Ché Pasa: Not sure you want to be using the French Revolution as an example for how to take this administration down. Not only did that fail miserably in making France a functioning democracy (which didn't happen until over 80 years later, after a succession of terrible wars, military defeats, dictatorships, empires, smaller revolutions and a monarchial restoration or two), but it might just attract the attention of the Secret Service (ok, mostly joking about that, but you never know with these guys...).

And our own revolution was more than a decade in the making, having taken place under quite different circumstances. There was no constitution to restore back then, but an arbitrary tyranny to throw off. And only after years of trying to do this lawfully was it determined that only open rebellion would work. If you're suggesting that we're at such a point, then you're essentially according to BushCo absolute tyrannical powers that many of us do not acknowledge nor believe are quite so absolute. Which makes me wonder, if they are this powerful, what on earth would make them leave even if they ARE impeached and convicted?

WT: Sooner or later I think we'll have to "jump". But I'd rather do it with functioning wings than a lead suit. I am not opposing impeachment, but proposing a path to it which has a chance of succeeding. As are you, of course.

sysprog: Pointing out pedantry is itself pedantic. So there. ;-) But thanks for the correction. I did, in fact, mean "grace", but wrongly spelled it "gras" because that's more like how it's supposed to be pronounced and I keep forgetting that French is not phonetic like Italian.

C2H5OH: I agree with most of your points except that you forget that while Dems might have the gun, Repubs still hold the bullets. I.e. enough votes to convict. Until they're willing to give us those bullets, that gun is useless.

Preliminary impeachment inquiry hearings might make it somewhat easier for Dems to either get at the underlying facts that might give them a solid case for impeachment, or force the administration to make the sorts of mistakes that might make that happen. But it would also force the Repubs into defensive mode and make them more likely to side with the administration out of a show of loyalty for the sake of their base. So it would have its pluses and minuses.

Whereas continuing the current non-impeachment oversight process deprives the GOP and administration of a clear-cut reason to circle the wagons and rally the base, instead slowly bleeding them of their strength and unity while quietly building up a case for impeachment, until such moment as Dems can unleash it fully-formed, which will likely be a lot harder for the other side to combat, either legally or politically.

Death by a thousand hearings, questions, press conferences, subpoenas and contempt citations, in full public view but just under the "partisan witch hunt" spin threshold, is how to get there. Dems are playing a very cool and I think smart hand. I can't say that it'll succeed, but if anything can, I think think it has the highest chances.

Btw, as to the question of who to impeach, and in what order, I'd argue for Gonzo, then Cheney, then Bush--with a politcally acceptable Repub appointed to replace Cheney before it's Bush's turn. I.e. one who's not running or likely to run in '08, who's not too far right for the Dems nor too liberal for the base. E.g. Danforth, Baker, Dole, Kemp, etc. Heh, that would even satify those silly Unity08 types.

And yes, if possible have the GOP take the lead on impeachment. Make them realize that if they don't impeach, they will become politically irrelevant for the next 5-10 years (and there's just enough geezer Repubs who won't last long enough to see the GOP's comeback to want to prevent that). Split off the "moderates" (i.e. those who might have been siding with Bush but reluctantly, e.g. Warner, Lugar, Voinovich) from the true wackjobs who WOULD jump off that cliff and take their party with them (e.g. Graham, McCain, Boehner, Blackburn).

Divide and conquer, as per Caesar (although perhaps not the best person to cite in attempting to restore our republic, heh).