All Congresspersons take an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution and to uphold the laws of our country! Any democrat who is not willing to uphold their oath of office should be removed from any position of power.

This especially goes for the Nancy 'Screw the Constitution - Let's play politics' Pelosi and Harry 'Rethugnican Lite' Reid.

Support Sheehan's challenge to Pelosi!

I understand and share the anger of Testing at the current Administration. However, I cannot disagree more with his thesis.

Let me state unequivocally that I think there is merit to many of the impeachment allegations made against Bush and Co. However, the ranting against the House leadership shows a fundamental lack of understanding about impeachment as a tool of the Constitution and of political reality.

First, impeachment is a political tool in the political structure of our government. It is NOT a criminal justice system, however much many of us (me included) would like to see Bush and Cheny and others in stocks. Thus, there is no legal obligation for the House to mount any investigation. And yes, Speaker Pelosi, does have the power to handle these things as she has. Not inherently and not as Constitutional prerogatives, but because the House, in setting up its rules and procedures, a dynamic process that has evolved over the past 200+ years, chose to delegate certain authority to the office of the Speaker to ensure the orderly conduct of business. Because she has been delegated this authority (deciding which committee to send resolutions to) and is applying it to this political tool (impeahcment), Pelosi has to make a political judgment on how she handles it. This leads to the second point.

Testing doesn't understand political reality. Let's take it for granted that Testing, Pelosi and I all would agree with the following two statements: "It is of the highest importance to get the current Administration out of office as quickly as possible."and "A McCain Administration would not be appreciably different than the Bush Administration."
To get the immediate change we seek, Bush and Cheney would have to be impeached simultaneously. It does no good to impeach Bush, remove him, and then have to repeat the process with Cheney. We'd have to get them both at once in order for Pelosi to become President. The investigations required would take months. The trial in the Senate would take weeks if not months itself. None of this could be completed before 1-20-09. Thus, it is pretty much moot as a practical matter.

In addition, It takes 67 Senators to convict in an impeachment trial. Please, Testing, tell me where you are going to dig up 17 Establishment Republican Senators who would even consider voting for impeachment?

Now, stack all of this up and what you get is the indisputable conclusion that no impeachment could possibly occur in the time allotted and weigh that against the political impact of even trying. We would be risking losing the upcoming election for an exercise in futility which, because it is an exercise in futility, is merely just an emotional feel good move to asauge the feelings of those of us frustrated by the past 7 years. Pelosi knows all of this and has rightly concluded that the best (and only) way to make sure we are able to steer the Titanic away from the iceberg (a McSame Administration) is to win the election.

Whatever damage Bush and Co. have done is done and will not appreciably worsen in the next 6 months. Then, when President Obama appoints all new U.S. Attorneys, a few of them can get into the business of determining what crimes were committed by which people.

Don't even think about preaching about "Constitutional Responsibility ought to trump politics." The Constitution says the House "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. Nothing REQUIRES that it exercise it in a given case. Citizens of this country are dying in Iraq for no good reason and citizens back home are suffering greatly because of the imbecilic criminals who are in charge now. Our world is suffering because nothing is being done about the environmental problems we face. MORALLY, we cannot do anything to risk losing this election that is, in my opinion, ours to lose. We owe it to the rest of the country and the rest of the world.

In order for impeachment to gain traction politically and psychologically for the American people (who will be voting), Congress/Dems/leftwing would have to mount AT LEAST as much of a p.r. campaign as Bush did to get us into this mess. Ain't gonna happen.

Article VII, invading Iraq without a declaration of war, is pathetic. It was in March 2003, Rep. Kucinich. Why the five year hangtime on your drafting? If waiver could be a defense to impeachment, then it is now.

Pelosi is exactly right about this.

Also, the purpose of appointing new U.S. Attorneys is not to prosecute or persecute the prior administration. The Ken Starr-ization, the Third World-ization of the American rule of law that statement is laden with, is indefensible.

We need to appoint U.S. Attorneys to be fair, and need to bust chops of Republicans for doing the opposite (when they do it -- some of theirs, e.g., Fitzgerald in Chicago, are gems). We don't use the courts as a hammer to hit our opponents.

Explain what the end game is supposed to be. How many Republican Senators would vote to convict?. Impeachment just means to file charges. Do you know how many Senators voting yes it takes to convict. Find me all those Republican senators who will do so. Show me the names. I dare you too. If you have no chance of getting a conviction, then all impeachment would do is rally a lot of people back to the Republicans. That would be a dumb move for Democrats to make, as they are trying to retake the White House and expand their margins in the House and Senate.

Nancy Pelosi has a good brain and she uses it. Yes, George Bush has done a lot of bad things. But punishing him is not more important than saving the country from more of the same. We need to keep the focus on filling as many House and Senate seats as possible as well as taking the White House. If John McCain should get elected, we would have more of the same and that we cannot allow. And Ms. Pelosi is correct that it is a battle that we can't win. We can't get the most basic legislation passed because we don't have the 60 Senate seats that would be necessary to block republican fillibusters. We can't even get anything to the Senate floor for a vote because of that. We have to put up with the likes of Lieberman because he caucuses with us on everything but the Iraq war and he gives us that essential 51st vote. Revenge is not more important than preventing a continuation of the harm that would be done and impeachment is not the only to call someone to account. After he leaves office, George Bush is just another person who conspired in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and that is a war crime.

John McCain says that he will never give up in Iraq until we win. How can you "win" a war against innocent people? We need to keep our eye on the prize. We need to make sure that laws are passed so that no president can ever again do the things George Bush has done. We need to heal our country and our economy. And in order to do these things, we must insure that republicans lose power. Eye On The Prize.

Most of the people who argue against impeachment contend that the pursuit of such a course would be bad for the Democratic party's agenda, for many familiar reasons: it would rally the disorganized Republican base, it would leave Democrats open to accusations of "gotcha" politics & political theater, and it would leave us vulnerable to negative PR in an important election year.

Essentially, it's a "don't rock the boat, we have a good thing going here," type of argument.

Remember, though, that PR can be a funny thing. GHW Bush (41) won a war in the ME with the popular support of the entire free world, and was still voted out after only 1 term. Sometimes, that's what you get when everything is seemingly going your way, when your boat is sailing smoothly, and you don't rock it. In GHWB's case, he governed moderately, and the far Right stabbed him in the back for it in 1992.

I'd rather not stab Pelosi in the back, since it's dishonorable; I want to even less because she is a woman, and I must confess that I retain some misogynistic chivalric notions about violence toward the fairer sex.

But testing has posted a well-reasoned indictment that gives me pause. Pelosi's moderation on this issue has elicited plenty of well-deserved scorn from the far left.

It's not OK to fiddle idly while Vandals burn the Constitution. Regardless of whether The People's elected representatives see impeachment as politically expedient, The People will stand up to defend this document. It's Our right to demand that our representatives pursue this course, and if they fail to, it's Our right to continue advocating for this course. Whether Pelosi likes it or not, whether anyone else likes it or not.

If activism and extremism can divide a party, then remember the lesson of GHWB: moderation can also divide a party just as effectively.

There may be a case for impeachment, even at this late date, but Testing isn't the one to make it. He's like Yul Brenner in "The 10 Commandments": "So Shall It Be Written, So Shall It Be Done."

Of course, it's not going to happen short of a real drive from the grassroots (a kind of bottom up thing, eh, Obama supporters?). But seeing that there is pretty overwhelming evidence that crimes have been committed by the administration, in a way, Pelosi is obstructing justice if she goes beyond her office to impede the investigation from going forward.

Way to go, testing. Keep churning 'em.

Yes, Let's spend the next six months taking the preliminary steps to remove Bush from office. The American people are so very interested in the Democrats using their resources to do that. I mean, it's not like they can prevent any further legislative actions through their majorities.

I say we impeach em all. Who cares if the inability to act like adults gives McCain the only chance he could possibly have to win.

Hell, we may even be able to remove Bush 10 or 15 days before his terms ends.

