Let's remember what we're talking about here with this Congressional schedule: It's about getting to the bottom of why the US Attys were fired. TPM was the lead blog which prompted the attention on this. Josh Marshall won an award for his work and leadership in reporting at TPM.

In that spirit, I wish TPMM would stop parroting the supposed GOP excuses, and directly challenge those who have raised them. We don't need the GOP's "opposition" if the DNC is going to make the GOP's arguments for inaction for them. This "what the GOP might do or say" is as worthless as an argument as "What might happen in the future"-argument about threats. Speculative threats are not taken seriously. We need something specific.

For example, why should anyone take this argument for inaction on impeachment seriously:

put this behind us and move forward; we have to restore our reputation with the rest of the world; it would drain our energy and divide the country From

This statement is just a list of excuses, not credible plans to provide leadership. It asks that we ignore fact finding; accept there is a problem but ignore what needs to be done or what to correct; and believe the absurd notion that governance is a "drain" of resources. No, it's a requirement for leadership to confront reality and build a plan that will move us forward.

Thanks to the recklessness of the White House, they've created a mess, divided the country, and would ask that they -- the one's who made the mess without a solution -- should be listened to. Huh?

- How can we "move forward" until we confront what's happened?

- How will the plan to move forward be credible unless we examine closely what went wrong, what options must be explored to prevent what went wrong, then implement that plan?

- How can any of the GOP candidates say they are "serious about moving forward" when they refuse to examine what failed in Congress in re the oversight; and have not provided a plan linked with what their party failed to do?

The GOP has no answers. They're making excuses to shift attention from war crimes, US government misconduct, evidence destruction, and recklessness by legal counsel.

Part of moving forward means keeping all the options on the table to find facts: Denying legal counsel any hope that they "might" ge a pardon, by starting impeachment proceedings. Once impeachment proceedings start, regardless the outcome of the Senate trial, the target of that impeachment proceeding cannot be pardoned.

Someone needs to provide a very straight answer why Congress should be trusted to "lead" when it removes the impeachment option, and, thereby, denies the Congress any chance to trump the President's pardon. As long as anyone working for the President has any hope for a pardon, Congress is fooling itself thinking it is going to be leading the charge for fact finding. Without facts through an impeachment investigation, the Congress' claim that they are supporting change is meaningless drivel. The three leading Presidential candidates [McCain, Clinton, and Obama] are from the same Senate. If we are going to take their promises of change seriously, then we need to see each of the Senators -- now -- leading efforts to change the way the Senate confronts this President. If they do a good job, we might have confidence they're serious about supporting that change as President. Without leading efforts to investigate this President, then we're fooling ourselves when we believe someone is serious about change.

Let's see the change in the Congress with an impeachment, and deny this President any chance he can pardon anyone. An impeachment proceeding doesn't have to be narrowly focused at the President, but anyone. Whether the Senate does or doesn't throw that case out is irrelevant: The impeachment proceeding trumps the President's pardon; and sends the clear message: Congress is serious about fact finding, and developing information needed to understand what needs to change, and what needs to be supported.