Is Ranger Rick's indictment the best evidence yet of JEB!'s 2016 intentions?

CORNDOGGED, or CORNHOLED?

Texas Governor "Ranger" Rick Perry's recent felony indictments for abuse of power, after a long and checkered career running one of the nation's more celebrated "pay to play" statehouse machines, may seem like trying to nab Al Capone with a traffic ticket, but it probably says more about the 2016 Republican presidential race than anything else. Forget the idea that Democrats are behind it.  The Texas Democratic Party barely even exists anymore, and the national Democratic Party would want Perry front and center on any debate stage, and would certainly do nothing to derail his ludicrous presidential ambitions.  Who would want him out?

Consider this. As the Dallas Morning News reports,

"Within hours of Rick's indictment by a Travis County grand jury, Perry denounced it a partisan attack by political enemies. When he turned himself in for booking Tuesday, the governor cast himself a victim of retribution for vetoing funding for a Democratic district attorney.  

The Travis County district attorney is not prosecuting Perry. The state district judge in the case is a Republican appointed by George W. Bush when he was governor. The judge selected San Antonio lawyer Mike McCrum as the special prosecutor in the case. McCrum served as a federal prosecutor in the administration of President George H.W. Bush and was supported by Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison as a potential U.S. attorney candidate."

Rick is as dumb as ever.

Who stands to benefit most, certainly in PR terms, by a Republican presidential primary race without Rick Perry's presence?  Who, among all the potential Republican candidates, would be the most embarrassed by having to demean themselves, and share a debate stage with Rick Perry?

Dallas News: Why the conventional wisdom in the Rick Perry indictment story might be incomplete

Bloomberg View: Rick Perry's Comeback Is Headed Off at the Pass