Talk about blind faith. In the latest issue of The Nation, John Nichols writes of potential trouble in the wings for the (thankfully) soon-to-be former President George W. Bush. As is traditional, the outgoing President will be winging a few pardons here and there, and that's where the supposed trouble starts.
Mentioning constitutional framer George Mason's beliefs that impeachment would "surely" be in order if a president attempted to stop inquiry and prevent detection of wrongdoing within his administration, and that impeachment would be in order if a president were to pardon crimes which were advised by himself, Nichols writes of the obligation of the House Judiciary Committee to demand that Bush explain himself, should he pardon the usual cast of characters we have seen over the course of his eight years in the White House, such as Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Josh Bolton, and on and on, etc.
Nichols concludes the blurb-style piece with the statement that the House should challenge any refusal of explanation by Bush of questionable pardons with articles of impeachment. Man, wouldn't that be a beautiful world, if only it would actually happen? Are we supposed to believe that even now, with a stronger Democratic majority in the House and Senate, that Dubya will ever be in the same room with a serious intent to bring about impeachment proceedings? For all the extra-constitutional hi jinx and flat-out lying us into a long and damaging war in Iraq, among items on a veritable laundry list of reasons why he should have already been impeached by now, do you honestly think now, in the final waning weeks of the Bush administration, this will be the thing that pushes the right button? Waiting until the turd turns white to remove it from the carpet hardly does anything to fix the stain underneath, nor does it do much to bolster one's reputation as a housekeeper. The boat done sailed, folks, and as usual, we're the ones left to tread the water in its wake.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment