They're not talking about or thinking about impeachment yet, but the recent steps leading GOP senators are taking, speaking out agains the Iraq war are the beginning steps necessary to break the Bush loyalty mindset.
For the past seven years, Republican senators have been marching in lockstep with the idiots in the Whitehouse. Finally, facing an angry, dissatisfied electorate, these GOP senators are also facing reality. Supporting Bush and his policies is bad for their job futures.
This is creating a new mentality-- an "I can disagree with Dubya mentality"-- an "I better disagree if I'm going to keep my job" mentality.
It's a bit like losing your virginity. Once you've done the nasty, you don't have the old barrier, the worry about doing what you've never done before, as a concern anymore.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that Republicans are ready to impeach. But the process of accepting the reality that they can publicly disagree with Bush, reject his policy and stand against him is a good thing for the impeachment movement, and really a good thing for America, which sorely needs the patriotic assistance of the GOP in re-asserting the rule of law, the constitution and ethical political engagement.
Note that impeachment is not something that is necessary in the senate. Dave Lindorff has eloquently argued that the whole idea of impeachment was conceived as something the house of representatives does. He writes in his article Forget a Senate Trial, Impeachment is its own Punishment.
"Under the Constitution, there is no obligation for the Senate to even hold a trial after someone is impeached. It is an option, which is up to the will of the Senate.That said, it is nice to know that there are many hearings going on that are cooking the impeachment soup hotter and hotter and that the Iraq war is forcing the members of congress in both houses to re-adjust their Bush loyalty mentality. Things are moving in the right direction.
When the Founding Fathers drew up the impeachment clause, they envisioned it as its own punishment. Trial and removal were seen as a wholly separate process, in addition to impeachment.
Under the Constitution, after investigating the high crimes and misdemeanors of a president or other federal officer in an impeachment panel composed of the members of the House Judiciary Committee, which would then approve articles of impeachment, the House would vote on whether to impeach the executive.
If they concluded that Bush or Cheney, in this case, had abused their power, or had damaged the nation, or committed treason or bribery, they could then vote to impeach.
At that point the president and/or vice president would stand impeached.
- Advertisement -For all time, they would be known as defilers of the Constitution--or perhaps as traitors, depending upon the nature of the articles approved by a House majority.
Their nefarious actions—the lying to Congress and American people, the violation of international laws, the violation of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Amendments, the subversion of elections, the obstruction of justice, the criminal negligence, the war crimes, the usurping of the power of the Congress and the Courts—would all stand publicly condemned by the People’s Body."