I read somewhere that some of Libby's notes recovered by Fitz were on a hard drive that Libby thought he had wiped clean. That would be enough for an obstruction indictment. I doubt it comes from his letter to Miller.
Get out of here with your factual basis for a charge. No one is interested in such trash.
"I read somewhere that some of Libby's notes recovered by Fitz were on a hard drive that Libby thought he had wiped clean. That would be enough for an obstruction indictment."
Maybe an indictment, but that's a long way from a conviction. He would have to have corroborating evidence showing that Libby purposely deleted the files in order to conceal information from the prosecutor.
Yes, that's an important point to understand about hard drives: when you delete data, the data isn't actually erased from your hard drive. The deleted area is just marked as unused and then can be overwritten with new data. Numerous people have been nailed for various offenses when they thought they had permanently deleted files from their hard drives. To really get rid of data on a hard drive, you have to destroy the hard drive's storage disk.
That would be dumb, if Libby doesn't know how to do a secure-delete on a computer file.
I, we, delete things on my computer all the time. Concluding that he was destroying evidence is like saying someone washed their hands, so they must have been bloody.
This is what the dum dums have been waiting for, with tongues hanging out? This is comic opera.