Washington Journal: Arthur Davis is full of poo.

This Democrat is sitting on teevee telling the people that they don't want to use impeachment because you just can't use the simple test of did a person commit a criminal act. It has to be higher. What the eff is higher? Anyone watching this?

there isn't currently enough support and many (public and politicians) are still in denial per many of the acts of malfeasance of the administration... that the series of investigations currently going on are the route to uncovering enough evidence of high crimes that the will to impeach will grow per the evidence. Personally - if it is possible, I would guess that Goonzales will be the first target of impeachment if he doesn't resign.

the prosecute them all and send 'em to prison after they leave office. Then turn the chief culprits over to the ICC. THere's too little time left in this term to waste on impeachment. Impeachment doesn't send anyone to prison where they belong.

Release their presidential papers..going all the way back to Reagan..

Let them play their little games now, but if a dem becoomes presidnet, and junior has his pardon pen taken away from him, these fools could do hard time..

But then I know I am dreaming, because what always happens when a dem wins an election is this..

they want to forgive & forget..and move on..

and the roaches they could have squashed, slink off under the sink and plot their revenge ..

as John Dean suggests here:

Focusing On Bush Administration Officials

Lowering the aim of an impeachment effort to focus on those who have aided and abetted, or directly engaged in, the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, would have all the positives, and none of the negatives, of going after Bush and Cheney. It would not be an effort to overturn the 2004 election, but rather to rid the government of those who have participated, along with Bush and Cheney, in abuses and misuses of power; indeed, many among them have actually encouraged Bush and Cheney to undertake the offensive activities.

Many of these men (and a few women) are young enough that it is very likely that they will return to other posts in future Republican Administrations, and based on their experience in the Bush/Cheney Administration, they can be expected to make the offensive conduct of this presidency the baseline for the next president they serve. Impeachment, however, would prevent that from happening.

It will be recalled that Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states: "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." (Emphasis added.) After any civil officer has been impeached, under the rules of the Senate, it requires only a simple majority vote to add the disqualification from holding future office.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20061215.html

I think it's more how hard going after the booosh regime will be. We know they'll resist and stonewall every step of the way and there's no sure blueprint here at to how Democrats can put pressure without it ending up in a court or some protracted battle. Call it fortitude or just plain stretching one's resources.

The question here isn't malfesance as much as it is a smoking gun...some type of proof that directly ties boooosh or chenney to a crime. So far there's nothing that really sticks. We don't have boooosh on tape saying "slam dunk" or a video of chenney calling out Joe Wilson. And then it's not clear that crimes that would apply to a "normal citizen" would apply to "the executive"...and you know where that's going.

Gonzo's a test...a game of high stakes chicken by this regime to play out the clock and avoid facing what would happen next if Gonzo resigns. Marcy Wheeler has a great post on what is going on here...and Gonzo is playing the firewall...if he falls so does the most important inner walls of this regime and with it the real direct criminality. I suspect all we've heard second hand will become first hand fact and then evidence and then history.

Cheers..

:hi:

Retroactive impeachments are possible, according to conyers.