Point blank, now that Libby is convicted, will the House investigate Cheney?

[still_one]

On Ed Schultz today, I heard a Democratic Congressman from Virginia interviewed who implied that the leadership doesn't want to detract from the "people's business"

Don't they GET IT?

This is the people's business. This is the reason we invaded Iraq, and so many people are dead and wounded

Starting a war based on a lie isn't bad enough for them?

[porphyrian]

1. If they expect to be re-elected, they fucking well better. - n/t

[robinlynne]

4. right on.

[NewJeffCT]

2. well, write your Congressional Rep and tell them otherwise

it's very easy to send out a short (polite) email to them.

[saltpoint]

3. The unanswered questions in the wake of Libby's conviction are

going to grow louder, IMO, and soon many Republicans up for re-election in 08 will join the chorus calling for investigations.

Uncle Dick's going to have a tense spring season in the capital.

[jobycom]

5. If they feel it will yield results.

But put it in perspective. Fitzgerald investigated for three years. He examined every witness, every bit of evidence out there. He presented that evidence to grand juries. He came up with indictments only for obstruction and perjury against a lesser player.

They have to ask a couple of questions to see if it's worth it. First, are they likely to find anything other than what Fitzgerald did, three years later and after the key players have had time to clean up the evidence and polish their stories? Second, if they do find something, what will it do for the country or for them? In other words, will they manage only to put another minor figure in jail, or could they expect to actually get Cheney or Bush or Rove? Third, is it likely to lead to impeachment? If they investigate for six months, manage to get someone to spill the beans on someone, and open impeachment proceedings, is there an advantage to removing Cheney or Bush from office just in time for next year's primary race to begin?

The answer to all those questions might be yes, and they might investigate. But the answers might be no, or not much. Keep in mind that each Congresscritter and Senator is only one figure of a large staff. They have activists like us pouring over every bit of testimony, every bit of evidence, in ways most of us don't. They have lawyers and investigators advising them as to whether they are likely to find anything. They know a lot more than we do, or at least some of them do.

I'd love to see them investigate, but frankly, you have to also consider the fickleness of, dare I say it, us. If they dump the tons of resources necessary into this and come up empty, how many DUers and other Liberals are going to shout at them for doing nothing or not having courage? And if they do investigate, in three months when we've moved on to another issue, how many people will be screaming that they aren't ending the Iraq occupation, or haven't boosted minimum wage, or haven't done whatever we feel is critical to humanity then? Look around, not one day goes by without someone screaming about something the Dems haven't done yet, and vowing to not support them ever again. They are afraid of our fickleness as much as anything else. So they won't start a project that will soak up too many resources and have little chance of success.

I still want to see them do it. I want Bush and Cheney impeached, even if it's on the day before the inauguration in 2009. I want them and their entire administration on trial for war crimes and treason. I consider anything less to be an atrocity and a lack of justice. But Congress is only going to do this if there is a good chance of success. Pisses me off, too, but let's aim the gun at the other guy's foot, not our own.

[tridim]

6. See the post two slots above yours..

Conyers is starting the investigations. Never had the slightest doubt.