WASHINGTON – With word of possible indictments in the CIA leak investigation thought to be imminent, the swirl of attention to the case enveloped Vice President Cheney yesterday as Democrats and prominent journalists suggested that the vice president may have been less than candid when he discussed the matter during a television interview two years ago.

The renewed interest in Mr. Cheney was triggered by a report yesterday in the New York Times that in June 2003 the vice president told his chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, that the wife of an administration critic, Joseph Wilson IV, was employed by the CIA. The Times, which cited unnamed lawyers who claimed to have seen Mr. Libby’s notes of the conversation, said Mr. Cheney was informed of the link by the then-director of central intelligence, George Tenet.

A special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, is investigating how the name of Mr. Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, who had undercover status at the CIA, spilled into the press the following month.

The questions about Mr. Cheney’s truthfulness relate to a September 14, 2003, interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in which the vice president was asked about a trip Mr. Wilson took to Africa in 2002 to investigate claims that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials there. “I don’t know Joe Wilson,” Mr. Cheney said in the interview. “I have no idea who hired him.”

When the interviewer, Tim Russert, interjected that the CIA had sent Mr. Wilson, Mr. Cheney added, “Who in the CIA, I don’t know.”

“Obviously, there’s a discrepancy,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat of New York, said in an interview yesterday. “Cheney apparently didn’t tell the truth on ‘Meet the Press.’ … It’s more grist for the special prosecutor.”

At yesterday’s White House press briefing, reporters from several major news outlets peppered the press secretary, Scott McClellan, with questions about whether Mr. Cheney lied.

Citing the ongoing investigation, Mr. McClellan refused to address the allegation in detail. However, he bristled at the line of inquiry. “Frankly, I think it’s a ridiculous question,” the spokesman said.

At another point, Mr. McClellan seemed to concede that the Times account and Mr. Cheney’s interview were in conflict. “We now have reports that there are documents that directly contradict the public statement of the vice president of the United States,” an ABC News correspondent, Terry Moran, said.

“Reports,” Mr. McClellan emphasized. “The vice president, like the president, is a straightforward, plain spoken person.”

Mr. McClellan acknowledged that he had not discussed the new report with the vice president’s staff. Mr. Cheney’s spokeswoman declined to be interviewed for this story.

During the 2003 interview, the vice president was not asked directly when he became aware that Ms. Plame worked at the CIA, nor did he describe the scope of Mr. Tenet’s briefing on the CIA’s mission Mr. Wilson undertook.

Mr. Nadler said it was difficult to believe that Mr. Tenet mentioned Mr. Wilson’s marital tie to the CIA without describing how the ex-diplomat’s fact-finding trip was arranged. “He was briefed on a specific thing that normally he wouldn’t be briefed on. That means there was something going on. All this wasn’t an accident,” the congressman said. “All this stinks to high heaven.”

Mr. Cheney’s attorney, Terrence O’Donnell, was out of the country yesterday and did not return a message seeking comment.

The alleged conversation between Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby does not appear to put the vice president in legal jeopardy. However, it could have more serious consequences for Mr. Libby.

Mr. Libby reportedly told a grand jury investigating the leak that he believed he learned of Ms. Plame’s identity from a reporter. With the grand jury’s term expiring on Friday, the prosecutor, Mr. Fitzgerald, may move as soon as today to end his probe or bring indictments. According to lawyers involved in the case, perjury, false-statement, or obstruction-of-justice charges are more likely than a charge related to the leak itself.

A newspaper that covers Congress, Roll Call, reported on its Web site last night that Mr. Fitzgerald was seen yesterday at the offices of a lawyer for another White House official said to be in danger of indictment, Karl Rove. Mr. Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, did not return calls seeking comment yesterday.

CBS News reported last night that an unnamed source “familiar with the investigation” said Mr. Fitzgerald has informed targets of the grand jury of his plans. “That could only mean he is seeking indictments against them,” a CBS correspondent, John Roberts, said.

If the Times report is accurate, one remaining question is why Mr. Libby didn’t know about the notes that contradicted his testimony. “He’s got a good lawyer. Any good lawyer preparing a client to testify before a grand jury will make sure they find every relevant document, every relevant set of notes,” a former prosecutor, E. Lawrence Barcella Jr., said.

Mr. Libby’s attorney, Joseph Tate, did not respond to a request for comment yesterday.