yes, Cooper said he heard it from Rove. that's not the "before" timeframe I'm interested in.
I don't know why you put so little credence into them being baited. the reporters only asked that question because they knew the answer already, that Wilson's wife was CIA. Had they known Wilson's wife to be a waitress, there would have been no context to asking about whether "Wilson's wife had anything to do with his Niger trip". That question only makes sense if you know Wilson's wife is in some position to have effected the assignment - like being a CIA agent in a WMD bureau. these reporters knew exactly what they were doing, and had that been made clear, the entire indictment would be viewed in a different context - or would have included the reporters. after all, if perjury is so important as you say, then its important for the reporters too.
/ shrug / I don't see the relevance of "being baited" when they are in front of investigators. Rove seems to have managed to tell the truth in that venue.
... these reporters knew exactly what they were doing, and had that been made clear, the entire indictment would be viewed in a different context ...
I just don't see that playing one way or the other when it comes to what Libby tells investigators. The indictment does not depend on the reporters being ignorant of Plame before having conversations with Libby.
if perjury is so important as you say, then its important for the reporters too.
We're just going in circles at his point.