Republicans are turning against their own party, but an impeachment would pull them together. History will take care of Bush and Cheney, we need to worry about beating McCain and taking back our government. Plus I don't think unseating a woman at this point would be the best move for the party, with the sexist charges that Clinton supporters are waging.

Testing does a service by listing war crimes but LogicalConsideration is exactly right about the power of the speaker. And really, you are happy it is so.

We want the government to be difficult to take down. That is why Bill Clinton survived. It had less to do with him than bringing down a Democratic president. (I'm a FOB but that is how I see the impeachment thing)

It's also why Gore did not contest the supremes.
It's not worth it to test the limits of our government too far.

Keeping the dream of America is worth something to the whole F*%#ing world.

Eventually the world will get around to prosecuting Bush co. In many ways we already have.

(If you're really paranoid, you can assume that is why he ("didn't") buy that land he bought in Paraguay.) He won't go to jail but he is already toast.

Obama will win but he won't be his own man. He will be owned by all of us. Every bit of every thing he does will be argued but don't you feel a consensus towards so many of the goals he espouses? Climate, Iraq, healthcare* ...etcetera etcetera....

Hillary was hitched to the same star. We all are.

It is still useful for the people who are paying attention to the war crimes to keep up their protest and encourage firebrands like Kucinich and Wexler to keep the heat on. Even if there is a major culture wide shift there needs to be people on the fringes pushing and "testing" the limits, otherwise we won't progress.

Impeach!

My name is Scott Creighton and I wrote the Petition to Replace Pelosi as Speaker of the House several months ago. I am glad that you have decided to include the link to the petition.

When I wrote it, all of the things that you have talked about in your article were true; by taking impeachment "off the table" she violated her constitutional duties and exposed her complicty with this rogue administration.

For those of you that think she is wise not to attempt impeachment because of the timing, I remind you she took impeachment "off the table" as soon as she came to power in the House. nearly two years ago. She is not acting in Obama's best interests, or yours for that matter.

Many liberals will defend her actions to the death because, what it all boils down to is that they fear it will cost some votes for Obama. This is not the case. If you look back over history, impeachment, successful or not, does not hinder the impeaching party in the next election cycle.

Further, it really doesn't matter. The elections have been rigged for some time now. Two of the articles of impeachment deal with election fraud.

The people that really run this country have a plan and they cannot afford for that plan to be stopped midstream. If they got away with rigging the 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections, why would they stop now?

What you are going to do, by standing in the way of impeachment is provide them just what they want; McCain/Lieberman will "win" the election, people will blame Hillary (like they still blame Nader rather than K. Harris or Scalia), and we will lose the only shot to impeach these war criminals while McSame and Lieberman fill the roles that Cheney and Bush have created.

and then we will be in a "world of shit".

Replace Pelosi to put pressure on the rest. Replace Pelosi to show the ruling class that we still have the willingness to fight for this republic before handing it over without so much as a wimper.

And thank you for writing this article. It's time has come. This is our country. it's time we take it back.

Pelosi is ranked as the 3rd most progressive person from the house so please people dont start this nonsense.

the bush administration should be left so we can use them to our advantage. bush is the best thing to happen to the progressive movement ever.

In other words - there cannot be an "illegal position" on impeachment - it's discretionary - not statutorily required.

I blame it all on wii. Some folks be thinkin' they should be able to wag their finger at the teevee and make shit happen.

Impeachment dumbshits drive me NUTS. Pelosi has been elected any number of times from her district, and now is the Speaker.

She knows stuff. YOU ARE A MORON.

Bush is sinking, sinking, sinking, beneath the weight of public opinion. If we impeach him, he would IMMEDIATELY GAIN POWER, POPULARITY and LEVERAGE.

Impeachment is a stupid idea now. It would suck all the oxygen out of the Pres race, and would elect McCain.

What I believe that we are seeing is that the political price that the Repukeliscum are going to pay will be huge. The American public perceives that the 'Scum made a political decision to go to war. Now, they will pay a political price. And that is the best solution to this problem.

If we impeach Chimpy, we would reverse the political result.