Reply #21: I don't think that we should look at impeachment as a "liability" at ALL...

[cascadiance]

But we SHOULD look at it pragmatically and know when it will yield results and when it won't. We NEED investigations now. We might just find that set of "watergate tapes" soon that will make it a viable option to do now. And some have said that we already have those big evidence pieces. Well, even if we do, they have to be more formally and publicly vetted and cross examined for all to see, so that people don't just feel it as a bunch of "leftist malarky". You and I know that it isn't, but we need to convince the rest of America that.

One thing I'm wondering about too is if there is some legislation that the Dems want to get through soon, but are afraid of Bush vetoing it and not having enough votes to override his veto. If that very key legislation is hung in front of Bush and he's then told, "You either sign this and continue to cooperate with other legislation we have moving through congress, or we WILL go through with impeachment shortly and you and Cheney's asses are going to be grass!". Perhaps they want that leverage for a bit. And by all means, increased investigations that would yield bigger smoking guns would INCREASE their ability to put pressure on Bushco, and therefore INCREASE their ability to get things through congress that they (and hopefully we in the process) want.

Of course once Bush backs off, then they can stop playing nice as a means of dealing with the Republicans. At that point they need to have the appropriate evidence to compel the American people to demand impeachment, and then they can go through with it.