Good analysis. Yes, I've read things pointing away from Rove as well. I believe the WP quoted sources yesterday that in many instances it was the reporters who told government officials about Plame, not the other way around. I was just pointing out the earlier signed form releases did not mean it wasn't Rove. I heard the reporter last night saying they did not consider those releases to be voluntary. We can howl all we want but that was a principled decision by the reporters if you accept the premise they should protect their sources.
What stops a reporter from including some big names as sources in their notes? nothing
What stops a reporter from lying about the actual source? (X called me as said they were "insert name here")
It is apparent that left wingnut conspiracy theories will be believed by the michael more democrat niche.
(the circumstance is similar to a madame including a few political names in her client book as insurance regardless of truth.)