How, I think anyway, it would do that, it so illustrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the whole premise of the invesitgation was flawed, and that valerie wilson was known to be a CIA employee and it was common knowledge, and that there is no justification to charge libby with lying or misleading a Grand Jury when it can't be proven he was lying or was hiding anything, and it would additionally be said that "you can't obstruce a crime that you didn't commit and that didn't happen". The investigatin is flawed in its very existence. All this would be VERY difficult for a JURY to convict on. If there's just one person like me on that jury, Libby is a free man. Because just ONE person like me, will hear all this, then listen to Valalley, and say "Screw this. This is a hose job and it's all full of crap, NOT GUILTY, and if the other 11 in the jury disagree with me, they can BIT ME! NOT GUILTY!" That's how I think anyway. 8)
I hear you. And to be consistent, if you were on a jury hearing a criminal contempt charge against Miller, Cooper or Russert, you would have to render the same verdict for them.