involves the outing of a CIA agent, and a subsequant risk to national security. Reporters don't have a right to risk national security, or COVER UP CRIMES which that was. If a reporter did an interview with "somebody" on september 8th 2001 who said he was going to attack the WTC, and refused to reveal the source, you bet he would be in the same boat, or for that matter if a damaging story about Bush revealed dangerous national security secrets.

[dchill]

3. Reporters ALSO don't have the right...

to decide if a specific act was or was not a risk to national security. Just sayin' - IMO.

[ClintonTyree]

4. Which is why Novak....

should be behind bars at this very moment. He KNEW he was outing a CIA operative. He WILLFULLY outed her and blew her cover and mission. There is NO excuse for that and NO protection from reporter/source privilege for jeopardizing national security.

JAIL NOVAK, NOW!

[DefenseLawyer]

5. One is a conviction, one is contempt, you have to keep them straight.

Miller is in jail because she is in contempt of court for failing to follow a court order. She is not in prison for anything do to with committing a crime. She didn't claim privilege because she had committed a crime. Ironically if she HAD committed a crime she could claim the 5th amendment privilege against self incrimination, which would have been recognized by the court, and wouldn't be in jail. Novak either testified or pleaded the 5th, which means he is not in contempt, so he can't be jailed. It is doubtful that he committed a criminal offense by reporting what he was told, but one can hope, because in my opinion he was not reporting, but was a very willing participant in a conspiracy (i.e. an agreement to commit a crime)to out Plame and discredit Wilson. If he did commit a crime he deserves to be convicted and sent to prison with Rove, not to jail with Miller.

[rumpel]

6. But reportedly Novak was called by the CIA and was specifically asked not

reveal her name. Which indicates to a lay person that there was sufficient concern to protect their agent. Obviously not to Novak, which reeks of deliberate intent.

Someone posted an inicdent in the first Bush administration, where Rove was fired for leaking information to, guess who - Novak.
Novak in my eyes now is a propaganda operative of the neocons.

[DefenseLawyer]

7. No question at all

that Novak is a propaganda tool. Novak may very will be guilty of a crime, in which case he should be charged, tried, convicted and sent to prison. I wasn't trying to defend Novak, but I think it is important to keep it all straight, because saying "Miller shouldn't be in jail, Novak should" is mixing apples and oranges. If Novak goes to jail, or more accurately prison, it will be because he is convicted a substantive crime, not because he is in contempt of court.
Miller being held in contempt has no reflection on who did what in the underlying case before the grand jury. She simply refused to follow a valid court order.