One of our favorite Supreme Court reporters, the fabulous Jan Crawford Greenburg, gave a speech at Harvard Law School today. But she didn't tarry in Cambridge:

Not sure what is going on, but JCG just finished giving a speech at HLS and said that:

a) She was turning around to go back to Washington immediately (this was not her original plan) and that the folks in DC had actually wanted her to turn around and catch the next shuttle back right away this morning after she landed.

b) We should be sure to watch the news tonight.

Not sure if there is anything to this, but checking Drudge and everything else there don't seem to be any legal headlines going on. So the whole thing just seemed sort of weird.

Sure, I guess a few hundred bucks is nothing to ABC News, but the whole thing just seemed sort of odd. So I thought I'd throw it your way in case there were any other rumors flying about.

Correction / Update: We've been advised that the foregoing information actually came from the remarks introducing Jan Crawford Greenburg, not from the speech of JCG herself, and was mentioned only by way of explaining why the event was being cut somewhat short (with a planned lunch cancelled).

Has anyone heard anything? Nothing over at JCG's blog, Legalities, hints at the reason for her rapid return to Washington.

Might Jan Crawford Greenburg's hasty retreat back to DC be related to the embattled nomination of Michael Mukasey as Attorney General? Maybe Mukasey will give her an exclusive interview, in which he will declare waterboarding "not cool"?

Your speculation, informed or otherwise, is welcome in the comments.

P.S. On the subject of Mukasey and waterboarding, see this editorial cartoon.

Mukasey Mulls Waterboarding [The Illustrated Daily Scribble]
Bush Moves to Save Mukasey Nomination [New York Times]
Open Thread — The Nomination of Michael Mukasey [WSJ Law Blog]
Mukasey Confirmation Unlikely as Sen. Kennedy Joins Opposition to President's AG Nominee [Blogonaut]

New Yorker writer Jeffrey Toobin's exciting new book, The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court, is being released tomorrow. But it's already provoking some interesting discussion in the blogosphere. See, e.g., this post by Professor Rick Garnett (esp. the comments).

And it's garnering some favorable reviews. The dean of the Supreme Court press corps, Nina Totenberg of NPR, has given The Nine her blessing.

How does The Nine compare to other recent books about the Supreme Court? Here is Totes's take:

Jeffrey Rosen's book about famous court personalities and rivalries is an interesting history packed into a professorial thesis. [A] biography of Justice Clarence Thomas by the Washington Post's Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher is a credible, but limited, look at the justice. In addition, Thomas himself was paid a reported $1 million to write a book that is slated to come out this fall.

If you're interested in the Supreme Court as an institution and as a collection of personalities, though, Toobin's is the book to read.

Hey Nina, what about the book by that rather attractive lady reporter?

Supreme Conflict, by ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg, contains a fair amount of good conservative gossip about the nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, but it lacks the balance, substance, and context of Toobin's book.

Ouch. Jan, remember all those nice things you had to say about Nina? Care to take any of them back?

Toobin's 'The Nine' Reveals Politics of High Court [NPR]
"The Nine" [PrawfsBlawg]

Earlier: In Defense of Nina: Jan Crawford Greenburg

"Dear Jim: Thanks for the great job you do pushing the mail cart around the office. You truly are a special person!"

[Charlie Savage signs a copy of his book for Aaron Zitner, politics editor for the Los Angeles Times.]

Earlier this week, we attended a delightful book party for Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy, by Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe. Savage won the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, based on his work on presidential signing statements.

Photos and discussion of the star-studded event -- after you win a Pulitzer, everyone is your friend! -- after the jump.

Yesterday we opined that Judge Laurence H. Silberman would get the Attorney General nomination. Now we take that back.

After our post, a knowledgeable source informed us that Laurence Silberman isn't interested in the job. A second source, who confirmed Judge Silberman's lack of interest, added that he might be tougher to confirm that one might expect for a longtime federal judge. See here.

Then we came across this great analysis of the AG situation, by the ever-fabulous Jan Crawford Greenburg. She writes, over at her blog, Legalities:

The White House could announce as early as Wednesday its nominee to replace Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson has emerged as a leading candidate—despite initial concerns in the administration that he could face a tough confirmation hearing, according to sources close to the process.

