Right, and I can buy that scenario, but the fact remains there is an ongoing investigation as if she WAS covert. That's a fact, unless there's something we really do not know.
My whole reason for bringing up this article is because I kept thinking based on reports that she was NOT covert, but the MSM kept writing articles as if she was. I was saying why would the MSM be so blantantly wrong about her status and keep reporting bogus info. So, I did a search and found that article.
Futhermore, based on a reporter sitting in jail for not revealing a source of someone who was NOT convert is pretty stupid and unneccessary UNLESS there is more to it! I believe this was setup against Bush and Rove, if you noticed in the article Schumer immediately suggested Rove be investigated.
I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the status of "ongoing" means that the status of "covert" is or was attached to Plame. The investigation can remain open for many reasons, including obstruction of justice by testimony witnesses.
I've been looking (so far in vain) for the questionnaire that CIA forwarded to Justice. I did find this snippet, which seems to indicate that CIA is asking whether or not a law was broken, which is different from assering and reporting that for sure, a law was broken.
The unauthorized disclosure laws are a fairly complex tapestry. In fact, the CIA isn't alwasy sure a law is broken, and sometimes (maybe more often than not) prefers to not bring the high profile of prosecution to bear on a disclosure.
As The Washington Post reported on October 1, 2003, the CIA submitted a detailed questionnaire to the Justice Department to initiate an investigation into whether the incident amounted to a "violation of federal law that prohibits unauthorized disclosures of classified information."
This is a good read to give a flavor of the complexity of finding a statutory violation: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/lapham.html.