Simple question about Libby trial

Doesn't the whole thing come down to Tim Russert? As I understand Libby still maintains that he heard about Plame from Russert. Doesn't the prosecutor simply have to put Russert on the stand and ask him if he told Libby anything about Plame, while in fact the opposite is true (correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall seeing Russert flatly deny Libby's assertion, almost laughing at the concept on TV once).

If Russert never told Libby about Plame, but Libby said (and still says) he did, doesn't that alone constitute lying to the grand jury and/or perjury and/or obstruction?

All these other witnesses are certainly entertaining and they shed light on the atmosphere in the administration, which is nice and bound to lead in new directions... but as far as this trial goes, doesn't Fitz have an ace in the hole with Russert? When can we expect to see Russert on the stand? And is there any indication that he wouldn't be a cooperative witness?

gary

So Russert may have forgotten what he said to Libby, etc.

I think Fitz is bringing in witness after witness to show how focused Libby was in outing Plame. There seems to me to be an utter wealth of witnesses against Libby.

Ari, Russert and Judy will all contradict what Libby said. Fitz is building a pretty strong case. The defense is looking weak.

The prosecution is building their case, brick by brick. Russert may be the key, but at the same time, they are forming an impenetrable wall of evidence. The defense will have to scale their wall, and so far, it doesn't look good for Scooter.

Julie
president for life of the PFEB

I think someone will answer a question and open a whole new can of whoopass on this administration. I will dance in the streets when that finally happens.

Fitz is building an ironclad case against Libby, with multiple testimonies.

It is also possible that he is annoyed that he couldn't charge anyone with the actual crime involving the leaking of Plame's identity, so he is revealing as much as he can about the whole affair into the public record, while still staying within the bounds of the perjury indictment against Libby.

jim

how do we know that case is closed? all we know is that Rove received a letter saying he won't be indicted. Isn't it possible the case is still open for others (Cheney?)