Of course Bush has his apologists in the media such as David Brooks in the New York times that deny there is a cancer in the White House [his words] and in his column he claims democrats exaggerated and distorted the conspiracy claim by democratic leaders

Far be it for me to argue with David Brooks. He is too intelligent and articulate. However, the fact that Mr. Fitzgerald apparently feels that he cannot prove a criminal conspiracy doesn´t mean that nothing bad was going on. This was not a leak designed to inform the American public of important policies. The leak was a mean-spirited effort to punish a critic, Mr. Wilson, by hurting the career of his wife, which wasted CIA´s work in creating her cover and is possibly endangering foreign agents who dealt with her.

Wasn´t this leak worthy of indignant language? As for conspiracy, maybe it didn´t amount to a provable crime but obviously these people were working together. It is clear that Mr. Cheney talked to the CIA and informed Scooter Libby of Mrs. Wilson´s employment. Mr. Libby talked to Karl Rove and others. Mr. Libby and Mr. Rove revealed Mrs. Wilson's identity to at least 3 reporters. Does anyone believe that these leaks were just a slip of the tongue?