CNN's Jeffrey Toobin said the words on air: "unindicted co-conspirator"

[DeepModem Mom]

Lou Dobbs just had a discussion among himself, David Gergen and Jeffrey Toobin, CNN's legal affairs guy. While always remembering to point out that there could be no indictments, Gergen and Toobin admitted to the possibility of a net almost as wide as some have envisioned here. Gergen said with an air of certain knowledge that as of yesterday, Rove didn't know what was in store for him. When the discussion turned to Libby, it centered on the can of worms Libby's involvement and/or trial testimony could open up, especially re. Cheney. That's when Toobin used the words "unindicted co-conspirator" in a series of possibilities for Cheney.

ON EDIT: LSparkle's first post, about their having to mention the possibility of no indictments but they probably know something, reminded me that I think Toobin did say that one to five indictments are expected by most observers.

[LSparkle]

1. "There could be no indictments" is just their concession to "balance"

My impression was that they all know what's going to happen, but they don't want to "frighten the children."

[WI_DEM]

2. Nixon was also an "unindicted co-consipirtor"

I would love it if this happens with Cheney--and who knows where it goes from there?

[rocktivity]

3. "Unindicted co-conspirator" should be used as a possibility for Bush, too!

Even if he truly did not know that the leak was done on his behalf, he should have taken action above and beyond "rebuking" Rove two years ago.

:headbang:
rocknation

[DeepModem Mom]

4. I agree! That Daily News article said he knew two years ago!

They didn't mention Bush, however.

[Mme. Defarge]

5. What does Unindicted Co-conspirator mean?

Are there any legal consequences in this case?

[DeepModem Mom]

6. We need to hear from some DU legal minds --

I know only that that's what they had to charge Nixon with, because he was the President, and it was a devastating charge, just on its face.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. The indictability of a sitting president is not settled law.

The constitution does not say anything directly that forbids it, which leaves the 'originalists' in a quandry of having to infer and invent such a prohibition.

[Mme. Defarge]

9. Didn't know this

Thanks.

[hiaasenrocks]

8. Could mean a few things.

It usually means they identify that person as someone who participated in the crimes for which others have been charged (as part of explaining the reach of the conspiracy). And it means, ominously, "you might be next."