Lateral or Downward? The Negroponte Shuffle
John Negroponte is stepping down from his Cabinet-level position as Director of National Intelligence to become the #2 man in the State Department, backing Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. What does it all mean? I think Captain Ed has a better feel for this story than most, and even that seems uncertain:
Memorandum.com is all over the NY Times version, and while other bloggers (mostly on the left) seem to be commenting on it, they don't seem to have anything solid to go on either. At this point, it all seems to be mostly blind speculation... so why not add to it? Liberal Booman Tribune floats a couple of theories, including the theory that that Negroponte is being primed to take over for an incompetent Rice (hey, this is his theory, not mine), who will resign for health reasons after an appropriate amount of time, at which point Negroponte will be elevated to Secretary of State. This is not outside the realm of possibility; as far as politics goes, crazier things have happened. But if we're going to go for wild speculation, shouldn't we go "whole hog?" So here is my completely groundless theory: Negroponte is moving in to be in a position to take over for Rice, but not because Rice is going out of office, but up. Vice President Dick Cheney will resign due to much more plausible health problems (the poor guy has worn-out defibrillators, hasn't he?), and Dr. Rice will step in as our first female Vice President sometime during the summer or early fall of 2007. She will then be "pushed" into running as the Republican contender against Hillary, setting up our first guaranteed female president as a result of the 2008 elections. At this point, Pat Robertson will quote some obscure translation of the Book of Revelations and declare this is proof of the End of Days, at which point we all laugh at him. Again. Of course, that's just my theory. I could be wrong.
The position carries a high profile and arguably has more influence on policy formulation, but it still represents a step down and a move out of the Oval Office inner circle. The change reflects a possible loss of confidence in Negroponte, especially given his proximity to the President and the obvious opportunity to influence his decisions on policy on a whole range of issues. Congress appears taken aback by the change. Susan Collins, a Republican who pushed hard for the 9/11 Commission recommendations that created the DNI post, expressed her disappointment at Negroponte's resignation. Jane Harman, who would have been the new House Intel chair had Nancy Pelosi not fumbled the assignment after the election, also objected, making the criticism bipartisan. With the available information, it looks like Negroponte got shuffled downward as part of the review finishing up on Iraq and the war on terror. The quality of intelligence coming from Iraq has come under some fire over the last couple of years, and eventually that responsibility rests with Negroponte. Alternatively, it could be that Negroponte's experience in Iraq was necessary for Rice to push through Bush's new strategies for Iraq and the Middle East. Negroponte was the first American emissary to Iraq, and with the resignation of Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush may have wanted the most experienced hands focusing directly on Iraq. It's a puzzlement, without a doubt. I don't recall any recent moves where a Cabinet officer resigned to take a deputy post for another Cabinet officer.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:49 AM
Comments
Posted by: MikeM at January 04, 2007 10:27 AM (xWG/i)
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at January 04, 2007 11:02 AM (oC8nQ)
Posted by: Crusty at January 04, 2007 11:19 AM (saT0B)
Posted by: Dr. T at January 04, 2007 11:33 AM (uNq0W)
So it MUST be true!
Posted by: jblog at January 04, 2007 11:35 AM (L/wan)
Hmm - is Ms. Rice Jewish?
Posted by: Tom Maguire at January 04, 2007 11:36 AM (xygYS)
Shouldn't it be "at which point we will continue to laugh at him, as we have for years?"
Posted by: Richard R at January 04, 2007 11:46 AM (1iYRk)
Negroponte knows who they are . . . .
Posted by: Gary at January 04, 2007 11:49 AM (MwlDS)
http://markdaniels.blogspot.com/2005/02/condoleezza-rice-for-president.html
http://markdaniels.blogspot.com/2005/05/will-condi-be-nominated-by-gop-in-2008.html
http://markdaniels.blogspot.com/2006/01/why-rices-expressed-disinterest-in.html
Just a few thoughts.
Mark Daniels
Posted by: Mark Daniels at January 04, 2007 11:54 AM (QNZ/6)
Anyway, that's what occurred to me.
Daniel Pearl, of course, was killed in Pakistan by Jihadis.
Posted by: Alcibiades at January 04, 2007 11:58 AM (H9kgs)
Posted by: Bill Faith at January 04, 2007 11:58 AM (n7SaI)
For Tom ... Rice - Lieberman? (Nah.)
