I don’t have time today to keep up with the Plame developments, but the fact that Woodward was told two years ago by a different senior administration official (ie not Libby, not Rove) apparentyl has everyone even more confused.

Paul at Wizbang says:

It appears that after almost 2 years of Fitzgerald investigating (and who knows how many million dollars) he is no closer to understanding who told what to whom than I am.

Maguire says this proves Fitzgerald was wrong.

As noted by Libby’s counsel, that does not jibe well with the assertion made by Mr. Fitzgerald at his press conference that “In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson.” (But give Fitzgerald props for qualifying this with “known to”).

This disclosure by Woodward raises many questions, starting with, why is he only coming forward now, and why is the “senior Administration official” only coming forward now.

But then you go the other side of the world and they’re convinced this hangs Libby. Here’s FireDogLake, arguing Libby is willing to take the perjury trial over an espionage trial, and that’s why he lied.

This certainly makes one’s head spin. This is a deeply tangled web that I think may yet lead to surprising places…

UPDATE: Sister Toldjah points out that the original allegation being investigated has officially been put to bed.

This just puts another nail in the coffin on the allegations that a CIA agent was “deliberately outed” in order to put her and her family in harms way as ‘revenge’ towards Joe Wilson for his NYTimes opinion piece.

And an ARC writer thinks he knows who the Woodward’s source was.

Betsy Newmark, guest blogging for Michelle, wonders about an indictment for a journalist at the Post.

So, if Woodward and Pincus both testify to different memories of their conversations, how is that different from Libby and Russert both testifying to different memories of their conversations? If we can believe that the great Bob Woodward is misremembering when he told someone something, isn’t it possible that Tim Russert could misremember something, too? Or that Scooter Libby could? Why is one discrepancy worthy of indictment and the other one chalked up to “confusion about the timing”?

And Decision ‘08 also wonders about Powell.

Captain Ed thinks the indictment will be withdrawn.

The Left will have to go back to the drawing board, and I suspect that Fitzgerald will eventually withdraw the indictment.

So does Tapscott.

Steven Clemons says Woodward crossed lots of lines.

And Beltway Pinto Beans thinks the source is Cheney.

Raw Story claims attorney’s “close” to the investigation say it was Stephen Hadley.