Political seppuku? In every profile of Scooter Libby - and they are legion these days - friends and co-workers express shock that anyone so meticulous and bureaucratically sure-footed could have made such dumb mistakes and told such easily debunked lies to a federal grand jury.

One easily drawn conclusion is that Libby assumed that because the conversations he fictionalized were with reporters, with whom he generally spoke on background, the reporters would never testify against him. However, his conversation with NBC’s Tim Russert was not off the record - and it was this conversation that tricked him up. Libby told the grand jury that he first learned the CIA agent’s secret identity in that conversation, a fact that did not square with Russert’s recollection and that Russert vehemently denies.

Another possible explanation now afloat in the Capitol is that Libby may be taking a hit for his boss. If true, this would mean that the cover-up is still active and Cheney was more deeply involved - or that some more terrible secret is being protected. Consider this quote from former Cheney aide
Mary Matalan in today’s Washington Post:

“I know he has a story. Believe me, he’ll answer,” Matalin said. “People who wish the best for Scooter . . . have to take a step back. It’s so completely inconsistent with Scooter’s work ethic, his intelligence and his history. There’s no context in the indictment . . . it’s only one side of the story.”

Sorry, Mare, the “context” seems very clear: Sccoter got nabbed in a disinformation campaign about Saddam’s nuclear capabilities. What other side of the story could there be?