Monday
Counting Chickens
In a post below I said I thought that Ron Suskind's allegations about the White House forgery of a letter connecting Iraq to al Qaeda operative Mohammed Atta were probably true, and if true constituted a sufficient reason to impeach whomever was revealed to be responsible for the forgery. Since I endorsed it as probably true, I feel like it's my responsibility to note that his two named sources for the allegation are denying it and that Suskind says he's fine with that, since he has them saying it on tape and they're just feeling a lot of pressure right now to retract. Further, another reporter has come forth with a story saying the forgery did happen but that Suskind is wrong in some details, including about the White House instructing the CIA to do it, and that they instead used the Pentagon Office of Special Plans. I don't revise my estimate of the truth of the allegation that the White House caused such a forgery to be created, but to give some sense on where I'm coming from on this issue, I remember that in February of 2003 I was absolutely certain that if the U.S. invaded Iraq we would find weapons of mass destruction because they'd either be there or we would put them there to be found. And I was wrong about that and nevertheless haven't come to trust the White House any more just because they didn't plant weapons to be found.
To expand on my mention that such a forgery is sufficient for impeachment, a couple of points. First, I hope that wasn't taken to mean that I actually expected such impeachment, or even a serious movement for it. It's been clear for a long time that for whatever reason the vast majority of Democrats in Congress have no interest in impeachment proceedings, and there's no prospect of that changing now. Among other things having all political news shift to focusing on Obama and McCain, and the fact that Obama in his reconciling mode would never hint at suggesting at thinking about impeachment completely preclude it.
Second, I'm of the view that the torture memoranda (and giving the orders to carry out the tactics permitted by said memoranda), the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program, and the Libby pardon all constituted sufficient independent bases for impeachment, which should give an idea of where my standards for impeachable offenses currently stand.
|
To expand on my mention that such a forgery is sufficient for impeachment, a couple of points. First, I hope that wasn't taken to mean that I actually expected such impeachment, or even a serious movement for it. It's been clear for a long time that for whatever reason the vast majority of Democrats in Congress have no interest in impeachment proceedings, and there's no prospect of that changing now. Among other things having all political news shift to focusing on Obama and McCain, and the fact that Obama in his reconciling mode would never hint at suggesting at thinking about impeachment completely preclude it.
Second, I'm of the view that the torture memoranda (and giving the orders to carry out the tactics permitted by said memoranda), the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program, and the Libby pardon all constituted sufficient independent bases for impeachment, which should give an idea of where my standards for impeachable offenses currently stand.
