The second terms of American presidencies are littered with scandals of such debilitating, legacy-threatening scale that a prudent Oval Office incumbent might question the wisdom of running for re-election. These febrile episodes acquire their own shorthand: “Monica”, “Iran-Contra”, “Watergate”. They surface after re-election with such precision that they have become part of the political calendar. The American political classes expect Washington’s peerlessly theatrical backdrops to stage good second-term drama. And much of the audience is salivating at President Bush’s current troubles: the indictment of a senior White House player, a right-hand man under similar threat, the enforced withdrawal of a Supreme Court nominee, the passing of an ugly milestone in Iraq. But whether history will judge these woes to be as wounding as those that tarnished, dogged and evicted his predecessors is far from clear.

Presidents Clinton, Reagan and Nixon all faced politically and personally searing scandals that directly imperilled their second-term presidencies. Mr Bush is not personally vulnerable to his travails in the same way. True, his poll ratings are low. And his troubles have begun mounting early, barely ten months after his second inaugural address. But that gives him, notionally, time to turn things around.

Mr Bush’s main problem is the scope of the colourful issues ranged against him. If one pales, another flares. If it is not murky campaign finance involving Tom DeLay, the Republican commander-in-chief on Capitol Hill, it is an insider-dealing inquiry into Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader. A special prosecutor delivers his findings on Lewis Libby and Karl Rove. But several other prosecutors still hover with potentially messy indictments of Jack Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist with tentacles reaching high into the party. The cases are not necessarily with merit. But their effect becomes a huge distraction. Even low-rise Washington has only so much oxygen. They are, therefore, serious.

In this light, the indictment of Mr Libby by Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor examining the unmasking of CIA operative Valerie Plame, bodes ill for Mr Bush. There is the spectre of his Vice-President, Dick Cheney, being forced to take the witness stand. It will claim untold hours of Administration time and energy; likewise the continuing investigation into Mr Rove, Mr Bush’s senior adviser. The inquiry’s demands on Mr Rove have already brought the White House close to paralysis. During Mr Bush’s first term, little moved without Mr Rove’s say-so. And with him tied up with lawyers, little appears to be moving at all. This is not a good time for Mr Bush to be distracted. His ambitious second-term domestic agenda of pension and tax reform is on life support. A bellicose and would-be nuclear Iran needs careful handling. Middle East peace is far from a reality.

But it would be premature to assume that Mr Bush’s days of effectiveness are over. Republicans still hold majorities on Capitol Hill. A sound Supreme Court nominee to replace the witless Harriet Miers would rebuild bridges with the Right. Neither is Mr Bush’s legacy necessarily lost. Iraq is soon to elect its first government. The US economy is growing at a healthy lick. Mr Bush will survive “Miers-Plame-Libby-DeLay-gate”. But to prosper, he needs to recapture his authority, and quickly.