The Libby case was about Libby "lying" during an investigation of a case that shouldn't have been brought...
If HE did lie...he will be held accountable...but, in the meantime....Wilson, Plame, Vallely, Andrea Mitchell, Russert, Miller, Cooper and all of the rest will have to testify in public, under oath....yes!!!!
Chrissy Matthews has decided to "take a look at the leaking of a CIA agent case, A DIFFERENT way....by looking at the "wider" picture---how the White House MANIPULATED the media"....
yeppers....now that Wilson may be blowing up in their faces...they are saying that Bush used a "calculated plan to manipulate the media" into pushing for war, using cherry-picked CIA evidence...yada, yada....
More specifically, (allegedly) lying to investigators (he is free to lie his ass off to reporters, before, during and after) about information that is material to figuring out the source of information published in the Novak column.
What is puzzling though, is that the WH could have made the same argument raised by 36 news organizations, and it (the WH) could have done so with knowledge of the facts. But it didn't. Why not? Why did the WH permit the investigation when it knew beyond any doubt whatsoever that 50 USC 421 had not been violated, even if the WH was the source. Was it fear of political embarrassment? If so, it was silly, because what it has now is embarrassment delayed and magnified.