Problem with number 1 ("covert status") is that somehow the CIA was utterly unable to come up with Plame's status under the IIPA throughout the entire investigation and trial. That would have changed a lot of things. In fact, they still haven't done this. In the summary mentioned in the article, the CIA defines "covert" on their own as a "CIA employee whose employment is not publicly acknowledged by the CIA or the employee." This is still not the IIPA definition, which is why nobody was ever charged with a crime under that law.

The CIA had to know the moment the investigation started whether or not a crime had been committed under the IIPA, but it has yet to nail down Plame's status specifically under that law, and claims it can't for some reason. Don't know what's keeping them.

No one has been indicted for the leak. If it was a crime, why not?