Rolling the dice on impeachment
If you want the answers to many of life’s mysteries, I’ve found that the greatest source to ask is your local bookmaker.
These guys have got it wired, and they almost always get it right. Whether it’s pinning a point spread for the Super Bowl or laying odds on a big-time prize fight, they know how to get you to part with your money.
Right now, they are taking heavy action on a gambling proposition that weighs far heavier than something as trivial as a sporting event. They are laying odds on whether the president will be impeached.
Those odds jumped dramatically last week as damning testimony was given by those from within the government’s inner circles about the coercion, extortion, and intent of, with apologies to Jimmy Breslin, The Gang That Couldn’t Think Straight.
Like the myriad characters in Breslin’s book, the administration is revealing itself to be a bunch of stumbling, bumbling, inept crooks who just can’t seem to get it right.
And the oddsmakers know it, which is why the odds on a successful impeachment have grown to 75 percent. In layman’s terms, that means you’d have to wager a lot to win a little. Sort of like betting on the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl.
You can’t rush off to your favorite casino to book this bet, because betting on political events in the United States is against the law, and no house will take your action. To get into the action, you’d have to go online and find an offshore gaming house to take your bet.
Besides, while the numbers may look like good news to many of us, the flipside is that the best parlay on that initial bet would be to lay down money that the Senate would most likely not find the president guilty after a House impeachment.
Now, this has nothing to do with evidence, right or wrong, or morality.
It’s all about the math, which is what wagering is built around anyway, and the math does not play out well for those who would like to see a regime change since the Senate holds a Republican majority that would, in all likelihood, give the president a pass.
In fact, if you want the best advice on getting into the action, put together a trifecta proposition that the House will impeach, the Senate will not despite the testimony of some very credible witnesses, and Rudy Giuliani will find himself charged with at least one felony.
There is, however, one variable that could be put into play and turn the whole thing around, and that would be if John Bolton showed up to give his testimony.
Bolton is one of those rare figures revered by the new and old Republican clans.
He has been on The Beltway since the Reagan years, serving in the State Department, the Justice Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. He worked as Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security and Ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush and most recently as National Security Advisor for the current administration.
Bolton is a self-described “Goldwater conservative” and is considered to be as bombastic and hawkish as the late Arizona Senator.
Although his politics blend well with the neoconservative movement, he distances himself from that bunch, most certainly on the grounds of its lack of intellectual depth.
He’s coarse, blunt, and petulant with no filter.
He’s judgmental, stubborn, and cunning and possesses an outlandish ego.
But he is also described as effective and knowledgeable, a fastidious note taker, and a treacherous foe.
His tenure with the current administration was rocky. Although he shared the president’s views on extreme nationalism and hard-right Republicanism, they clashed because the president thought he was too hawkish. It’s still not clear who quit whom. But last September, Bolton made his exit from the administration among much gnashing of teeth and expletives, cooling his heels ever since.
Or maybe not.
A lot of people think Bolton was never put on ice and is the whistleblower in the Ukraine scandal — that he is the guy who brought “quid pro quo” back into the lexicon.
A lot of evidence can lead to that conclusion.
He’s razor sharp and treacherous as a great white in shallow water. He’s dangerous because he knows how the game is played and isn’t afraid to go nuclear on anybody who gets in his way.
He finds himself today in a most unique position, that of a possible hero for Democrats who understand that no matter how hardcore conservative he may be, Bolton, probably more than anybody else, could very well deliver the goods to sway Senate Republicans in an impeachment trial.
If the president needs to fear anybody through all of this, it is Bolton.
The Democrats have tried to get his testimony. But he refuses to budge, playing the good soldier up until the end, even though he clearly disapproved of the Ukraine extortion plot hatched up by the president.
However, he said that if a judge rules that a committee subpoena overrides the president’s orders to stay mum, he would testify. Given that OK by the courts, he’d sing like Pavarotti. We know that because Bolton is the guy who told National Security Council member Fiona Hill that she needed to report the president’s Ukraine shakedown to NSC attorneys.
It’s why politics has become such a crapshoot.
Scholars were once able to deduce reasonable scenarios for how events would probably play out based on history, current events, the personalities involved, and the painfully quaint science of the mechanics of politics.
Not today.
There are any number of wildcards floating through the deck, and you can never tell when one will be dealt, which makes it a much more difficult game.
Except for the bookmakers.
Those guys always seem to have the inside information that the rest of us are lacking.
So if you see those odds start moving in the direction of impeachment in the House and Senate, place your bets, because it’s a sure thing.
And Lord knows there aren’t very many of those any more.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
Planet Kociela. At the most there will be a Partisan vote by Dems only passing the impeachment baton to the Senate where it will backfire with devastating effects.. However, do not be surprised if that doesnt even happen. Whatever the case we shall see. YES, we shall see folks. Funny that Bolton has become your new great white hope. All good, and let the magic trolls attack me for speculating against their consensus reality, LOL. The older generation can still exchange repartee, OK BOOOOMER. YEP “A” OK. Comment on the article folks. Ed and I go way back.