Sigh sigh. Yes I read the indictment several times. And it says little...like most indictments. However, Fitz's mistake was his press conference where he said:
"At the end of the day what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true.
It was false. He was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter. And then he lied about it afterwards, under oath and repeatedly."
Ooops. Hey Fitz (aka Mr. Wrong Facts) good luck proving Libby lied vs. different memory (like the crappy memories of every reporter in this case). Fitz better hope for a jury full of MarcusTulliusCiceros.
Actually, your first sentence indicates you either didn't read it or understand it. It is quite specific, unlike many indictments. What evidence Fitzgerald may present to prove Libby's guilt remains to be seen. However, nowhere in the indictment does it allege that Libby was the first to divulge Plame's identity. The indictment deals with 3 very specific conversations in which Libby claims ignorance of Plame's status of his own knowledge when, Fitzgerald claims, documentation demonstrates that Libby indeed was well aware of her status.