Restraint for what? This whole friggin thing was supposed to center around who outted a COVERT CIA AGENT we learned yesterday after a two year investigation has concluded know one has!!! All Fitz did was indict someone who supposedly lied about WHEN he obtained Plame's name...Who wasn't even covert and being bandied about in Washington like front page Inquiry News!
That's so friggin lame and bogus it's not even funny. Fitz did nothing more than went on a fishing expidention to hook a BIG mouth and got one.
We've now learned there is truly no "leaking" here by anyone, and let me also say this, MILLER has big one's for trying to protect Libby, at least it appears she was really trying to protect him now.
The guy said plainly that the reason he didn't bring an 'outing' charge is that he couldn't reasonably make a determination whether the - read this part carefully - revelation of CLASSIFIED information about Plame's employment was intentional, inadvertent, etc. And he said plainly that one of the reasons he couldn't make that determination is because Libby constructed a cover story to hide what actually happened.
A prosecutor with less restraint could take two little pieces - the 'non-secure phone' comment and the need to lie to cover-up what happened - and fairly make the argument that Libby INTENTIONALLY revealed the classified information.