Sure. But Ccooper's testimony already admitted that.
There is alot of evidence out there that Wilson was blabbing this all over the place for these reporters not to have known.
So what?
Were their statements investigated for a possible perjury charge? Probably not ...
Turn the tables, turn the facts around. Make it so Libby did not lie to investigators, but some reporter did. Thr GJ would need to resolve the conflicting testimony. We can't know for sure, but I recall a good deal of specuation here that Miller or Cooper was going to charged with perjury - and that speculation was based on the assumption that the reporters told Libby about Plame, not the reverse.
I hear your complaint, BTW, but it seems to miss the gravamen of the indictment. The indictment stands EVEN IF the reporters independently knew of Plame before Libby called the CIA and made his inquiry.
yes, but it would mean that the reporters should ALSO have been indicted for perjury. Why should the reporters be able to go in there and claim they knew nothing, and not face perjury, when an investigation into whether those statements were false would likely have been successful, given what we know about how many people in that circle did know who Wilson's wife was? Fitzgerald made a conscious decision to let them skate on it. And you are correct, while it would not have changed the factual basis for Libby's indictment - it would have put the entire case in a different light - showing that the reporters were part of a setup to bait Libby and Rove into talking.