Page 4 of 5   <       >

The Impeachment Question

"But several Senate Democrats who co-authored that deal countered that ideology is a legitimate line of inquiry and potentially a reason to block a nomination. 'In my mind, extraordinary circumstances would include not only extraordinary personal behavior but also extraordinary ideological positions,' said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), a moderate the White House has been hoping to enlist to give bipartisan backing to the nominee. . . .

"Rove did not comment on the chances of a Gonzales nomination but at one point referred to him as 'Justice Gonzales,' provoking laughter. He quickly added that he used the honorific because of the attorney general's former tenure on the Texas Supreme Court, but among Bush aides he is typically referred to as 'Judge Gonzales.' . . .

"Rove made clear that Bush will consult with senators in both parties, but that he has no interest in any kind of grand bargain between the White House and Congress in which legislators would give support in exchange for advance input on the president's choice. Some Democratic groups have suggested that Bush seek an early consensus. Rove, however, cited his own weekend reading of the Federalist Papers to argue that the framers of the Constitution envisioned no such role for Congress, leaving the president alone to make nominations."

Valerie Plame Watch


Carol D. Leonnig writes in The Washington Post: "A special prosecutor demanded yesterday that Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper answer questions about his confidential sources and again urged a federal judge to jail him and New York Times reporter Judith Miller if they continue to refuse to comply. . . .

"In unusually blunt language, Fitzgerald told Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan that Cooper and Miller pretend that journalists have a broader right to protect confidential sources than lawyers, presidents and law enforcement officers."

Leonnig also offers this tantalizing paragraph: "Fitzgerald may learn more details from Cooper's notes. Sources close to the investigation say there is evidence in some instances that some reporters may have told government officials -- not the other way around -- that Wilson was married to Plame, a CIA employee."

Adam Liptak writes in the New York Times: "Mr. Fitzgerald, who had been restrained in his public filings, was harshly critical of the position taken by Ms. Miller and of statements supporting her by The Times. His response to Mr. Cooper was barely 4 pages; to Ms. Miller, 21 pages.

"In October, Judge Hogan held the reporters in civil contempt, sentencing them to up to 18 months in jail. He suspended the sentences while the reporters appealed, and he said last week that the maximum time they faced was 120 days, as the term of the grand jury will expire in October.

"Civil contempt is meant to be coercive rather than punitive. In yesterday's filing, though, Mr. Fitzgerald suggested that criminal prosecution was also a possibility."

Richard B. Schmitt writes in the Los Angeles Times: "The prosecutor highlighted an article in the March-April issue of the Columbia Journalism Review, which said that many reporters and press advocates were chagrined that the case of CIA Agent Valerie Plame had become a test of journalists' ability to maintain confidential sources. The magazine said that many journalists believed that the reporters' sources, in exposing and endangering a covert operative, had committed an act that was not worth protecting."

Read the court filings.

Here is Cooper's memo, which includes moving pleas for leniency from co-workers, friends and family.


<             4        >

© 2005 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive