[Wally_Kalbacken]

It could be true, it could be false, but if it is not a crime - it has no impact. The key to whether it was a crime or not is in her status at the time the disclosure was made, and whether the information (her identity and employment as a covert CIA operative) had been made public (albeit with less dissemination than in Novak's column) earlier. Only Drudge would focus on the "who" to the exclusion of the "what".

[Anti-Bubba182]

It would be political trouble for Rove if true, but major egg
on Lawrence O'Donnel if it isn't. If it was Rove, that would
have probably disclosed a lot earlier.

[SittinYonder]

Only Drudge would focus on the "who" to the exclusion of the "what".

No, everyone will focus on the "who" to the exclusion of the "what" if it truly is Rove. The MSM and the Dems will be screaming from the mountaintops, calling for resignations, talking about impeachment. I realize this is no different than what they do any other day, but they'll be doing it over this for a while.

All in all, it's no big deal if it was Rove, IMO, except that it will be bad PR. I don't think there is a criminal case to be made.