Fitzgerald's assertion that "the evidence about the conversation concerning the Novak column provides a strong motive for the defendant to provide false information and testimony about his disclosures to reporters." is specious and misleading - it is already in the public record that Libby is not the one who leaked the info to Novak, and so a conversation by others about the Novak column shortly after it was published has no bearing on whether Libby had a strong motive to lie to the FBI or to the grand jury months later.
For Fitzgerald to falsely claim that it is a strong motive shows nothing so much as how weak Fitzgerald's case actually is that he has to resort to such patently silly statements. For Isikoff to have made a big deal out of it merely confirms that Isikoff is not to be taken seriously.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I can't get past the fact that CIA confirmed her employment to Novak. They didn't come straight out and give him permission to print it (which ought to put him in the hot seat, it mystifies me that it doesn't) but the fact remains that CIA outed her.
They didn't have to do that, they could easily have denied it. They didn't deny it, they confirmed it. I can't help but think that is significant.
Something is a stirring about this Plame crap. I have been reading alot of blogs today and the word around the internet world is Rove has been indicted. The next man they will go after is Cheney, and so on and so on. I hope the rumors of the day are just that. Ironic the "book" has been picked up by a publisher this week. It seems so obvious, but if you hate so much its just tunnel vision.