The Niger forgeries back on the front page, but why?

The WaPo has a front page article partially describing the journey of the Niger forgeries from the hands of Rocco Martino to the "16 words" in the 2002 State of the Union, the most egregious presidential lie that led us into the war in Iraq.

This article is a rehash of the known, so the question in my mind is why rehash this on the front page now? Is this supposed to be framing for Condi Rice appearing before Waxman's committee?

It is a huge story, forgeries being used to justify this disastrous mistake of a war, but it seems odd to put it on the front page with nothing new to report.

Oh, and perhaps what set me off was the last line.

It remains unclear who fabricated the documents. Intelligence officials say most likely it was rogue elements in Sismi who wanted to make money selling them.

Seriously. You expect me to believe that?

(Later: the writer of this piece has a book on the subject, but still, why front page?)