NP: Emerson, Lake & Powell, Emerson, Lake & Powell

The Washington Post points out something that has struck me from the outset of this current Mess O'Potamia -- that pretty much all of the evidence that the Iranian election was stolen has been, while compelling, almost entirely circumstantial. I'd love to see any sort of corroboration of those early leaked results to Moussavi's people. But at the end of the day, I think it gives rise to too many ad hoc fictions about what the truth is, and whatever solution is offered will fail to live up to many of them. Even full transparency will be met with skepticism if it doesn't yield the "right" result for at least some segment of Iranians.

Jeffery Gedman starts to delve into whether or not there's an outcome that will placate these throngs of protesters in his op-ed, also in the Post. At this point, "allowing" Moussavi to win seems highly unlikely under any circumstances, as it screams weakness on the part of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei . So, is there some other outcome that might be palatable to the people in this instance, as long as it respects them more than the initial "vote count"?

Or is Khamenei actually vulnerable? The New York Times profiles Iran's spiritual (and "supreme") leader, saying:

Few suggest yet that Ayatollah Khamenei’s hold on power is at risk. But, analysts say, he has opened a serious fissure in the face of Islamic rule and one that may prove impossible to patch over, particularly given the fierce dispute over the election that has erupted amid the elite veterans of the 1979 revolution. Even his strong links to the powerful Revolutionary Guards — long his insurance policy — may not be decisive as the confrontation in Iran unfolds.

"Few" is different than "none," so I'm curious as to what those few think might happen. And it comes down to whether or not this is a revolution in the true sense of the word. From the U.S. side, for all the talk about the pros and cons of the White House taking a cautious, hands-off approach, this was sort of the plan all along for "regime change" in Iran, wasn't it? Continuous appeal to the youth in the country so that they could ultimately stand on their own? Then again, was that plan predicated on exerting some leverage to help, like we explicitly didn't do in the first Iraq war?

I'm just some guy with a blog, so I have no idea what might happen. Part of me thinks that a reformist cleric might be able to supplant Khamenei, but that's just a totally speculative hunch. So, I turn to a cartoonist, who thinks the top dogs will say it was rigged, but that it wasn't their fault. I'm assuming Adams also thinks the re-vote will be rigged, but maybe less heavy-handedly than the original one. Not entirely unlikely, but it might be a run-off based on "revised" vote counts, rather than a second take of the main election.