I didn't realize Bush had finished reading "My Pet Goat" yet.

The shelf will have room for two books as soon as he finishes coloring in the second one.

That's the name of the book!

It is also possible that simply at that time there was not enough support in the House for Impeachment, for up to 435 different reasons.

It is also possible that Impeachment in the Age of Terrorism is, tactically, different from Impeachment in the Age of Bipartisan Principle of Communist Containment.

Lastly, even as Rohrabacher's motives may be suspect, I would agree with his fundamental conclusion that the three branches of government need to be re-made as equal.

Please read the entire speech and you will see the final paragraph:

"And to the American people, I say, carefully consider who our leaders are going to be and carefully consider the issue of the day. We have a
wonderful democratic society. There's a balance of power here set up by our Founding Fathers. And it's important, whether you're Republican or
Democrat, that we maintain this balance of an authority, the legislative, executive, and judicial in this country, and we should not be setting precedents that the President of the United States has the lion's share of the power in this great democracy of ours. The power is rested in these three branches and in the people themselves."

Note Rohrabacher's concern about "precedents".

This is not a partisan argument, and certainly it is not a new argument, just one that is growing in urgency.

Poss no. 3- Being threatened with having her political or personal skeletons revealed.

Whaddaya think all that surveillance was about, exactly?  Surely, you don't believe that 'terrorism' mumbo-jumbo?  ;-)

It was just to spy on congress and hold something over the head of every single member, so that none would oppose the king!

Let's investigate and see where it leads.  But the way subpoena power has been handled by this congress has been pretty lame.

Impeachment is NOT the punishment, as we are often led to believe.
Impeachment is the open door through which investigations must pass.
To impeach a witness in a criminal trial means to destroy that witness' credibility by showing dishonesty, malfeasance, perjury, etc.

We like to think of impeachment as the end result, but it is the starting point for justice. With the career criminality in this administration, impeachment must precede any real investigation. It's the only way around the abuse of "privilege" and crony coverups that are now bushco's last line of defense.

DO IT, you PATSIES!!!

>>Democrats have it wrong when they speak of Impeachment. That's why it seems radical- they are seen as putting the cart before the horse.

Wrong.  Impeachment hearings are like grand jury hearings:  that's when charges are aired and evidence is gathered.

If Dems had called for Removal hearings, THAT would have been putting cart before horse.

All that said, removal and likely impeachment would have been impossible and after Monica-gate (thanks Clintons!), impeachment hearings have been discredited and so dem pols had to forego them in favor of electoral impeachment of Republicans (and the poll #s clearly indicated and still indicate that that strategy was viable).