Does this mean that NO CRIME was committed against Plame?

[WiseButAngrySara]

Please answer. This is driving me nuts!

[deadparrot]

1. It means no one has been charged...yet.

We'll learn at the press conference if the investigation will continue to bigger and better (worse?) crimes.

[WiseButAngrySara]

4. Thanks. ...n/t

[OrlandoGator]

2. The crime isn't against Plame, it's against the CIA.

n/t

[WiseButAngrySara]

8. Yes, but its indirectly against Plame. n/t

[lancdem]

3. The investigation isn't close to being complete

Libby's indictment is a beginning, not an end.

[WiseButAngrySara]

9. God I hope you're right. But why wasn't Libby indicted with worse crimes?

n/t

[Kagemusha]

11. The investigation would be over if no obstruction and all that jazz

So if ONE person complains about what kind of money this is costing, or the time it's taking, please, point him/her at Libby...

[WiseButAngrySara]

13. Good point.n/t

[kenny blankenship]

5. No just that proving whodunnit is too hard (suspects tend not to cooperate

and when witnesses not under suspicion have everything to lose by ratting they tend not to cooperate either) and furthermore the crime committed isn't against her, but against statute law like the IIPA or the Espionage Act.

[WiseButAngrySara]

12. Should I change my op title to correct this? Don't want to confuse. n/t

[JerseygirlCT]

6. It means no indictment yet on that

but to me that says the investigation will be quite thorough. I can't imagine this guy throwing his hands in the air and indicting only on the cover-up.

We'll get there.

[WiseButAngrySara]

15. Thanks. I'm going crazy. It reminds me of 2000, Floridian voters

disenfranchised and as a consequence, the people of the United States disenfranchised, and the whoring SCOTUS tainting the strict interpretation of the constitutional laws that they so admire themselves for.

They got away with all of that. I hope they don't do it again.

[MGKrebs]

7. The possibility exists that enough evidence was destroyed,

or that the coverup is complete enough, to make proving the original crime almost impossible, but evidence of that destruction or coverup may exist.

[trof]

10. Cost her a career. The civil suit will cover that.

Loss of income.

[berni_mccoy]

14. It means they committed a CRIME in OBSTRUCTING the investigation

of the Plame leak. Now WHY would they do that?!?!

[WiseButAngrySara]

16. LOL! Truth is simple stupid. It's the cover-up that's complex! Thanks..

n/t

[savemefromdumbya]

17. the trial would bring this out?

[ourbluenation]

18. nobody was charged with bugulary at the watergate hotel...

but they all went down in disgrace anyways. All will be well.

[Ilsa]

19. Sounds to me like they know there was a conspiracy to reveal her.

MsNBC is saying they know of all of these "confidential" conversations Libby had with others about Plame and to shut down Wilson. How can they not indict for conspiracy?

[LeftHander]

20. Wait someone will be accountable for leak....

And it will he the person who ordered it....

Dick Cheney.

Just wait.

[Loge23]

21. First roadblock cleared

This is really just the beginning. Fitz xould not issue an indictment such he did today without getting to the heart of the matter.
The indictment today establishes that a crime was committed (disclosure of classified information). Obviously, Fitz has to continue up the line. The first raodblock (Libby) has been cleared. This is going to get very ugly for the illegitimate administration.

[goclark]

22. Can Scooter get more indictments

if they find out even more?