Maybe so, however in point of fact, nothing that Mr. Libby is charged with, as I can see, forwards a criminal or civil violation. In other words, talking to reporters about events which were not under your control, and in a sense reacting to those events by speaking out about them and then trying to recall those statements versus what others will recollect doesn't seem worthy of criminal prosecution. Just my opinion.
I agree, some of the folks look for ANYTHING when it comes to the President, his staff to use against them.
A major portion of the charges hinge on Libby's versus Russert's recollection of what they discussed.
I know I've had mistaken recollections about conversations in the past, and I know others have as well.
So when Russert says he learned about Plame only after Novak's article, well, maybe he did and maybe he didn't. His memory could be at fault (unless he has recordings, which are illegal under DC law).
It is literally a "he said, she said" sort of argument, and I'd be surprised to see it stand up in court.