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.
Um, Fitz's press conference was his first presentation of his case. He was so nervous, it looked like he was holding back tears. Now we all know Fitz made false statements during that press conference. He takes two years to come up with a weak indictment and then afterwards finds out he missed a key piece of the puzzle. LOL.
See ya, Esquire.
diG: "Plame not a covert [NOC]..."
diG: "The press conference put Fitzgerald out there with bold statement about Libby ('first person') that is now totally untrue...Woodward claims he told Pincus well before...Pincus now says I don't remember...Two people [WaPo] have different recollections of the same conversation...
diG: Fitzgerald's attempt to cast Libby being the 'first person' to unveil Plame, that is now in reasonable doubt and Fitzgerald must dismiss..."I believe that news conference was a disgrace"..."Fitzgerald tried to resurrect the (disproven) covert status at the news conference...An overly aggressive attempt to show the public what Fitzgerald wanted people to think this was all about"..."