John, I think the evidence that Libby tried to mislead investigators, at least as it is described in the indictment, is pretty strong. The evidence that he violated the espionage act is weak, and it is the weakness of the non-charged offense which has dominated the debate because Libby’s partisans have been very effective at portraying the case as about the crimes that were investigated rather than the crimes that were indicted.

Obviously, you should stick with the defense of “it’s just a difference of recollection” between Scooter and three reporters if you’re comfortable with that. And maybe that will carry the day when the trial finally happens. BUT, we now know that Armitage and Rove said things that were inaccurate and, after thorough investigation, Fitzgerald decided not to charge them. What that tells me — and, again, I don’t know what the evidence is — is that merely saying something inaccurate was not enough to get charged in this case. There had to be convincing evidence that the misstatements were knowing and quite intentional.

Knowing Pat as I do, I’d be stunned if he does not have that kind of evidence. But our speculation is beside the point. Scooter gets his day in court, and Pat gets to put his case in. Then we’ll know.