[RepublicanCentury]

I have read the indictment, and I am dumbfounded. The most serious counts (perjury) are based on nothing more that a "he said/she said" - specifically, Libby said that both Russert and Time's Matt Cooper told him about Plame, while Cooper and Russert said they did not. That's it - one man's word against another - no other evidence (at least none disclosed). Very very difficult to get a conviction with evidence this flimsy.

[jaydubyagee]

thats what I am seeing too. "trustworthy" MSM's word against Libby.

Is anyone else disturbed that Russert continues to report on this story as an "impartial" member of the media?

[frankjr]

I only read the press release outlining the charges and even though it says that Libby alledgely knew about Valerie working at the CIA before speaking with reporters, no where does it say he knew if she was undercover or if it was classfied. I am guessing that is part of the reason no charges on Intel Identity protection act orleaking classified info.

Now sure 5 counts looks bad, but it is pretty sad that there is no underlying crime and the charges are based on the memory of the reporters.

[angkor]

There's also a great deal in the indictment about Plame's alleged "covert" status (and presumably someone at CIA confirmed this for Fitzgerald), but there is no charge against Libby on that issue, and nowhere is there any indication that Libby knew of her "covert" status.

I'm having some difficulty seeing what the charges arise from. That he gave Russert, Miller, and Cooper a runaround? So what?

[ArmyBratproud]

Sadly, that's all it takes to indict ...according to political hack prosecutors.

Both Cooper and Russert should have been indicted by this standard then.