Reply #101: Not if you follow the Starr investigation for a precedent.

[Usrename]

Apparently Starr thought he had caught Clinton in some real crimes that he referred to the House of Representatives (it turned out that he was wrong about the crime part of his referral).

I think that is how it has to be done now, since there really is no single law enforcement agent that would have authority or jurisdiction to effect an arrest of the POTUS or VP, even though I would love to see the Sargent at Arms of the House give it a whirl.

Impeachment, if they were serious about it and did not pursue it just to drag it out as long as possible to make political hay, could happen very quickly. Two or three weeks, tops. Most of the investigation has been done and the evidence just needs to be presented twice. Refusal to respond to Congressional inquiries is enough to toss the bastards. Just the crimes we already know about are enough.

And who in their right mind in the Senate would defend them? Who is really going to stand with Bush? I just don't buy the argument that there are not enough votes to convict.