Quote:

the G-man said:
About three months ago, it was pointed out on these very boards that that the so-called "outing" of Plame was probably not criminal after all:

So, even if this allegation is true, I think before you hold that "Felony Treason Trial," you need to first have a criminal violation.



Quote:

PaulWellr said:
FLASHBACK: Bush about Plame leak, Oct 6, 2003 PM We're talking about a criminal action,but also hopefully will help set a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop, as well. And so I look forward to finding the truth.



Many investigations start as "criminal actions" but as the evidence is gathered it reveals that no crime, per se, occurred.

Quote:

But according to Luskin, Rove's lawyer...Rove himself had testified before the grand jury "two or three times" and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him.



If Rove is "the source" and, as noted above, Rove had signed a waiver, why would Time have to require a court order to surrender the information?

If the article is accurate, this would seem to indicate that the source is someone other than Rove.