I'm no fan of Pelosi, but I am happy that she has taken impeachment off the table. While impeaching GWB may be satisfying, it'll just result in a President Cheney - no change at all.

Following the impeachment of GWB with the impeachment of President Cheney would be politically tough, as the media coverage would have made the masses sick of the process by then.

If you think about it impeachment would be too easy. Let's get an indictment for crimes against humanity.

So, how exactly would a Democratic congress get the Bush administration to respect the law? Give 'em the stink eye?

If the Democrats start investigating something then why would the White House cooperate in any way even if legally required to do so? They've managed to get away with ignoring the law so far, why wouldn't the Bush administration openly do so in the future?

Though I agree that a "President Cheney" is a horrific concept it really wouldn't be a far cry from what we have now. It's not like Bush is calling the shots anyways. I think it's shitty that a potential impeachment hearing is off the table and it's another stinkin' example of the Dems being complete bottoms to the Republicans. If you can't impeach him for this, what could he possibly do that would be deemed impeachable?

The Democratic response to the impeachment issue ought to be couched in terms the Republicans should completely understand: "We have no plans at this time to impeach the President. However, in the interests of national security, we will do our Constitutional duty and thoroughly investigate any allegations of wrongdoing by the Administration. And to echo a phrase often heard in the gloomy halls of the NSA, the innocent will have nothing to worry about."

In case anyone has forgotten, the Dems are trying to win a presidency in 2008. If the Dems win Congress in '06, impeach the entire Administration and manage to install the Speaker of the House as the President (Pelosi, anyone?), it could spell political disaster for the Dems in '08. The best political course until 2008 is win one of the houses of Congress and proceed to check the Administration until the '08 elections. Either the House or the Senate under Dem control can embroil the Administration in one scandal after another until 2008, then they can run their "Had Enough Yet?" campaign and win the Presidency.

The only thing I hope for in 2009 are criminal indictments across the entire former Bush Adminstration. Unfortunately, as a "sign of a time of healing" the next administration is likely to hand out blanket pardons much like Nixon.

I know we all want Bush out of office, but see, here's why it's okay not to push hard for it at this moment. We want him gone because we know how much of a criminal he is, and what he's been up to. Congress, unfortunately, cannot act on what they "know" without having "proof" to back it up. Democrats can't get proof without the power to investigate (something the Republican committee chairs are highly unwilling to take on).

So, I say, sure, don't call for impeachment now ... wait until you get the proof of wrongdoing.

For the conservative, moderate, and liberal anti-fascists who understand that holding Bush et al accountable is one of the most important challenges to ever face America ... support the Democrats, not necessarily because you like them, but because they're the only thing with a hope of piercing the bubble of secrecy surrounding Bush's warm, criminal center.

And when I say "support the Democrats" I mean doing whatever it takes to get rid of the GOP eVoting machines. Because like it or not, the Dems will never win anything back if we cannot vote for them (or prove the GOP's fraud ... see the chicken & egg here?).

Despite recent passionate speeches by Kerry about ending this "war of choice" and other typical mutterings by the usual dem "troublemakers", I can't help but think that we're dealing with one large blob, a visceral mass of government. There are no longer any democrats or republicans in either legislative body. Just what the f-bomb do they stand for if not the ouster of these tyrants? Take impeachment off the table? I almost had to change my underwear after reading that.

President Bush's sinking poll numbers are not only indicative of his incompetence but also his disregard for the law. What he has done

in some instances has disregarded the advice of others who were well

aware of Presidential limits and to do otherwise was illegal.

For Nancy Pelosi to outright kill off any talk of impeachment is

silly. How much will she let Bush and his cronies get away with?

Impeachment should be on the minds of our newly elected represent-

atives immediately after the election.

Marvlous

Has it occured who becomes President if the Democrats gain control of Congress and impeach Bush and Cheney, and they are convicted and must leave office at the same time? It would be the new Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi! No wonder she does not want to be seen as pushing impeachment. It might look self-serving.

But, please Nancy, don't take it off the table. Let the new Judiciary Chairman John Conyers go at it. (I am being optimistic about November 06). The truth must be told.

Democrats must campaign for the TRUTH. Once the veil of secrecy of the Bush crime syndicate is pierced, events will unfold as they did in 1974.

It appears that the new Republican slogan going into the November elections is going to be:

if you don't vote for us, the Dems are going to impeach him for wiretapping, outing a covert agent for political gains (treason), and just generally being an idiot

Actually, I kind of like that slogan. I think this is a good talking point, and one that everyone should bring up as often as possible.

As pointed out in a previous letter, Republicans should understand perfectly well what Pelosi means when she promises that impeachment is off the table. She could call her statement a contract, even, perhaps something along the lines of a "Contract with the American People". No, that's too verbose, but something similar, perhaps. . .