Rice - Romney or Guiliani (not McCain).
But Condi doesn't want to have to run, and she's NOT married; I don't really think she will be drafted for the #1 slot.
McCain - Rice prolly wins against Clinton - Barak and even Barak - x.
Posted by: Tom Grey at January 04, 2007 11:59 AM (jfs74)
Posted by: Gary at January 04, 2007 12:03 PM (MwlDS)
Posted by: Jim O'Sullivan at January 04, 2007 12:04 PM (6+o02)
Posted by: abe at January 04, 2007 12:07 PM (9UfmE)
Having said that, she would be a very good V.P., and it's reasonable to think that a desperate Bush--looking to change the story line in 2007 away from an inevitable Iraq withdrawal and withering Democratic investigations--will tap Condi to be his Veep. The hearings she'd go through before the House and Senate would be great theater and force the Democrats to choose between making the kind of history they love (first black! first woman!) and their irrational Bush hatred.
Plus, since the Dems are more than likely to particularly go after Cheney and Halliburton, having him gracefully exit now (just like Rumsfeld did) would be smart politics.
Even so, Bush hasn't acted smart since 2004. So who knows if he'll do the right thing?
Posted by: DJ at January 04, 2007 12:20 PM (bzSn+)
Couldn't agree more.
Posted by: fred at January 04, 2007 12:37 PM (7UOuQ)
President Bush isn't the one "who hasn't done anything right" (or wrong) in terms of these types of decisions. He isn't pulling the strings here, the party is. To think otherwise, is naive.
Secondly, Condi has done well in many regards, except for Israel which she has bungled.
However, the public has a short memory and there will be no backlash two years from now against her...that is, any more than would be expected from the usual leftist cesspool...against any non-leftist.
Hillary/Lieberman would be a very tough ticket...but, I think the leftists will push through someone a bit further toward the nutjob portion of the spectrum.
Giuliani Rice sounds like the risotto special at Tutti Mare, and Rice McCain comes in a paper bag with a clown's face on it and sesame seed bun. Romney Rice does have an alliterative and palateable allure to it.
Centrist, likeable, articulate, calm, reflective, educated....soothing.
Hillary and Lefty du Jour will galvanize the right,and scare the center. Start spouting national nanny care for hangnails and tax increases for special interests...and it will be another close one...with Romney Rice taking it with surprising ease.
Hillary/Lieberman would go down to the wire with Romney Rice. McCain/Lieberman as a third party independent tandem would split BOTH tickets, but would hurt the Republicans more.
Romney Giuliani has a chance...but Romney Rice wins. Hillary/Lieberman wins, Hillary and Lefty du Jour does not.
Posted by: cfbleachers at January 04, 2007 12:39 PM (V56h2)
That would have two positive effects: 1. signal the bipartisan-izing of the GWOT; and 2. poke a blunt stick in Speaker Pelosi's eye.
wonder if she'd go for it if asked.
Posted by: vic at January 04, 2007 12:46 PM (pXtGj)
Posted by: DJ at January 04, 2007 12:47 PM (bzSn+)
Posted by: Neal at January 04, 2007 12:54 PM (q7g2R)
I think John Bolton may work very well as DNI. The constant turf wars between the various intel agencies need a firm hand to cut the crap and work together, not a diplomat.
Posted by: Korla Pundit at January 04, 2007 01:03 PM (FHlAi)
That's not a good way to ingratiate yourself with a new Democratic majority that would need to confirm you for SecState or any other cabinet appointment.
Why he would want to take a lower-level government job -- when he could make some bucks in the private sector is beyond me. But I imagine this was either offered as a consolation prize -- or demanded by him.
Posted by: IM Snooping at January 04, 2007 01:18 PM (GGFTB)
One more thing: Time also includes a quote from a "high ranking State Department official" who speculates that, should Rice step down before the end of Bush's term, it'll be important to have an easily confirmable Deputy in place. Rice stepping down? Hmmm. Maybe some grist for CY's theory.
Posted by: DJ at January 04, 2007 01:26 PM (bzSn+)
I favor the 'rooting out the moles' theory myself.
Posted by: NukemHill at January 04, 2007 01:34 PM (lHcjX)
I think the obvious, but overlooked, ticket for the left is Clinton/Clinton. There's no clause preventing a former President from serving as a Vice-President, is there?
