Re: impeachment. Aren't we forgetting something?

[CTyankee]

That is, we don't KNOW what our Democratic Congress's investigative and oversight hearings might produce. At this point, we can't know everything that this administration has hidden from us. With Congressional committee subpoena power, we will find out NEW things we never before knew (but perhaps suspected). A revelation that is so shocking that the American people demand that Congress strip it of its power could very well be the result of one of these upcoming hearings.

This is why impeachment cannot be automatically ruled out now or posed only as an alternative to a Dem taking the White HOuse in 2008.

Remember how we didn't know about Nixon bugging the Oval Office until the Watergate hearings were underway? Remember the shock to the American public with that revelation?

Folks, something even more world shaking than that could, and probably will, be revealed with this administration also. At that point, there may be no choice but to impeach both Bush and Cheney, if the people are really convinced we cannot have these men run this country any longer.

I believe this can happen. Then it won't the just the Democrats calling for impeachment. It will the the American people themselves.

Hello, President Pelosi!

[loyalsister]

1. The flip side

Given the recency of the Clinton impeachment, I doubt there are any blue dresses hanging around.
Lessons learned, I'm sure.
To presume that an investigation actually will turn up some damning credible evidence is a premature assumption, as well.

[CTyankee]

2. I hear what you are saying but I can't agree entirely

Subpoena powers are pretty tough. Contempt of Congress ain't pretty. And people will sell out other people if their necks are at stake. And don't be too sure that some "blue dresses" aren't being kept for "insurance" purposes. I predict that some serious sh*t will hit the fan in the upcoming committee investigations.

[onenote]

4. the possible flaw in your theory

Yes subpoena power can be tough. But in battles between the executive branch and the Congress, the president can and will assert "Executive privilege". Now, the scope of this privilege is anything but clear. It certainly didn't save Nixon. But Nixon's situation was different than chimpy's for two reasons: one, Nixon couldn't play the "acting as commander at chief, matters of national security" card with respect to the information being sought and two, Nixon didn't have the SCOTUS that chimpy has. If Congress tries to dig into areas where chimpy and crew doesn't want them to go, a battle over executive privilege will ensue. Two things will happen: one is that it will eat up a lot of time and two is that this SCOTUS almost certainly will side with chimpy. Because the Democrats on the Hill are realists, they will work out a compromise that results in them getting information, but not all the information, that they might otherwise get. And any smoking guns, if they exist, will remain hidden.

Just my two cents.

[CTyankee]

7. Good point but what I am talking about is the ultimate smoking gun

and THAT we can't really predict at this point. The only thing we know is that Democrats have subpoena power and they didn't before and that changes the calculus, IMHO. And with that, shit happens.

Also, SCOTUS has not at this point sided always with Bush. Here I am talking about a smoking gun that is so red hot it is a poker. I remember the Watergate hearing when Alexander Butterfield (sp?) revealed the existence of Oval Office tapes and everyone gasped. No one could have predicted that this rather low level guy in the WH would just blurt it out.

[brazos121200]

15. Butterfield spilled the beans about the bugging devices

because someone on the committee asked him the right question and he had to tell the truth or be subject ot perjury. We need to have someone on the investigative committees to ask the right questions of the right people and if they are under oath they will have to tell the truth, too.

[CTyankee]

17. Yes, you are right. But my point is exactly that the Butterfield remark

was a totally unexpected result of the committee investigation. THAT is what I am hoping for in these investigative and oversight hearings!

[ClassWarrior]

8. Oh yes, that's right... we're already beaten, so just give up.

:eyes:

NGU.

[onenote]

12. and if you can find those words or even that sentiment in my post

I'll donate $50 to DU. Your turn.

For the record, I said it was a "possible flaw" in the theory that the subpoena power could make the difference. I'm clearly on record as saying that Congress needs to perform its investigatory and oversight functions.

[ClassWarrior]

14. Why not donate it anyway? Like IMPEACHMENT, it's the right thing to do.

:shrug:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

3. The damning credible evidence is there. It just needs to officially...

...get on the record.

NGU.

[spillthebeans]

5. Make Bush Caesar

[Bitwit1234]

6. Republicans of the Senate HAVE to come on board

Since you need 2/3 of the senate 67..you have to have some republicans willing to break rank.

[CTyankee]

9. Yes, absolutely right. That's why it has to be a make or break

situation. That is why I said in my initial post that the offense must be so shocking that the American people feel they MUST get rid of the adminstration.

I don't know where it would come from. My gut sense would be that it is about the war in Iraq. If the American people say to themselves "OK, this is just too much. We can't take this guy one minute longer or the country will be ruined."

Already, the confidence of the American people in Bush is at an all time low. He is viewed as a joke by lots of people. That won't impeach him. People have got to be genuinely alarmed at him and Cheney staying in office. I just hope we get there, but before it is too late.

[EST]

10. Shortly after his Chimpyness took office and his poll numbers

started doing the dumpster dive, I started looking for "impeach bush" on the 'net, which led me, ultimately, to DU.

The more we discuss the case for impeachment and the investigations to be cranked up, as well as the recent outburst by Sen Leahy as to the information requests denied by the w h, the smarter ms. Pelosi gets.

[CTyankee]

11. Yep, Pelosi is the other side of my argument

In my scenario, Pelosi's proactive legislative agenda is a big winner with the American electorate. They begin to see what government CAN be about, after the arid desert of what it has been under Bush. They see that they have a real future with the Dems in control and what better person to lead us as a nation than the woman who literally turned the House upside down and started producing results.

[EST]

13. Aahhh, yesss...

It would be such a satisfying and gratifying experience to have an election wherein the huge majority of voters actually picked candidates because they were good at the job and were encrusted with integrity, rather than through hate, division and smear tactics.

[CTyankee]

16. please god, it come to pass!

I am hopeful. We have such a great window of opportunity. Let us hope for the best scenario!