The New York Sun explains how the Valerie Plame case could end -- not with a bang, not even with a whimper:

If federal prosecutors manage to get to the bottom of how CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity was leaked to the press - an investigation that has led to one reporter's incarceration - sharing their conclusion with the public may require something quite ironic: another leak.

Attorneys involved in the case say there is no clear legal authority for the special prosecutor pursuing the politically charged investigation, Patrick Fitzgerald, to explain how Ms. Plame's identity was disclosed. In fact, if Mr. Fitzgerald chooses not to charge anyone with a crime, it might well be illegal for him or any other government official to explain precisely who was and was not involved....

Mr. Fitzgerald faces two main obstacles to a public description of his findings. First, much of his probe has involved testimony before a grand jury. Federal court rules prohibit prosecutors from discussing any matter occurring before a grand jury. Second, the federal Privacy Act bars many disclosures of information about individuals contained in government files....

"It's probably more likely than not, if charges were not brought, you would not have a report," a deputy attorney general under President Clinton, Eric Holder, said....

I can't figure this damn case out, but I keep assuming that Rove and anyone else involved in leaking the name will get away with it -- that this will be one in a long series of scandals, from Enron to Abu Ghraib, that somehow never manage to touch the Bush higher-ups. If I'm right, maybe this helps explain how.