"A source close to Miller said yesterday that her testimony does not implicate Libby as intentionally and knowingly identifying Plame."
It doesn't get much clearer than that.
But what about Karl Rove? No doubt this was all engineered by Master Evil. (/sarcasm)
Agreed. Plus the article shows, once again, that it is the reporter that brings up the whole issue of the Niger trip and not the administration official:
"...the two first met for breakfast on July 8, when Miller interviewed Libby about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. At that time, she asked him why Wilson had been chosen to investigate questions that Cheney had posed about whether Iraq tried to buy uranium in Niger."
I have not heard or read of one instance yet where a reporter claims that someone in the administration first called the reporter to push the story.
From all the leaks so far (for what that is worth) seem to show that no one in the administration violated the Intelligence Identities Act (still not certain if Plame was covert and does not appear they knew anyway) nor did they lie under oath (it seems reporters stories sync up with the admin officials). I think the only question left is to the extent the admin officials (Libby, Rove, others?) knew about Plame, where did they get that info? Other reporters, known gossip or some 'confidential' document? I think proving it was from a confidential doc would be very difficult and the leaks regarding the testimony so far give no indication of that.
It doesn't get much clearer than that.
Ha! That was exactly the line that jumped out at me, too. Clear as a bell.
(The Washington Post is rubbing the New York Times' duplicity and journalistic sleaziness right in its nose.)