The indictment says that he agreed not to disclose classified info.
Does it say that he did that? I doubt it. If it did, there'd be a count for it in there. There isn't.
Read the counts of the indictment for perjury and OoJ. IIRC, the perjury was his grand jury testimony, well after the fact. The OoJ was related to that too. It wasn't a charge of leaking classified info.
As I said, he may well have been guilty of misstating his timeline, whether under oath or otherwise, but there wasn't any furshlugginer crime of leaking classified information here.
As for the "sacrificial lamb" stuff - the guy is being tried in DC. DC is a <i><b>very</i></b> Democratic town. That's who the jury pool is, Democratic Bush-haters. If you're Ted Wells and you have a jury like that, and you want your man to be acquitted, don't you try to paint the current administration as bad guys who were setting Libby up? I might be wrong here, because Wells told the jurors he'd be calling Cheney as a witness - but we'll have to see how that turns out.
For me this is spectator sport. I'm a lawyer, so I enjoy trying to figure out the strategy.
And Wells apparently put on quite a show. Read <A HREF="http://www.slate.com/id/2158157/">this account in <i>Slate</i></A>, you'll enjoy it.