Olson, a highly regarded Washington D.C. lawyer, has broad support inside the administration because of his deep experience in the Justice Department in two different presidential administrations. In addition to serving as solicitor general during President Bush’s first term, Olson headed the Office of Legal Counsel during the Reagan Administration.

This is consistent with what just went up at the Drudge Report:

FLASH: Ted Olson becomes frontrunner for Attorney General, top sources tell DRUDGE REPORT; announcement could be imminent... Developing...

But we're not so sure. Remember when Edith Brown Clement looked like the frontrunner for the Supreme Court seat vacated by Justice O'Connor? This White House likes surprises.

More discussion, after the jump.

Sigh. Too much to write about, not enough time (or energy). We should have written about this on Tuesday. But since we didn't, we now have the luxury of assembling a post by commenting on what other people have already written -- and snarkily noting that they all say the same thing.

It all started with this article from the Washington Post (via the Huffington Post):

It was John G. Roberts Jr., now the chief justice of the United States, who suggested [Harriet] Miers to Bush as a possible Supreme Court justice, according to the [new] book [Dead Certain, an examination of the Bush presidency, by Robert Draper].

Miers, the White House counsel and a Bush loyalist from Texas, did not want the job, but Bush and first lady Laura Bush prevailed on her to accept the nomination, Draper writes.

Sounds juicy, right? But not so fast.

If you're already familiar with this controversy, you can probably skip the rest of this post. But if not -- or if you are, but want some commentary on the commentary -- you can read more after the jump.

Maybe you're tired of reading about NPR's Nina Totenberg and the tempest in a teapot over seating in the Supreme Court press gallery.

But we're not. So we'll continue to write about it, since ATL is our party, and we'll cry if we want to.

We have two new messages to pass along today. One is from a current member of the SCOTUS press, and the second is from a former member of that group.

If you're interested in this story, you can read the messages, after the jump.

In the wake of the quasi-scandal that the divine Dahlia Lithwick has dubbed Divagate, we've received several defenses of that legend of the Supreme Court press corps, NPR's Nina Totenberg.

We previously shared with you an email from Tom Goldstein, who once interned for Totenberg (just as Cate Edwards is doing this summer). Today we bring you celebrity correspondence from another SCOTUS superstar: Jan Crawford Greenburg!

Check out her message, which includes a detailed discussion of seating arrangements in the Supreme Court press gallery, after the jump.

And we're not speaking metaphorically, about the remaining decisions from October Term 2006.

We're talking about the shoes of celebrated Supreme Court reporter Jan Crawford Greenburg, of ABC News. Will a pair of Manolos fall from the sky?

So, what happened to JCG's footwear? Was it a case of sabotage, by an increasingly threatened rival?

Go Home Already: Missed Connections [DCist]

"Linda says Jan has had work done -- I mean, A LOT of work...."

Due to associate pay raise mania, we've been neglecting news in other areas of the legal profession -- like our beloved federal judiciary. We're embarrassed, for example, not to have commented upon the Bush Administration's rumored Supreme Court short list, drawn up in case there's an unexpected vacancy at the end of this Term.

The theme of the article: the shortlist is centered on women and minorities. Most of the names are familiar (e.g., Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen), but there was one very exciting addition: Judge Loretta Preska, of the Southern District of New York.

Here's how she was described previously at Underneath Their Robes:

Judge Loretta A. Preska. In a word: magnificent. Tall, thin, elegant. Great bone structure, perfectly coiffed silver hair. Note to self: nominate for superhotties contest next year? Fabulous dark blue suit. Who designed? Dramatic, extra-long jacket, white-trimmed lapels; tapers down towards clasp, then flares out again--gorgeous cut. Nice accessories: big gold eagle pin, ladies-who-lunch pearl necklace, matching earrings. Delivers intro like newscaster, smooth as butter. Gestures grandly with long fingers; flawless manicure. WOW!

This scrumptious SCOTUS scoop was delivered courtesy of Jan Crawford Greenburg, one of our favorite Supreme Court correspondents. And our affection for her has only grown after we attended an event with her last week, at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) in Washington.

Discussion of that event -- where we put JCG on the spot about her rivalry with Linda Greenhouse -- appears after the jump.

Do we exaggerate the rivalry between Linda Greenhouse, the New York Times's veteran Supreme Court correspondent, and comely up-and-comer Jan Crawford Greenburg, who covers the Court for ABC News?

Maybe. We have a weakness for the dramatic, in case you haven't noticed. But even if exaggerated, there's no denying the tension between these two formidable female journalists.

Linda Greenhouse recently spoke at a litigation department luncheon at Willkie Farr in New York. And in her remarks, she threw down the gauntlet before Jan Crawford Greenburg.

Here's what La Greenhouse had to say about Supreme Conflict, the bestselling book penned by her young rival (emphasis added):

"In her book, Jan Crawford Greenburg wrote, I think quite improbably and without any evidence, that Justice Thomas is the ideological heavyweight anchoring the conservative side of the court..."

"Jan Crawford Greenburg got a lot of mileage out of that statement in the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere, but I just don't think it's true."

WOW. What did Willkie Farr feed Greenhouse for lunch? Fancy Feast?

An interesting account of the rest of Greenhouse's remarks, from an ATL reader who was there, after the jump.

Give a girl a Supreme Court beat and a best-selling book, and she gets her sassy on!

The fantabulous Jan Crawford Greenburg has taken on Geoff Stone, the former dean of the University of Chicago's law school, in a tart blog post. Stone (along with Rosie O'Donnell) had declared himself troubled by the fact that the five Supremes in the majority in last week's partial-birth abortion decision also happened to be the Court's five Catholics.

Greenburg responds:

That’s not how they taught First Amendment law when I was at the University of Chicago. Nor did they tell us to jump to baseless conclusions without any evidence—such as suggesting religion drove those justices. Or that different religious views influenced the protestant and Jewish justices to vote against the law.

Why not speculate that the five justices in the majority happen to like baseball--and therefore are more inclined to appreciate rules? That’s no less relevant or “telling,” as Stone put it, than their religious views.

A current student of Stone's alleges that Stone referred to Justice Brennan in class as "the only thinking Catholic I ever knew." Can anyone confirm that?

Because she needs all the help she can get these days. Backlash and insurrection against New York Times reporter Linda Greenhouse, the long reigning queen of the Supreme Court press corps, continue to grow.

For years, the courts construed 40 U.S.C. 6134 -- which forbids "loud, threatening, or abusive language in the Supreme Court Building" -- as prohibiting criticism of Linda Greenhouse. As a result, nobody within the legal or media establishment dared breathe a harsh word about her. But now, after decades of dominance, La Greenhouse is slipping -- and increasingly vulnerable to attack.

Fueled by the success of the bestselling, critically acclaimed Supreme Conflict, Jan Crawford Greenburg -- ABC News's young, talented, and utterly gorgeous Supreme Court correspondent -- is challenging Greenhouse for the title of America's top Supreme Court reporter. Last month, a threatened LG tried to mount a snarky counterattack. But rather than damaging Greenburg's reputation, it merely caused SCOTUS insiders to marvel at Greenhouse's pettiness.

And now Greenburg's challenge to Greenhouse is emboldening others. Some dare to claim that the empress has no clothes. Take Adam J. White of Baker Botts, a former Sentelletubby and legal commentator. White had this to say about Linda Greenhouse, in an essay for the Weekly Standard:

The law takes the long view, and so do its chroniclers -- none more so than Linda Greenhouse, New York Times reporter and unofficial doyenne of the Supreme Court press corps. But Greenhouse's recent essay on Chief Justice Roberts exemplifies the risks of racing to write the second draft of history before the first: By attempting to turn a single case into a moment of historic importance, Greenhouse misdescribes the record of one chief justice and severely insults another.

OUCH -- and there's more. You can read the rest of the piece here.

0-for-2: Linda Greenhouse gets both Rehnquist and Roberts wrong [The Weekly Standard via How Appealing]

That's the gist of this lengthy, extremely interesting, thoroughly researched special report. It's by one of our favorite reporters, Jan Crawford Greenburg -- who's on the verge of replacing Linda Greenhouse as undisputed queen bee of the SCOTUS press corps hive.

After reading the JCG piece, a devastating indictment of McNulty's involvement in this debacle, one possible outcome presents itself as increasingly likely:

Alberto Gonzales stays on as Attorney General -- but Paul McNulty's head rolls.

