Pelosi et al are playing it SMART re: impeachment

[GaYellowDawg]

Those of you who want an immediate impeachment aren't thinking things through. Consider the following:

Let's say that an investigation goes on for a year, and impeachment gets through the House of Representatives. What happens then?

- the Senate would try Bush and Cheney. What would need to happen for removal? Here's what: a 2/3 majority. Are you going to get a 2/3 majority with 49 Republicans, 1 independent, and Joe Lieberman? HELL, no. As of right now, with the information that the public currently has, the removal of W and Dick WILL NOT HAPPEN.

It's a waste of time. It's heartbreaking, but it's a waste of time. That's a huge argument against it.

This Democratic Congress was not elected to impeach anyone. It was elected to solve the Iraq problem, PERIOD. What our Democratic congresspeople need to do is to come up with appropriate solutions to get us OUT. Here's what the top of the list needs to be:

1. Iraq solution
2. Balanced budget

We do those two things over the next couple of years, and Democrats will be seen as problem-solvers, both foreign and domestic. At that point, we gain the Executive branch, make gains in Congress, and then we can proceed to further undo the damages of the Bush regime.

Now, I'm going to put this in a box for emphasis:

Gunning for impeachment without the country calling for it will be seen as more "politics as usual" and we must avoid it at all costs. If we proceed with what we think is right, no matter what the general public thinks or without considering the cost, then we are no wiser than Bush's cabal and the last Congress (albeit much less bloody-handed).

The only way that we need to start impeachment hearings is if the country is so angry with Bush and Cheney that we know that every single DNC senator, Joe Lieberman, the independent, and at least 16 Republican senators will vote for removal. At that point, we say, "We hadn't planned on this, but the country is calling for it." The public isn't even close to that place.

[AndyA]

1. What you are forgetting, or overlooking, is that the Constitution requires

Congress to perform checks and balances. If it fails to do so, it is not doing its job.

People will then blame the Democratic Congress for not policing Bush when his horrid acts become known down the road.

I don't think too many in the GOP are willing to stand by Bush at this point and protect him. It would be career suicide for them to do so. If Bush and Cheney broke the law, they should be held accountable for their actions, including impeachment.

Giving them a get out of jail card makes the Dems criminals - just like their friends across the aisle, the GOP.

Going through the process is not an option, it is REQUIRED.

[GaYellowDawg]

6. You misunderstand me.

I am not advocating letting them off permanently. However, you've got to realize that not all Americans are as well informed about the perfidies of the Bush administration as we are. In order to have a realistic shot at impeachment, firing, and jail time for Bush and Cheney, three things have to happen:

1. Indisputable evidence has to be found.
2. The MSM has to actually put forth that evidence.
3. A clear majority of Americans have to be educated about it.

Condition 1 is probably the easiest. Condition 2 - getting networks to actually present the evidence - will be tough. Condition 3 not only includes the cooperation of the MSM, but it also involves the American public being willing to be educated. I do not believe that's realistic, and if our new Congress goes ahead with action, it will simply result in a Republican Congress in 2 years, blanket pardons issued by Bush to cover everyone's asses, and everything will disappear just like Iran-Contra did.

[DemPower]

2. Impeachment on illegal wiretapping requires no investigation

He admitted it.

Let's just stay focused on that one, and he'll be out in no time. Remember Nixon?

[shrdlu]

3. Well said.

I have posted elsewhere that Bush was impeached by the election; he will be convicted by history.

[Independent_Liberal]

4. But if the investigations find that many Republican Senators were complicit in a lot of the crimes

we could give them a plea deal and the deal can be that if they want to get re-elected in 2008 and stay out of jail, they can vote with us on the impeachment. Has anybody ever thought of that?

[tnlurker]

5. After the investigations

Show all the crimes of Bush and his cronies the public will demand impeachment. The republicans will have to vote for it to save as many seats that they can in 2008. There are 21 republican seats up for re-election in 2008.

Do the investigations, show the public the crimes, then impeach and convict.

[GaYellowDawg]

7. YES!

There has to be a coherent strategy, and it should follow exactly what you said. Do the investigations, make the evidence public, let the public decide that impeachment and conviction are necessary. To me, this is less about revenge than it is simple justice. Expose what's happened so that another President down the line won't dare.

Charging ahead prematurely without a plan and without thinking of the consequences of doing so would be Rumsfeldian strategy - and we need to be a lot smarter than Rumsfeld!

[BlueJazz]

8. As a certain Big-Eared fellow once said...

"Your Logic is Impeccable"

[chaska]

9. As much as I want impeachment, it's not smart. The '08 campaign begins....

now. We need to investigate, yes, but not impeach (which doesn't necessarily mean that we Liberals shouldn't be pushing for it though). We need to keep the ugliness in full view WHILE WE CONCENTRATE ON SHOWING THE PEOPLE GOOD LEGISLATION (not shouting). Show them what good government can look like. We want them to think this: "These Dems are doing a good job. Now, if only we had a decent (Democratic) President."

[Guaranteed]

10. Great post. nt