Plamegate, contd.

Tom Maguire continues his excellent work covering the Scooter Libby case, linking to a Washington Post article that describes the defense gameplan, including their effort to go after journalist's notes. The Post makes both Jeff Toobin of the New Yorker and Maguire in another earlier post look prescient. Maguire's detailed commentary on what may happen to the newsmedia as a result of this case is particularly entertaining...

...the case can be made that the Libby trial will become the trial of the (new) century and shatter the credibility of the media in a way that makes RatherGate look as embarrassing and unimportant as on on-air sneeze.

Very briefly, here are the three main points:

(1) It *MAY* be the case that Tim Russert and Andrea Mitchell of NBC News are conspiring to conceal misleading and possibly perjured testimony by Tim Russert to Special Counsel Fitzgerald. Since that testimony was central to the indictment and resignation of the Vice President's Chief of Staff, this little glitch in Russert's testimony has had dramatic (and unforeseen) consequences.

Their *POSSIBLE* motive - the protection of other sources, possibly including (I am serious) Alan Greenspan and Dick Cheney.

(2) The NY Times will take a hit when (*IF*) Nick Kristof is forced to admit that he was aware of Valerie Plame's CIA connection prior to the publication of the Novak column, and that he had previously used Ms. Plame as a source for some columns. Since Mr. Kristof's columns of May 6 and June 13 2003 triggered the Wilson story, his previously undisclosed involvement will raise eyebrows. To say the least.

(3) The Washington Post will find another Bob Woodward on their hands when (*IF*) Walter Pincus is forced to admit that the Plame leak he received on July 12 2003 was *not* his first leak of the news that Wilson's wife was at the CIA. We will learn (I am *GUESSING*) that Mr. Pincus was apprised of her status through State Department (or possibly CIA) sources back in June 2003. Why did he keep quiet, and how did the WaPo miss this? Well, why did Woodward keep quiet? Source protection.

Are all three of these scenarios going to unfold as I suspect? Presumably not. But if the Libby team gets lucky with even one of them, the Libby trial will be deeply problematic for Fitzgerald, and for the media. And for the rest of us, perhaps these ideas can help some enterprising journalists re-direct their attention and break (or close out) these possible stories.

The breakdown of the speculation regarding Mitchell and Russert is particularly intriguing. No, there's not a lot of hard evidence there. But there's plenty of little nuggets to check out that may be helpful in finding a great story for an enterprising journalist. And there's more than enough dirt available for a lawyer to send an investigator on an expedition that could turn up proof of any of the three scenarios -- the first of which could wind up bringing down Alan Greenspan, for crying out loud.