It is a proven and admitted (by Armitage) fact that it was Richard Armitage who “leaked” Plame’s status, but you know that. Not that the turd Plame was worth one iota more than her self-aggrandizing.
That was a travesty of justice, and it angers me to this day. I contributed to his defense fund, and Bush should have pardoned him completely. I supported George W. Bush in many (but not all) aspects, and his declination to do this was an act of political cowardice which still rankles me.
Libby should have never been in front of that Grand Jury, it was a fishing expedition looking for scalps or someone to “frog march” out of the White House. The bastards got his. I hate them for that.
Yes. But that's not relevant to the issue at Libby's trial. The question at Libby's trial was, at the time he gave testimony to the investigators, did he know Plame worked at the CIA.
The question and evidence about telling reporters was adduced to get to the root question, did he know Plame worked at the CIA?
As far as leakers go, it is possible for there to be multiple leakers. IF (and this wasn't) the leak was of protected information, the fact that one person leaks it does not immunize everybody else.
-- Libby should have never been in front of that Grand Jury --
That was a political calculation by Bush, to appoint a special prosecutor. If Libby had come clean up front, Bush and Cheney would have had good information, and could have made a different decision how to handle the situation.
Anyway, I don;t want to rehash the case. We're both entrenched, and I don;t want to diminish any goodwill you might have toward me on account of this disagreement.