1. You're saying EVERY INVESTIGATION is proof a crime was committed? Investigations are conducted upon the ALLEGATION of a crime. If and ONLY IF the prosecutor decides a crime has been committed AND sufficient EVIDENCE exists to indicate a good likelihood of gaining a conviction, will he file charges. Then a judge and/or grand jury will get to decide whether there is sufficient evidence of a crime, and only then does it actually go to trial.
2. You're further assuming Rove is the target of the investigation. The last time Fitzgerald was asked about it (admittedly some time ago) he said he wasn't. That means back then there was at least one other target.
3. Rove gave a blanket release to ANY reporter he ever spoke with to testify before the grand jury. That means Judith Miller is not 'protecting' Rove, but someone else.
4. Then there's this little item:
36 'major news organizations and reporters' groups' filed an amici curiae brief in the D.C. Circuit on the question of whether Matt Cooper and Judith Miller should be compelled to reveal the identities of confidential sources. On page ii of the brief, the lawyers for the media groups assert: 'In this case, there exists ample evidence in the public record to cast serious doubt as to whether a crime has even been committed under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (the 'Act'
in the investigation underlying the attempts to secure testimony from Miller and Cooper.
http://www.bakerlaw.com/files/tbl_s10News/FileUpload44/
10159/Amici%20...
As many as for Nixon.
