Arguments against impeachment don't stand up

[RangerRK]

Why are Pelosi and her entourage refusing to honor their responsibility to challenge, through constitutional impeachment, the illegality of Bush's and Cheney's use of self-appointed powers? Why are they avoiding charging Bush and Cheney for fraudulently leading our country into an illegal "shock and awe" assault on Iraq, a relatively defenseless sovereign state. Why have they not defended our Constitution - the foundation of our democratic federation and the guardian of justice and civil rights? And why do they remain complicit - by their silence - to the deceptive and impeachable escapades of the Bush-Cheney administration? Why?

Following are four general answers offered by Pelosi and the three representatives from Silicon Valley. After each answer is a rebuttal by the Silicon Valley Impeachment Coalition.

ANSWER: There are not enough House votes to impeach Bush and Cheney.

REBUTTAL: Only by exposure of their crimes and misdemeanors, made possible by impeachment investigations, would they gain the number of votes necessary to impeach and indict. When the public realizes the severity of the Bush-Cheney violations, opposition to impeachment should quickly melt away.

ANSWER: There isn't enough evidence to prove that they are guilty of violating the trust they were given to exercise power.

REBUTTAL: Baloney! Many renowned constitutional scholars and lawyers, and millions of informed political buffs, can easily identify the impeachable White House vices. How can those who have the power to impeach dismiss the proliferation of evidence documented in volumes across the land? How can they honestly say there isn't enough evidence?

ANSWER: Congress doesn't have the time to impeach.

more
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6945527