>> The prosecutor says Libby was lying to investigators and to the GJ.<<
I know what the prosecutors are saying and what they think. What I'm trying to get through to you is that they are either mistaken or intentionally ignoring the fact that the lies that they allege on Libby's part are NOT lies to the GJ or the FBI, but statements made to the GJ or the FBI about lies Libby told to reporters.
Can you point to me anything in the inidictment or anything else in Libby's testimony that was, in fact, an erroneous statement of fact? When I stated "I went to a lodge meeting", I was telling the investigator what I told my wife, not that I actually went to the lodge meeting. In this case, the investigator is charging me with the false statement that I made under oath, saying "I went to a lodge meeting," when I did no such thing.
I believe that in at least SOME of Libby's statements that are the basis of the indictment, the prosecutor is charging Libby with perjury about the statements Libby made to reporters that are, in fact untrue. It isn't, as you seem to be getting confused about, that the prosecutor is charging Libby with lying to Russert; it is that the prosecutor believes that what Libby said to Russert was what Libby believes to be true -- and what Libby stated as fact, and it isn't.
None of what you posted refute that.
>> Maybe you can explain the relevance you see in an allegation that Libby was lying to reporters. <<
I HAVE. Three times at least. It isn't that there is an ALLEGATION that Libby lied to reporters. Its that there is an allegation that Libby lied to prosecutors when he stated what he told reporters, when those statemenst were, in fact, untrue. As I stated in my previous post, since the prosecutor does not state in his indictment that he understands Libby was lying to reporters, I'm not sure the prosecutor understands the distinction between Libby's statements to the GJ/FBI about his discussions with reporters and what Libby was stating to the GJ/FBI that was meant to be statements of fact.
If you, like the prosecutor, believe Libby lied, it is YOUR burden to show what he lied about. You haven't come close to that.
The prosecutor says Libby's testimony lead them to think that Libby never called the CIA to learn of Plame's status.
Neither, actually.
The charge is that whatever Libby told Russert, true or not; he gave prosecutors a different version of what he told Russert, true or not.
Its that there is an allegation that Libby lied to prosecutors when he stated what he told reporters, when those statemenst were, in fact, untrue.
No, it's not that. The "lie" to prosecutors is the difference between what he said he told reporters vs. what he actually told reporters. The indictment is clear on its face.