So often I find myself wondering - is it true, or did I read it in TIME magazine?
Here is a howler from their coverage of Cheney and the aftermath of the Libby verdict (emp. added):
...no one was more responsible than the Vice President for pushing the limits of the prewar intelligence that did all the convincing. And when former ambassador Joseph Wilson questioned the credibility of that intelligence — and the motives that helped polish it — it was Cheney who led the fight to bring him down.
None of that was illegal. So four years later, the Libby trial still prompts the question, Why did Libby get into legal trouble in the first place? Why did the Vice President's top aide not simply admit to what everyone knew was true — that he discussed the identity of Wilson's wife Valerie Plame, a CIA officer, with at least one reporter? Since most experts agree that Libby was unlikely to be prosecuted on a charge of revealing her identity, it is hard not to conclude that Libby cooked up his stories to protect Cheney. If Libby had gone a different route and admitted in his grand jury testimony that he had told a reporter about the identity of Wilson's wife, Fitzgerald's next question would have been, Were you acting on Cheney's orders? And it would not have been long before Cheney was giving testimony under oath. There was, said Fitzgerald in his summation, "a cloud over what the Vice President did."
Uhh, Libby confessed to
leaking to discussing Ms. Plame with three reporters - Matt Cooper, Judy Miller, and Glenn Kessler (with a maybe, and Kessler denied it.) Jiminy - roll the tapes of his grand jury interrogations (and listen for the waterboarding!)
The notion that he refused to admit discussing Ms. Plame with reporters is shared by Neil Lewis of the Times and (I hope) few others.