Don’t know about you, but I’ve been waiting for years for the “Big House” to face impeachment hearings. In the legal world, it would be called a slam dunk…we gottem cold. Problem is, will Congress do its job, will they have the courage to take out Bush/Cheney?

Can a commander-in-chief disobey laws on wiretapping or torture to protect the country in wartime?

    No. The Constitution requires the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” The Supreme Court ruled Harry S. Truman could not seize steel mills to prevent a strike, even during the Korean War. Nixon’s claim of national security as a justification for illegal wiretaps was also rejected in impeachment proceedings against him.

    What then is the justification for taking impeachment “off the table”? Congressional leaders don’t defend the administration, nor do they contend that its actions are unimpeachable or less serious than Nixon’s. Instead they argue there is no time, or that impeachment proceedings would distract the Congress from other work, or divide the country. The subtext seems to be fear that impeachment could undermine Democratic election prospects in 2008.

    But even these “pragmatic” arguments are wrong. Let’s take them one at a time: