Why haven’t I joined in? Because I as I mentioned last week, I’ve already written many of the things her critics are writing now. For instance, here’s the Columbia Journalism Review Steve Lovelady today:

As our colleague Mike Hoyt has noted, reading the Times about the Times lately is a lot like reading Pravda about the Kremlin 20 years ago: You better bring to the task a microscope, a magic marker and an ability to read not just between the lines but between the words.
Let’s hope the grander piece to come that [executive editor Bill] Keller referred to yesterday finally levels with readers.
A good start toward achieving that goal would be for Keller to recuse himself from directing coverage of this story and from editing the results. Keller is a man of high integrity, but he, as much as Miller, is a part of this story — as is Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, and as are the Times’ lawyers.

Here’s what I wrote last summer when the Plame story was peaking:

How can anyone consider the Times’ coverage of this issue credible anymore? The Times is hiding information that the public increasingly needs to know. Who was Miller’s source? With whom did she speak, and what did they talk about? Why is the Times covering up her role in this case, while hammering away at Rove?
The Times should answer these questions