A scandal this big needs to claim some victims before it dies down. Some high-ranking DOJ or White House officials must be sacrificed to the vengeful Senate Democrats. And, with all due respect, Kyle Sampson isn't a sufficiently big fish. Nor is Monica Goodling, for that matter.

But the Deputy Attorney General of the United States? Now that's another story...

Update: The question then becomes whether McNulty goes quietly. There's a good case to be made that the answer is no.

DOJ Official Ignored White House Guidance [ABC News]
Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty biography [U.S. Department of Justice]
Paul J. McNulty bio [Wikipedia]

We have previously compared the fierce competition between Supreme Court correspondents Linda Greenhouse, of the New York Times, and Jan Crawford Greenburg, of the Chicago Tribune, to the rivalry between Margo Channing (Bette Davis) and Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter) in All About Eve.

For decades, Linda Greenhouse has ruled the reportorial roost at the Supreme Court -- just as Margo Channing reigned over the New York stage. But just as Channing came to be challenged by a young and attractive newcomer, Eve Harrington, Greenhouse now faces tough competition from Jan Crawford Greenburg.

Perhaps this comparison, much as we love it, must stop here. We don't want to spoil All About Eve for those of you who haven't seen it. But let's just say that Margo doesn't put up much of a fight when Eve moves into her turf.

Linda Greenhouse, in contrast, is NOT going gentle into that good night. She will NOT pass her tiara graciously to Jan Crawford Greenburg, like a Miss America ending her reign. Greenhouse has no intention of allowing Greenburg to ascend to the post of America's Next Top Supreme Court Reporter -- at least not without a (cat)fight.

How do we know this? Just read between the lines of this "Reporter's Notebook" item by Greenhouse. It's snarkily entitled "Alarmism in the Blogosphere" -- "blogsophere" being synonymous with "unreliable and dubious rumor-mongering" -- and in it, Linda G. goes out of her way to embarrass and even humiliate her younger colleague:

Jan Crawford Greenburg, an ABC News correspondent who covers the court, posted a startling item last week on her blog, Legalities. Under the heading “Faith and Frailty,” she wrote that the “real drama” of an argument concerning the Bush administration’s religion-based initiative came when the argument ended.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s delay in getting to her feet and leaving the bench, Ms. Greenburg wrote, seemed a sign of possible ill health and “made me think I’d better start pulling those possible retirement files together.”

The alarming item quickly made its way around the blogosphere, puzzling court insiders who know that Justice Ginsburg, 73, is in fine health and keeps to a schedule that would exhaust most people who are decades younger....

The explanation is, quite literally, pedestrian. According to her chambers, Justice Ginsburg had kicked off her shoes during the argument and could not find one of them.

OUCH. Jan Crawford Greenburg did some phenomenal reporting work for her fantastic new book on the Court, Supreme Conflict. But in a single breezy, casually tossed-off "Reporter's Notebook" item, Greenhouse makes Greenburg look like a rank amateur.

We conduct a close reading of Greenhouse's column, after the jump.

"Hee-hee, this book of mine is TOO FUNNY! Every time I read the story about Souter drinking all of Luttig's wine, I completely lose my s**t. I can't figure out who was the bigger a**hole: Souter for drinking the wine, or Luttig for offering it?"

(Lest there be any confusion, the caption above is fictionalized. Jan Crawford Greenburg is far too genteel to say such things. Who do you think she is -- Alexandra Korry?)

Here's a quick, belated write-up of the interesting discussion we attended last week at Georgetown Law School, featuring Jan Crawford Greenburg and Jeffrey Rosen (and moderated ably by Professor Neal Katyal, who happens to be Rosen's brother-in-law).

Both Greenburg and Rosen have just published new books about the Court. Rosen is the author of The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries that Defined America, and Greenburg is the author of Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.

Some brief highlights from the conversation, as well as a few photos, after the jump.

We're stepping away from our computer for bit, to attend an event at Georgetown Law School featuring two of the best writers about the Supreme Court working today: Jan Crawford Greenburg, of ABC News, and Jeffrey Rosen, of The New Republic. It will be moderated by the brilliant Professor Neal Katyal (who also happens to be Jeff Rosen's brother-in-law).

Both Greenburg and Rosen have just published new books about the Court. Rosen is the author of The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries that Defined America, and Greenburg is the author of Supreme Conflict.

