Should Dems investigate Bush?

assuming they take the House, should Dems hold hearings about Bush's role in pushing us into Iraq?

I think not.

The House would be better investigating the hell out of Haliburton, etc, but Bush's folly has been revealed, and no good can come of attacking him. He is damn near irrelevant already, don't give his base an excuse to rally to his defense.

Well, they pretty much have to if they are going to impeach the fucker and put his administration on trial for the war crimes they have committed.

Yes

The question should be: Why is it taking so long for the Dems to investigate Bush?

Are you guys conveniently forgetting all the Dems who did and still "support the war."

They, at the very least, need to be severly chastised. Better yet, tried fro crimes against humanity as well. But I'll take Bush if it's the only thing on offer.

Well my point was, the investigation shouldn't turn into a partisan snipefest. There are people from both parties that need to be held accountable.

agreed *passes out a few more torches and pitchforks*

Sorta, but honestly, who still supports the war on the left wing apart from Lieberman? And he's not coming back.

even if they don't investigate him over this, there's still plenty else to look into (signing statements, war profiteering, nepotism, etc etc).

Bush shouldnt not be tried and fried on his own. If He goes down, he whol Admin has to go with him. Rummy, Condi, Cheny, The warlus at the UN, Roberto Gonzales (true he's not really a part, but I want my pictures back )

The Dems should only investigate Bush if they have enough votes to actually do something. Otherwise they should spend their time trying to show up the Republicans by accomplishing something.

agreed.

And the answer to that would be: because the Republicans have been blocking them every step when they've tried to. Democrats don't control any of the committees that would do the investigating. And when Dems who were actually on those committees tried to, the Republican leadership did cute things like force them to meet in a basement room, refuse to participitate, and schedule 11 other votes during the same time, to try to cut down on attendance. Not to mention things like shutting off microphones during a Patriot Act debate, etc., etc.

isn't democracy a magical thing

Mr.Crisp....i agree with you again..

i really don't want there to be a partisan problem when the democrats gain control. i'd much rather have everyone working together without turning everything into a power grab or a witch hunt. it's important for the democrats to distance themselves with the type of performance that's going to get the GOP booted out this election, and that definitely includes adopting a mature and professional attitude. that being said, i definitely think there are certain actions that this administration should be held accountable for.

It's not a question of investigating who supported the war. We already know that; their votes are on the record. The question involves investigating those who collected and manipulated intelligence; those who "planned" the war; those who executed the war; and those who drove the subsequent occupation - by definition, the executive branch.

Truly....

I would hate to see the opportunity for proper change, lost because of infighting.
The time should be spent trying to correct the mistakes made, and not punishing those who made them....

The problem with that kind of investigation is that, especially a government investigation, is that it often reveals as much about the investigator as the investigated. The only person/people able to pull this off would be someone with nothing to hide. Good luck.

How about someone who doesn't give a fuck about what is there to find? I'd love to be that guy.

Hasn't Pelosi already said impeachment was off the table?

i agree that it'd be a serious waste of time and energy, especially with there being only two years left in his term, but what you would rather them do? is a criminal case a possibility?

anyways, it'll be nice to have checks and balances back.

A partisan problem is inevitable when one of the sides considers bi-partisanship to be date rape.

Yes - i.e. an individual NOT of the executive branch.