Reply #4: I don't understand thisquote:

[Duer 157099]

"I never thought that Bush and Cheney could be removed for their past crimes, but only for refusing to cooperate with subpoenas that would expose those past crimes. And, for that strategy to be effective, the Dems had to plausibly 'take impeachment off the table' and take the abuse of the angry left." (emphasis mine)

How did taking impeachment off the table facilitate *anything*?? Is the idea that it emboldened BushCo? If so, that just sucks, because they didn't need emboldening, and it could be argued that even if it did embolden them, it also resulted in some serious damage.

No, impeachment never needed to be taken off the table! Never! All that did was prove that certain members of Congress just DO NOT understand the Constitution sufficiently to know the purpose of impeachment.

Failure to impeach, especially now, but also certainly just as much so a year, two years, three years ago, perhaps more, is a blatant failure of Congress to uphold and defend the Constitution.