The latest head-scratching twist in the Fitzgerald investigation unfolded over the weekend, when Time reporter Viveca Novak wrote about her grand jury testimony informing the prosecutor of a conversation that she had with Karl Rove lawyer Robert Luskin. After learning that Fitzgerald might be calling her to testify, wrote Novak:

“I hired a lawyer … but I didn’t tell anyone at Time,” Novak wrote of the days leading up that interview. “Unrealistically, I hoped this would turn out to be an insignificant twist in the investigation and also figured that if people at Time knew about it, it would be difficult to contain the information, and reporters would pounce on it.”

With this, she becomes the second high-profile journalist to see the public’s right to know as an obstacle and not a cause. Bob Woodward, still inspiring a whole generation of reporters.

[John Gress/Reuters]

Reporter Didn’t Tell Editors About Probe [AP] MORE »

We’re glad to see that someone did some of that reporting thing and asked the White House about their press briefing transcript commissar-disappearing act. As you may recall, CQ reported that the WH’s official transcript of the Oct. 31 briefing differed dramatically from the independent transcripts provided CQ and the Federal News Service. The former had McClellan stiffly contradicting the assertion that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove “had conversations” about Valerie Plame: “I don’t think that’s accurate.” According to CQ and FNS, McClellan was more candid: “That’s accurate.” The White House stands by their version, with flak Dana Perino arguing she knows it to be correct because “the White House stenographer was in the room and I was in the room.” We’ve watched the video and we have to say, if Perino was in the room it wasn’t the briefing room. It was Room 101. MORE »

Judith Miller “said that in the few hours since her departure had been made public, she had received several offers ‘of all kinds’ for future employment, which she declined to specify.” — NYT, 11/10/05 MORE »

The New York Observer reports that talks between Judy Miller and the New York Times over her employment status at the paper have stalled. The sticking point is her desire to publish an op-ed in the paper to “rebut” her colleague-critics (Dowd, Keller, Calame). As our shallow sibling points out, it’s unclear whether she’s demanding to have the op-ed space or else she’ll leave, or demanding it or else she’ll stay. Obviously, the latter is the more potent threat, but we wonder why the Times is reluctant. It’s not like they’re very picky about who appears on their op-ed page to begin with. (Of course, the Unabomber wrote about real bombs.) In any case, we say, let her have her say. Put it another way: Give her enough rope. — WONKETTE MORE »

We were watching the footage of Scooter Libby’s court appearance and something struck us: That lady with him! Then we realized she just looked like she was about to hit someone. We asked Fred Becker to make sense of it.

Dear Wonkerstick, MORE »

From this afternoon’s Los Angeles Times (click for full page):

Silly John Podhoretz: Don’t you read the Note? You’re not supposed to actually identify who the source was for today’s blistering Rove’s-future-in-doubt story in the Washington Post. You’re just supposed to say,”‘It’s SO obvious who those quotes are from,’ with a small shake of the head and a knowing half smile.” (And here we thought all of DC’s journalists had just developed palsy.) Granted, the shake of the head is hard to pull off online, but maybe you should have invented an emoticon for it or something, instead of posting this brilliant thesis: WH press puppy “Scott McClellan’s messy fingerprints are all over the WaPo story, as even Bush will be able to see.” MORE »

To the thousand or so tipsters who’ve sent us that New Yorker piece: We know about Scooter Libby’s bear porn novel (actual bear, not Andrew Sullivan), okay? Not that we aren’t grateful, but maybe you should start lobbying Santorum’s office about it or something. In the mean time, we’d like to alert you to the following “statistically improbably phrases” in Libby’s book. Surprisingly, “fuck the deer” is not among them:

assistant headman, tiny dancer, man with the pole, mountain trousers

Mmmmm, mountain trousers…. MORE »

Figuring out who the not-as-much losers were in our Indictment Bingo contest proved to be a rather complicated undertaking. If only Fitzy had not shown such discretion! We weighed entries based on ratio of right-to-wrong guesses and how early they were turned in. Wonk Dad wound up creating an equation for it the explanation of which is after the jump. If you feel you were unfairly judged, we will forward your statistical analysis to him.

In any case, the “most correct” proved to be those with the quickest fingers and the least confidence that justice would be done. They are:

Third place and winner of a stale pack of Air Force One M&Ms is “Lorenzo.” Please get in touch, Lorenzo!
Second place and winner of an “Animal House” DVD is Thaddeus Nguyen.
First place and winner of breakfast for two at the St. Regis is “Abacusdog.”

All together now: “We must always ask ourselves not only what is legal, but what is right!”

MORE »

• “A nasty man recently threw me in jail, and several of my least favorite co-workers just ganged up on me in the pages of my own paper. Needless to say, these critics are a bunch of pansy assholes.” J.M. in Sag Harbor asks the Ethicist. [Panopticist]
• “Relentless and totally out of control,” “eager to let you know that she travelled in a world of international intrigue and important people,” who could they possibly be talking about? [Gawker]
• Arianna reads between the telephone lines regarding Libby’s call to Tim Russert. [HuffPo]
• “If only lies left semen stains.” [The Daily Show]
• Jason Zengerle zings Joe Wilson: “Wilson’s op-ed was entitled, ‘Our 27 months of hell.’ A better title might have been, ‘How to turn your 15 minutes into 27 months.’” [TNR's The Plank]
• The WP bundles all the scandal buzzwords into one incoherent mess. (Hey, that’s what blogs are for!) [WP]