3/7/07 Libby Trial

I'm taking a little bit different approach with this post. Maybe I can get some of my questions answered.

The March 7 publication of the New York Times had a front page article announcing that Ex-Dick Cheney aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby was found guilty of lying in a C.I.A. leak case. There are many articles about the case that filtered March 7th's issue as well as several others.

For those of you reading that aren't familiar with the case, I'll do my best to explain, even though I feel just as uneducated about it. Valerie Plame/Wilson was a CIA operative that had her cover leaked to the press. An article was published about it, people were fired, the whole story is a zoo. When questioned about whether he knew of the leak, Libby said he was having a memory block and didn't remember. Now, he is found guilty of lying to the Grand Jury and faces several years in prison.

The ethics are everywhere once the facts are all diagramed into place. Vice President Cheney was reported to have also known about the leak, however, was excused from the trial. Robert Novak, who wrote of the leak also doesn't fit into the puzzle. Is it ethical that so many key points may have been ignored?

For this post, if you could please comment and set me straight. The whole case interests me, however, I'm sketchy on my facts. Am I on the right track that not everything adds up here?