Miller Says She Wouldn't Change Much in CIA Leak Dealings

NEW YORK – Judith Miller, the reporter who left The New York Times amid criticism of her actions in a CIA leak probe and reporting on weapons of mass destruction, says there was "not really much" she would have done differently.

Miller spent 85 days in jail for defying court orders in a CIA leak probe after refusing to testify about conversations with a confidential source. She retired from the Times this week, saying she had to leave because she had "become the news."

"I really don't know what ... brought about this 40-day tsunami on me, these attacks after I came out of jail," Miller said Thursday on CNN's "Larry King Live."

"I am very comfortable with the decision that I made. My conscience is clear and I guess I wouldn't change much."

Miller's departure ended an increasingly stormy relationship with the newspaper as editors and columnists assailed her publicly for her actions in a CIA leak case and her reporting on weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq war.

Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. said separately Thursday that the paper is ready to move past the Miller controversy and that he is "not sure there is a lot of damage" to the Times' reputation.

Sulzberger, speaking on PBS' "The Charlie Rose Show," said the primary reason it was agreed that Miller should leave the paper was that she had become a politicized figure, which affected her ability to be seen as an independent journalist.

But, he also acknowledged that the relationship between Miller and her editors had become strained.

"We recognize, and Judy recognizes it, that you have to have strong bonds of trust between a reporter and that reporter's editors," he said. "That was ... at risk."

The Times declined to disclose details of a severance deal with Miller but agreed to print a letter from Miller in which she defended herself and explained her reasons for leaving.

Miller said both Republicans and Democrats had been sources for her stories before the war about weapons of mass destruction, which were widely criticized, and she did not believe she had been deliberately misled.

Asked whether she thought her writing contributed to the United States' going to war, Miller said she believed the president would have gone to war regardless of her reporting.

Bush "would have gone to war without Judy Miller or The New York Times or all the other papers that endorsed the Senate vote" that provided the authority to go to war, she said.

Miller initially refused to tell a grand jury about conversations she had with I. Lewis Libby, then chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, regarding a CIA operative who is married to a diplomat critical of the Bush administration.

Libby was indicted last month on charges of obstruction of justice and two counts each of false statement and perjury. A special prosecutor said Libby lied to investigators trying to learn whether there was an intentional effort to blow the CIA operative's cover. Libby has pleaded not guilty.

Miller, 57, joined the Times in 1977 and was part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for reporting on terrorism.