Before her book was published, we speculated that Jan Crawford Greenburg might unseat Linda Greenhouse as Queen Bee of the SCOTUS press corps. We suggested that the young and attractive Greenburg might play Eve Harrington to Linda Greenhouse's Margo Channing. In light of the rapturous notices that Supreme Conflict has received, as well as its status as a New York Times-certified bestseller, we feel that our prediction is coming to pass. Watch out, Linda G.!

Some content will be posted while we're gone. So please do check back soon!

Earlier: All About... Jan?

(Because, you know, they have better things to do with their ten-foot poles.)

The New York Observer's Anna Schneider-Mayerson has penned an interesting article on Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. Here's the link.

Random aside: When ATL holds its "Legal Journalist Hotties Contest," expect Anna Schneider-Mayerson -- a Harvard-educated blonde beauty -- to give Jan Crawford Greenburg a run for her money.

Much of Schneider-Mayerson's article will be familiar to regular readers of Above the Law (since we've been "covering the crap" out of this case, as promised). But the piece does contain some new information. Like this:

Mr. Charney said he called Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a legal advocacy organization that represents gay clients on civil-rights-related issues, to aid in his case.

“I called the hotline, spoke to the representative who answered, and was told I would hear back from them,” he wrote in an e-mail. “Days later they returned my call and informed me that they were not interested in pursuing my matter against S&C.”

(A representative at Lambda contacted by The Observer said it does not comment on these matters.)

The Lambda diss is the juiciest tidbit. But the NYO piece contains a few other highlights, which we reprint after the jump.

* We took Eve Harrington's Jan Crawford Greenburg's quip that Justice Stevens told her when he was planning to retire as a joke. But not everyone did. [Volokh Conspiracy; Althouse]

* A juicy rumor. But who on earth could it be? [Concurring Opinions]

(Btw, congrats to Concurring Opinions on its one millionth visitor.)

* Former fashion designer Ilene Moses is on trial for allegedly defrauding banks of $26 million. But her design of fur-trimmed capes may be the more serious offense. [Associated Press]

* Fred Fielding will be taking a pay cut as White House counsel. But that's okay, 'cause he can afford it. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Drape an invisibility cloak over the Federal Register, and call it a day. [Wonkette]

* We recommend to you any blog post that contains the words "palpably fresh." [Crescat Sententia]

* Here's Blawg Review #90. [Minor Wisdom]

* We weren't the only ones who had a blast at last week's crazy law-blogger party! So did Miriam Cherry, whom we had the pleasure of meeting at the festivities. [PrawfsBlawg]

Last week was short, thanks to the New Year's holiday; but it sure was busy. Here are some highlights from a very momentous week:

* No more jokes about Harriet Miers: the ill-fated ex-SCOTUS nominee has resigned as White House counsel. Speculation about her successor abounds.

* No more jokes about the Dewy Orifice: the ill-fated merger between Dewey Ballantine and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe has been called off.

* Turns out that Chief Justice Rehnquist was a painkiller junkie. Once, while suffering withdrawal symptoms, he tried to bust out of a hospital in his PJs.

* Chief Judge David Levi, of the Eastern District of California, will be the new Dean of Duke Law School.

* All About Jan? Just as the aging Margo Channing's reign over Broadway was threatened by the comely Eve Harrington, the aging Linda Greenhouse's reign over One First Street is being threatened by the comely Jan Crawford Greenburg.

* Who knew? Law professors and legal bloggers sure know how to party! Photos of drunken legal academics available here and here.

* Cravath partner John Beerbower has enjoyed some amazing apartments over the years. Cravath partnership + Wealthy wife = $20 million, Park Avenue pad.

* Who's your favorite First Circuit judge? Cast your vote here.

* If you're a right-winger hoping that Justice Stevens will step down soon, don't hold your breath.

* Today's D.C. Circuit: Despite the occasional catfight, it's not as bitchy as it used to be. Sigh.

* Oppressed law clerks, your Devil Wears Prada is on its way. Coming soon to a bookstore near you: Chambermaid, by former Third Circuit clerk Saira Rao.

