I am saying that it was not investigated - if it had been, we might have been able to show their testimony was not truthful in some areas.
not backwards - but a more fair outcome might well have brought BOTH the Libby indictments and other indictments against the media "players" in this. if we are looking for the level of "fairness" in Fitzgerald's approach to this case, that certainly would have been a data point of note. As it is, I still don't know what deal he cut with Miller.
this whole issue of "prior knowledge", while again I understand it has nothing to do with what Libby is charged with, would certainly have been enlightening with regards to exposing the part of the story about how this whole Wilson thing got cooked up in the first place. and after all, if this investigation was really about a search for the truth - shouldn't we know that?
The endeavor is odd. I am puzzled at why the WH endorsed and continues to endorse the investigation as "serious." Why not point out the obvious? If someone is known to work at the CIA, they are not covert.
But if you read the charge from the DoJ to the independent counsel, you will see why the focus was on government actors.