;-)
As to an pleasing (sounding) ticket for the other party, how about Rice/Bol (as in Mnute Bol the former NBA star)?
Actually, I think I'd like Rice/Thompson (Fred) for '08.
Posted by: Chris at January 04, 2007 01:45 PM (RIaLE)
It's Andy Devine and St. John the Divine.
Posted by: radar at January 04, 2007 01:48 PM (HQTfD)
>
Twelve Ammendment:
" .... But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Posted by: Jack at January 04, 2007 01:55 PM (RCBS4)
I like your theory a lot better though.
Posted by: Deano at January 04, 2007 01:58 PM (NI12z)
For everyone else, who is likely to replace Mr. Negroponte at DNI, or does it stay vacant and Porter Goss becomes the DNI in all but name?
Posted by: Chris at January 04, 2007 02:04 PM (RIaLE)
Posted by: vic at January 04, 2007 02:05 PM (pXtGj)
The drafters did not say that a person who was elected twice is ineligible for the Office. It says that no person shall be ELECTED to the Office MORE than twice. So, arguably, Bill Clinton could serve as Vice President because that wouldn't constitute an election to the Office of the Presidency.
Posted by: DJ at January 04, 2007 02:06 PM (bzSn+)
DJ/Chris/Jack -- I have to weigh in on the side of Jack on this one. We cannot have a former two-term President become President again based on the two-term limit.
And no one can be qualified (Constitutionally) for Vice President if they fail the Constitutional test for President.
No Clinton/Clinton ticket is allowed. Praise Allah!
Posted by: Bruce (GayPatriot) at January 04, 2007 02:19 PM (lV1tZ)
Posted by: Jack at January 04, 2007 02:35 PM (7Cfb8)
With Bolton out and Pelosi/Reid ready to stop any and all Bush appointments, Negroponte as a #2 of State can sit in on sessions. And he's a known and trusted quantity.
Posted by: Laurence Simon at January 04, 2007 02:42 PM (uBCxH)
Makes me wonder what Karlito is up to?
And no, we're not invading Iran anytime soon. Purple Avenger is right, but I bet the Iranians do something stupid.
As to Rice herself, she remains popular in the country, which is something liberals continue not to get. She could get promoted after a confirmation hearing in which she would swear up and down that she was returning to Stanford or taking an NFL head coaching job in 2009. That's the only way the D's will give her the job, but paradoxically, it will increase her popularity (the Jerry Ford effect).
The contrast with the hyperambitious, out-for-herself Hillary will be stark.
This leads me to another scenario for '08, but I won't mention it.
Posted by: section9 at January 04, 2007 02:43 PM (gdXU5)
Clinton (Bill) is eligible to serve as Vice-President.
Clinton (Bill) would be eligible to serve as President if something happened to Clinton (Hillary). He just wouldn't be able to run for another term as President if something happened to Clinton (Hillary).
I don't think Clinton (Hillary) would be foolish enough to agree to that ticket - who wants to spend every waking minute worrying about whether the Secret Service can protect you against your spouse?
Posted by: BD at January 04, 2007 03:32 PM (tVaaz)
Your parsing of words between the 12th and 22nd Amendments is impressive (Clintonian, even), but if you can't be elected President (under the 22nd Amendment) I think that makes you inelligible to be President (under the 12th Amendment).
Plus, I would bet most of the interns in a Hillary Clinton White House would be male, and as a result, I doubt Bill would have the same desire to put in the late hours under those circumstances.
Posted by: Gene H at January 04, 2007 03:51 PM (7vLAY)
Posted by: luagha at January 04, 2007 05:31 PM (iiytt)
Posted by: Bob at January 04, 2007 06:02 PM (T3hVT)
Posted by: William M Goetsch at January 04, 2007 09:14 PM (363/H)
Does this make my parsing of the 22nd Amendment right?
Posted by: DJ at January 05, 2007 12:18 AM (I8I73)
Posted by: Jack at January 05, 2007 02:29 AM (lU40R)
I think your theory has some meat on its bones, something for which I'm sad, though. The Berger documents non-scandal is evidence of how the bureaucratic establishment views the world; not a good thing in times of war or "reform".
Posted by: vic at January 05, 2007 11:09 AM (95zEX)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0122 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.007 seconds, 52 records returned.
Page size 31 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.