At HuffPo, of course, Arianna sighs loudly and rolls her eyes, annoyed but not surprised that she's learned nothing new from Russert. She cites Steve Lovelady at CJR who honestly can't believe Russert could fail to acknowledge the "silent elephant" in the room, saying "nothing. Nada. Non. El zippo. Not one word." about his role in the matter (and thus joining a distinguished group of journalists who, upon being implicated in PlameGate, promptly clam up: Novak, Miller, and now Russert).

UPDATE: We can't be exhaustive, but we can exhaust ourselves trying to be! Salon's Eric Boehlert made some good pre-and-post "Meet The Press" points on Russert that bear inclusion: (1) Despite the fact that the discrpancy between his and Libby's testimony got Libby indicted for perjury, "for more than a year, Russert, free to discuss his testimony publicly, never disclosed that key discrepancy himself. He didn't just bury the lead, he buried the whole story"; (2) he references a "carefully-worded" NBC statement neglects to actually mention that Russert and Libby never discussed Plame: "why was that glaringly important point, which would have caused Libby some discomfort prior to the indictment (as well as advanced the story in 2004), why was that left unsaid?" In hindsight, he says, that seems the opposite of transparent; (3) Boehlert connects some dots following this morn's NYT piece which, though it "completely fails to mention the deceptions in play" does help explain Russert's reticence: "Libby's boss, VP Cheney, has appeared on Russert's "Meet the Press" no fewer than 10 times since being sworn." [HuffPo] SIDE NOTE: I find myself going to HuffPo more and more for this kind of dogged attention to detail. Ariannna continues to collect talent. HuffPo is not only a player, but a heavy-hitter. Two weeks shy of six months, people.