Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
I think some may have forgotten how the Watergate investigation played out.
The Senate spent nearly a year (from May 73 to March 74) investigating Watergate and the WH involvement in a select oversight committee (the Ervin Committee). The House impeachment inquiry didnt start until the spring of 74 as the Senate select committee was completing its work.
The Dems in Congress today recognize how slowly and deliberately an impeachment process must proceed.
IMO, they started the right way...with oversight hearings...and they recognized the impracticality of moving to a House impeachment inquiry before Bush/Cheney leave office.
They could conceivably started a House impeachment inquiry this year (after spending 07 in oversight hearings investigating possible areas of inquiry), in which case the impeachment process would have occurred in the midst of this year's election campaign....a nightmare scenario that would only have politicized it and divided the country even more.
Which is why they should continue after Bush/Cheney leave office and, if appropriate, recommend to the Pres that he appoint a special prosecutor within the DoJ to explore criminal charges.
|
I agree with this. Good insight and analysis DC. I think it's much wiser to wait and gather the facts/evidence rather than hastily rush into things. Also, instead of making it a witch hunt and mockery of the system, show some class and dignity in handling the situation. Be above the fracas though I realize it will get ugly. The good thing about waiting is that once the Bush Administration is out, there will be less pressure for the current politicos to defend him as much in my opinion.
I also don't know if Obama or McCain should be the ones initiating it. I feel an "outside" party would be better, like an "independent" investigation.