Not Condi. Colin.
It means that Rove is cooperating with the prosecutor and has cut a deal to finger Cheney.
Self preservation trumps political loyalty.
I used to think that, but not now. Colin is out. He wouldn’t take it even if it were offered to him. Do you think Bush wants a pain-in-the-ass VP like CP would be?
Frankly, I think this whole speculation is crazy. Cheney is NOT going to be indicted. Not a chance. I don’t even think Rove is going to be indicted, although I wouldn’t put that probability too close to zero. Maybe around 25%. If anyone is indicted it’ll be Libby.
Build up the rumors of the actual VP getting indicted. Then when it’s only Rove, it can be spun as a good thing.
Not a chance that they want to make that call just yet. (It’ll still wind up being George Allen, but they’ll want to wait another year or so before deciding that.) So they’ll pick a placeholder. Condi will do just fine.
(Condi. Giuliani. Where do you guys get these ideas?
The time when someone who actually might have to work to demonstrate their bona fides to the “Christian” Right can get the GOP nomination has gone for good.)
I don’t think there’s any doubt that Cheney is THE target. There is way too much smoke for there not to be any fire. I put Cheney’s odds of indictment at 90%, Bush himself at 10%. I’m only even thinking about Bush because the investigation seems to be expanding beyond the Plame case.
I can guarantee that Powell will not be VP. He might even be a key witness for the prosecution.
This is about what I think, with the exception that I believe an indictment of Libby is certain.
Cheney is far too much a power to resign, or be forced to resign. They’ll have to carry him out feet first.
Put Bush at 0%. You can’t indict a sitting president, you need to impeach him first.
I see an opportunity to make some money here…
Aynone want to bet that Cheney is going to be indicted? I’ll take the negative against anyone who wants the affirmative.
Hi there. Not to start a hijack, but…
An interesting question, and one that has never been resolved. There is no constitutional provision or law preventing the indictment of a sitting president. There is plenty of theory that it can’t happen. Put the theory in one hand and an indictment in the other and see which one smells.
That said, Bush is at 0% regardless.
With all the anger he’s voiced about going along with the Iraq thing? No way.
Shoes, John. Shoes.
But, but, but… it’s a sure thing! I can’t lose!!
Odds?
Other famous examples:
“Aces and eights! What a great hand, this is my lucky day!”
“We smash through the Balkans, Moscow by October, nothing to it.”
Put me down for 25 cents.
Don’t be too sure that Bush can’t be indicted. Probably won’t happen, but “unindicted co-conspirator” might be his new first name.
Rice / Giuliani? I like it. Especially if she comes into '08 as the VP. IMHO, if all you’re worried about is convincing the “Christian Right” to vote for a Black woman and a New York Italian, the swing voters and disgusted Democrats that this duo would attract would far outweigh the fringies that might stay home, and NONE would vote another party, not even for spite.
Or, I could be entirely out to lunch…
If I bet the shoes, I cannot lose!
At 90% probability, you’re betting 25 cents! The postage will cost you more than that. But, $.25 it is. We’ll figure out the details later.
Unindicted co-conspirator isn’t the same as being indicted, btw. But do you want to add another $.25 to the bet, on whether or not Bush is named an unindicted co-conspirator? Come on Bob, live large!!
Suggestions?