Our favorite movie of all time is All About Eve (1950). It's the story of a brilliant but aging stage diva, Margo Channing (Bette Davis), and an aspiring actress, Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter). Margo befriends Eve, taking the star-struck youngster under her wing. But then the exceedingly ambitious Eve starts to threaten her mentor's reign as queen of the theater.

The small Supreme Court press corps can be compared to the clubby world of the theater. It's populated by distinguished veterans, like Tony Mauro, and emerging younger talents, like Dahlia Lithwick. (Expressed in Broadway terms, Mauro and Lithwick could be compared to, respectively, Christopher Plummer and Sutton Foster.)

The stage has its great divas -- e.g., Bernadette Peters, Chita Rivera -- and so does the SCOTUS press corps. Nina Totenberg is certainly one of them. But the undoubted queen of Supreme Court correspondents is Linda Greenhouse, of the New York Times.

Greenhouse has been covering the Court for almost three decades, since 1978. She enjoys unmatched access to the justices, especially those in the middle and left wings of the Court. Supreme Court justices are notoriously media-shy. But Linda Greenhouse can magically reach them on their cell phones, at any hour, and get them to spill their deepest and darkest secrets. If you want to know whether there was blood in a justice's stool this morning, ask Linda G.

So here's our question:

If Linda Greenhouse is the Margo Channing of Supreme Court reporters, does that make Jan Crawford Greenburg into Eve Harrington?

Just like Eve Harrington, Jan Crawford Greenburg of ABC News is a talented and attractive young woman, whose star is on the rise. In the past three months, she has scored coveted in-person interviews with almost half of the Supreme Court:

(1) Chief Justice John Roberts, in Miami;

(2) Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer, here in Washington; and

(3) earlier this week, Justice John Paul Stevens (his first network television interview ever).

For all of you non-journalist types, please understand: these are MAJOR COUPS.

And there's more. As Howard Bashman notes, later this month, Greenburg has a "top-secret" new book on the Court coming out. That book, Supreme Conflict, is being touted as drawing upon "unprecedented access to the Supreme Court justices and their inner circles."

(Note to Greenburg's book publicist: We'd love to get a reviewer's copy, if you wouldn't mind sending one our way.)

Call it Greenhouse v. Greenburg. Linda Greenhouse's historic domination of Supreme Court coverage is under siege, as Jan Crawford Greenburg makes some serious inroads at One First Street. And we're not the only ones who have taken notice. Check out Howard Bashman's great interview with La Greenburg, posted just this morning, in which he accurately describes the trajectory of her career as "meteoric."

We will surely piss off some people with this question, but we'll ask it anyway:

Could Greenburg's status as a hottie be contributing in any way, however small, to her journalistic success?

In All About Eve, you will recall, Eve Harrington uses her beauty and charm to seduce theatre critics, writers, and directors.*

Some of you might object: "This whole 'All About Jan' theory is ridiculous. Linda Greenhouse has been covering the Court since Jan Crawford Greenburg was in footsie pajamas. Do you really think LG is about to be supplanted as Empress by some upstart kid?"

We respond by quoting this exchange from All About Eve, between Margo Channing and her lover, Bill Sampson:

BILL: Darling, [to succeed in the theater,] you've got to keep your teeth sharp. All right. But you will not sharpen them on me --- or on Eve...

MARGO: What about her teeth? What about her fangs?

BILL: She hasn't cut them yet, and you know it!

But Jan Crawford Greenburg HAS sharpened her pearly whites (which we've admired up close). And she's ready to sink them into Linda Greenhouse.

* Rumor has it that back in the day, as a young and attractive reporter, Nina Totenberg was not averse to "workin' it." If you can confirm this rumor or shed more light on it, please drop us a line.

N.B. We are NOT suggesting that Nina Totenberg pulled The Full Judith Miller. We've simply heard that Totenberg, back when she was a youthful beauty, was highly skilled at deploying feminine charm in getting her sources to talk.

Update: This comment is one of the best compliments we have ever received in our entire life. Addison DeWitt is our idol. Thanks, Michael Doyle!

Interview of Jan Crawford Greenburg by Howard Bashman [How Appealing]
Jan Crawford Greenburg [NewsHour Extra: The Road Taken]
Linda Greenhouse bio [Wikipedia]
All About Eve [IMDb]
All About Eve screenplay [Screenplays for You]
Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court [Amazon]