FBI investigators are asking Bush administration aides to sign papers that would allow reporters involved in PlameGate to give the names of officials who spoke with them. In other words, the aides would sign papers saying it's okay in this instance to violate the rules of confidentiality between a reporter and a source, because of the seriousness of outing a CIA agent.
Here are the articles:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/02/cia.leak.probe/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/03/politics/03LEAK.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50649-2004Jan2.html
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=4067393
Here's an excerpt from the CNN article:
Time magazine reporter Viveca Novak thinks it's pretty clear that Bush administration officials can't refuse to sign the document without being seen as uncooperative. She also said that gathering the releases appears to be a step toward subpoenaing reporters before a grand jury.
"It's certainly a possibility because prosecutors are being very careful, I think, laying their legal groundwork here," she said.
"To go to the judge and say, 'We've exhausted all other avenues for getting this information that we need and we now need the reporters to talk and the reporters are not talking. A crime has been committed here and we need them to talk.' And the judge could then hold them in contempt and put them in jail," she said.
And while she said reporters are not known for responding to that kind of pressure, in the post-September 11 world with the United States on high alert for new possible terrorism, a judge may take such a request seriously.
The waiver wouldn't require reporters to tell names, but it would increase pressure on them to do so.