FBI agents have begun asking reporters about conversations they had with former Department of Defense analyst Larrry Franklin, the New York Times reports:

The interviews by the Federal Bureau of Investigation are starting with four reporters, among them at least one newspaper journalist and others whose work has been published on the Internet, the officials said. They would not identify any of the journalists and said the number could increase.

The interviews represent the latest twist in a convoluted inquiry that appears to be evolving from a spy case into a broader investigation into the possible disclosure of classified information by the analyst, Lawrence A. Franklin.

The journalists whom the agents want to question wrote articles that investigators are said to believe are based on classified information that Mr. Franklin obtained while he was working at the Defense Department.

If the reporters refuse to answer all of the FBI’s questions, a subpoena could be issued. In that case, the Franklin investigation would begin to resemble the controversy involving journalists who refuse to answer questions about who outed CIA officer Valerie Plame.

As noted earlier this week, the FBI’s interest in speaking to journalists was first reported by Newsweek. The Newsweek article mentions that bloggers may be among those questioned.

The Times article contains new details about the evidence to be used against Franklin:

At one point last summer, Mr. Franklin had agreed to help the government with the investigation before ending his cooperation when it became evident that prosecutors wanted to charge him with a crime. During that time, he made several telephone calls to possible subjects in the case, including one to Mr. Weissman, according to people who have been officially briefed on the case. The call was surreptitiously monitored and recorded by F.B.I. agents.

In the conversation with Mr. Weissman, Mr. Franklin said he had learned that Iran was seeking to encourage or engage in attacks against Israelis in northern Iraq, people who have been officially briefed on the case said. They said that Mr. Weissman told Mr. Rosen of the conversation and that the two men are believed to have passed the information to an Israeli official who was an intelligence officer. It is not clear whether the information was based on actual information or was fabricated to lure the two Aipac officials into incriminating themselves.

So: if the Times’ sources are to be believed, two men employed by AIPAC (a group that is not registered as an agent for a foreign government) are suspected of giving classified information to an Israeli intelligence officer. Think any of the speakers will mention this at next week’s AIPAC conference?