Reply #9: From a pragmatic standpoint - No.

[noamnety]

We've created a pattern of letting top officials know that they probably won't be convicted even IF it's public knowledge that they committed crimes, and that if they are convicted, they will be pardoned. This happened when we refused to investigate Reagan, it's been happening ever since. There are no consequences for wrong-doing if you are high enough up, because those in power act like it's "bad manners" to prosecute those in power.

This creates a culture that promotes criminal behavior and corruption, and it allows repeat offenders to go back into power each time their party is in power.

We don't need more of this:

9/11 Commission Vice Chair
Lee Hamilton. Hamiltion was chairman of the House Select Committee investigating the Iran-contra affair. Despite being shown ample evidence against Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, he did not probe their wrongdoing, explaining later on PBS 'Frontline,' that he did not think it would have been 'good for the country' to put the public through another impeachment trial.

How different would our country be if Hamilton HAD prosecuted Reagan and Bush I? Prosecution at that time would not have been about "looking backward." It would have been entirely about looking forward.