Thanks,
I have wondered what would happen if Fitzgerald were to say: "I'm willing to stipulate that Libby was busy with a lot of top secret stuff, so there is no need to produce it".
Obviously, this case is much different from Jabara, because in Jabara, the withheld evidence WAS the evidence supposedly making the crime.
With the Libby case, Libby is mounting a defense to lying on "Matter A," that depends on "Matter A" being trivial and easily forgotten, compared with Libby's very busy life on "Matters P, Q, T, and X, Y and Z."
So, Fitz won't have as easy a time of dispensing with the Judge's order. There will be some dickering at the CIA about what they might be able to put together, some discussion with the VP and President about their sense of what they're willing to release, etc. Hey, it's a pardon in "we can't tell you that" clothing.
The alternative is Fitz appealing the order. He's independent by design, and may choose to do that. It puts off the chore of conformity, and gives the CIA and administration time to play with various ways to comply with the order if the appeal is lost.
I'd like to see it appealed - just because it's an interesting window into what the executive can withhold as a matter of stifling criminal prosecution. Sort of a Nixon v. US sort of case, but on little matters rather than big ones.