What crime was the grand jury examining?

United States Code
 TITLE 50 - WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
  CHAPTER 15 - NATIONAL SECURITY
   SUBCHAPTER IV - PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY
   INFORMATION

Section 421. Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources
  (a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent
  Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
  (b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information

  Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identify of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
  (c) Disclosure of information by persons in course of pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents
  Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual's classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
  (d) Imposition of consecutive sentences
  A term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence of imprisonment.

Since you asked, I thought you might really want to know. Note where this statute falls in the US Code: War and National Defense — National Security.

The request for the investigation of this crime came from the CIA, who, one suspects, would know whether one of their agents was covert or not and whether they were "taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual's classified intelligence relationship to the United States" or not. The request was sent to the FBI, the investigative branch of the Department of Justice. After the initial investigation, the Attorney General, seeing who was involved, decided that he had to recuse himself. That was the point at which Fitzpatrick was appointed as prosecutor.

My point remains.

Of course it does because it is merely your opinion, unsupported by facts. Indeed, your opinion is completely independent of the facts. You have shown repeatedly that your opinions can't be affected by facts.

Fitzpatrick had already determined that talking about Plame wasn't a crime.

What Fitzpatrick had determined was that those who talked about Plame hadn't committed the crime because none of them was authorized to have the information that was released. Fitzpatrick was trying to determine who had released the information to those who talked. By lying to the grand jury and to FBI investigators, Libby tried to obscure the dissemination of this information. Because of Libby's lies, Fitzpatrick was unable to determine this and consequently to determine whether a crime had been committed or not.

The grand jury here was a perjury trap that worked on one person because he and Russert disagreed.

You do know how to avoid a perjury trap, don't you? You tell the truth. Or, if telling the truth will incriminate you, you exercise your right to non-self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. But if telling the truth will incriminate someone that you really don't want to incriminate then you are in a cleft stick. The only thing you can do is lie or face a contempt charge. Libby chose to lie. The evidence of this was rock-solid and convinced a jury beyond reasonable doubt. You have a problem with the jury system?

It was nothing less than a political witchhunt.

Which seems to have caught a political witch (or warlock). But really, shooter, a political witchhunt by a Bush-appointed prosecutor and a Bush-appointed judge? You'll have to do better than that.

Between that, disallowing witnesses for Libby, and an outrageous sentence, it was a Nifong of classic proportions.

The difference between Fitzpatrick and Nifong is that Fitzpatrick had evidence and he didn't try his case in the press.

Are you the same shooter242 who said "don't do the crime, if you can't do the time"? (http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/26/justice_standards/permalink/993b6ac56f0a5369d8f25674c1a91c91.html)

Meanwhile, Berger walks. Some justice.

Berger didn't walk. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and didn't get jail time, but he still has a conviction on his record. The difference is, of course, that Berger admitted what he had done and pleaded. By saving the government time and money through not requiring a lengthy trial, he gets off easy. Libby on the other hand did not plead out, has not shown any remorse for wasting the taxpayers time and money, and essentially said 'convict me of a felony if you can.' Libby had his choice. He could lie and go to jail or he could tell the truth and not. He made his choice