Plame Gossip - V Novak was the 11th hour information?

Big news! According to Jim Vandehei(WaPo) - Luskin claims it was some conversation with his "friend" Viveca Novak in May 2004 that was the 11th hour information that led Fitzgerald to hold off on indicting Rove.

It's not clear why Luskin believes Novak's deposition could help Rove, President Bush's deputy chief of staff, who remains under investigation into whether he provided false statements in the case. But a person familiar with the matter said Luskin cited his conversations with Novak in persuading Fitzgerald not to indict Rove in late October, when the prosecutor brought perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges against Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

"This is what caused [Fitzgerald] to hold off on charging" Rove, the source said. But another person familiar with the conversations said they did not appear to significantly alter the case.

Luskin presented evidence, including details of his own conversations with Novak, to Fitzgerald at a secret meeting at a downtown law office shortly before Libby was indicted on Oct. 28, according to a source familiar with the case.

It could not be learned what Luskin and Novak, who are friends, discussed that could help prove Rove did nothing illegal in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to reporters and the subsequent investigation of it.

Question, if Luskin told V. Novak something that showed Rove didn't remember talking to Cooper, is that significant evidence? A defense lawyer just happeneing to leak evidence to a friend that helps exonerate his client?

Also in the same article:

Woodward's source could face legal troubles because the source testified earlier in the case and apparently did not mention a conversation with Woodward about Plame, according to lawyers in the case. If the source provided inaccurate or incomplete information, Fitzgerald could seek to bring charges, they said.

Certainly, if Woodward's source previously testified, he intentionally perjured himself, but whether it is going to be prosecuted is all a question of whether that person then came forward or was brought forward by the investigation. Or whether he pissed Fitzgerald off.

(and by the way, if I'm guessing, it sounds like one of Vandehei's sources is a Rove lawyer, the other unknown, but sounding like someone getting info close second hand, maybe a third party's lawyer(or a Libby lawyer.) So, I gotta view the exculpatory claim a little suspiciously.)

More tomorrow.

UPDATE: After thinking about this overnight, I would SPECULATE, that Luskin thinks that V.Novak's testimony will say that she reminded him, and in turn Rove, about Rove's allegedly forgotten conversation with Cooper. Thus, Rove can claim that he didn't really remember the talk with Cooper which would free him of perjury charges related to his sudden remembering when it became evident that Cooper was going to testify about it.