Who Do They Think They're Fooling?

The Republican talking points re the Libby indictments are a classic example of sophistry. Point # 1, Innocent until proven guilty. While it's true that Mr. Libby hasn't been convicted (mainly because he hasn't gone to trial yet) that line was used in response to a question about whether Rove should resign because of the political difficulties that his continued presence at the White House could cause. Some of these mouthpieces don't even try to pretend that they're answering the questions. Like candidates at the Presidential Debates, they know what they've been told to say and, by God, they'll say it no matter what the question.
The other, more ludicrous point was coming out of every Republican talking head on the Sunday morning talk show circuit. They all made the disingenious point that Mr. Fitzgerald was unable to prove that the crime which he was originally instructed to investigate was committed. From there they assert that the crime wasn't committed so Fitzgerald reached for something to charge the fine, upstanding, self-sacrificing Mr. Libby with.
The fact is that Libby, Rove, and company successfully obfuscated the facts with lies, delaying tactics and the power and prestige of the US government. The obstruction of justice charges refer to the obstruction in the investigation that prevented Mr. Fitzgerald from being able to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the crime was committed. When Al Capone was sent to prison on income tax evasion charges it was because the government was unable to convict him on any other charges, that doesn't mean he was innocent. Maybe William Saffire still argues that Scarface should be considered innocent of racketeering because he was never convicted of murder and mayhem. Inability to convict does not mean innocence. In some cases it means skill in establishing plausible deniability.