Impeachment is absolutely necessary if we are to retreat from the brink of having a totalitarian government, and to restore some kind of representative democracy. So how is that going to happen, and what should we be doing to further it? I propose that beating up Pelosi over that silly phrase is useless. Impeachment will happen when these oversight hearings bring out so much undeniable wrongdoing that the entire nation is ready to say “Enough!” Then it won’t even be a partisan impeachment, Republicans will join in because their constituents demand it…as it happened with Nixon. So it’s up to us to keep the pressure on, write letters of support to all the chairs of all the committees that are doing oversight hearings, keep de-spinning the public discourse wherever we can, write our own reps, and yes even write Pelosi letting her know how we feel. Eventually a tidal wave of disgust and outrage is going to wash this “Gang Who Couldn’t Shoot Straight” out of the White House.

And if you think that Pelosi isn’t already doing her part, I suggest that you aren’t paying attention. Right now oversight IS the Democratic agenda in Congress, and that is exactly what’s going to get us there. Also, did you see the video clips she posted on her own blog: all the key parts of the Waxman hearings from Friday, plus his letter to the White House. She’s keeping the pressure on. So should we all.

PS, I do live in San Francisco, but not in her district. My rep is Tom Lantos.

LHP in your post last week I didn’t do very well in articulating that I think/know(?) that Fitz is still holding some very interesting hole cards; what got me thinking again was your post on Sat. when you mentioned Spook, which started the old hamsters in my head to start to spin again, which caused me to remember this post from Spook … scroll down to “Mystery #2″

On October 28, Justin Raimondo published an interesting article for antiwar.com which contains the following quote form District Court Judge Hogan:

The ex parte affidavit establishes that the government’s focus has shifted as it has acquired additional information during the course of the investigation. Special Counsel now needs to pursue different avenues in order to complete its investigation. … The subpoenas were not issued in an attempt to harass the [reporters], but rather stem from legitimate needs due to an unanticipated shift in the grand jury’s investigation.

There’s something there.

Fitz knows something.

Here’s more of a full quote of the opinion from Judge Hogan

Cooper and Time argue that because the second set of subpoenas seek the same information requested in the original subpoenas, enforcing these new subpoenas would be unreasonable and/or oppressive. Specifically, Movants take issue with the fact that Special Counsel voluntarily limited the previous subpoenas to information concerning one identified government official, yet he now looks to gather information that he previously agreed not to seek. Such an action, Cooper and Time argue, is unreasonable and oppressive. This Court disagrees.

In his ex parte affidavit, Special Counsel outlines in great detail the developments in this case and the investigation as a whole. The ex parte affidavit establishes that the government’s focus has shifted as it has acquired additional information during the course of the investigation. Special Counsel now needs to pursue different avenues in order to complete its investigation. Through the ex parte affidavit, the Court has determined that the subpoenas were not issued in an attempt to harass the movants, but rather stem from legitimate needs due to an unanticipated shift in the grand jury’s investigation.

I really think Fitz knows something but doesn’t feel he can prosecute without more than enough evidence because of who’s in his crosshairs.

Fitz knows that Libby knows something that will lead to someone higher up, and he’s just gotta let time turn the screws on Libby.

Maybe this mystery got covered in the trial and I missed it, but, I smell a there there

presidential excesses actionable as constitutional harm