Reply #42: Let me try to explain this more clearly

[NNN0LHI]

Lets say some guy robs a bank and when the police come to interview the suspect he says he was with Tim Russert giving an interview while the bank was being robbed therefore he could not possibly be guilty.

Now if Russert in fact had not been doing an interview with the suspect during the robbery should Russert be held by some journalist/source protection from testifying that there really was no interview? Should the false assertions made by the suspect be allowed into his trial without Russert testifying to the truth?

That is what Libby was trying to do here. And Russert was going to do anything he could short of going to jail to help Libby accomplish this.

Don