I was going to post what Cleek had already said but s/he beat me to it. But just to amplify the point: what type of chutzpah does FERRARO have to say that Obama got where he is because of his race when she (an obscure New York congresswoman at the time) was clearly put on the ticket in 84 because of her gender? (I was around in 84--I remember this!) I'm shocked no one has pointed this irony out yet in the MSM.

Geek, do the honorable thing and concede. LOL

Jamie, point well taken. That's one of the many reasons that I think perjury should rarely be prosecuted. The other is that it's about as common (although of course far more serious than) jaywalking. In this case though the circumstantial evidence that Libby lied about his memory is so overwhelming (considering the numerous conversations he had about Plame's wife just prior to the conversation with Russert, his strong motive to lie, etc.) and the importance of the investigation so great that I don't think Fitzgerald could possibly have let this one slide.

Doofus, the reason is that in the weeks prior to his conversation with Russert, Libby talked about Plame with several administration officials as well as several reporters. Thus, the idea that he actually believed that he learned about Plame's identity from Russert for the first time despite having all these prior conversations seems extraordinarily unlikely. So, there is much more evidence contradicting Libby's testimony than simply Russert's word.

"[A]rguably, Libby's statement that he believed he was hearing about Plame for the first time when he spoke to Russert is still false..." Omigod! Libby completely made up a story out of whole cloth and told it under oath repeatedly. How in the world can you possibly make the statement quoted? I agree the Woodward revelation complicates the story line (lawyers often have to adjust to new evidence in litigation), but that's a long way from "arguably, Libby's statement that he believed he was hearing about Plame for the first time when he spoke to Russert is still false is still false." "Arguably"? Good grief.

"For example, perhaps Libby testified that he only talked with reporters about Wilson's wife after hearing about it from other reporters, and in leaks to the press that conveniently morphed into 'Libby only knew about it after talking with reporters'." What other reporters?? If my timeline is right he learned it from Cheney on June 12th and told Miller about it on June 23. He didn't talk to Russert until "early July". So, somewhere in that short timeframe (between June 12th and 23rd) he talked to some third reporter we have never heard about and that reporter told him Plame works at the CIA? If there was some third reporter it would seem that the admin would have leaked that type of very favorable infomation by now. I think your scenario is unlikely.