Specter Opens Possibility of Impeachment

by Scott Shields, Sun Jan 15, 2006 at 05:55:22 AM EST

This is pretty big. Think Progress picked up on Sen. Arlen Specter's comments on this morning's 'This Week' regarding Bush's warrantless domestic spying program. Specter, the Republican head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will be holding hearings on the legality of the program. Here's part of Specter's exchange with host George Stephanopoulos. (Emphasis courtesy Think Progress.)

STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, if the president did break the law or circumvent the law, what's the remedy?

SPECTER: Well, the remedy could be a variety of things. A president -- and I'm not suggesting remotely that there's any basis, but you're asking, really, theory, what's the remedy? Impeachment is a remedy. After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution, but the principal remedy, George, under our society is to pay a political price.

Now, I don't really trust any Congressional Republican to hold Bush accountable for anything. They've supported him on just about every front from the beginning of his first term. And Specter gives himself a pretty big out by saying that he's "not suggesting remotely that there's any basis" yet. But for him to say something this big, even mentioning impeachment, is significant. It's significant because it's so hard to back down from. If the program is illegal, he's saying, impeachment is an answer. As Judd at Think Progress notes, the Congressional Research Service has basically already said that it was illegal. This is a major tipping point.

Tags: Republicans (all tags)

Comments

13 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Follow-on

Before we get all exited, note that Specter's last phrase is the more likely outcome:

. . . but the principal remedy, George, under our society is to pay a political price.

That said, Specter may have just warned the Republicans to clean their own house, or the people will evict them in '06.

by rba 2006-01-15 06:09AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Follow-on

Yes, the real opening Specter gives us is the last line: "the principal remedy... is to pay a political price."

What political price? The denial of confirmation for Alito. Here is a president who broke the law, claims he is above the law, and wants to appoint someone who is willing to say he is above the law.

Bush should not be rewarded with a confirmation of Alito. He should pay a political price, as Specter says. His nomination of Alito should be rejected.

Thge Dems, if they ever find their backbone, can use Specter's own words against him in the Alito debate. Whether they laid a glove on Alito in the committee hearings is irrelevant. They have 45 votes, and can filibuster if they simply decide to do so, and Specter's words give them ample justification.

by Alan S 2006-01-15 06:49AM | 0 recs

permalink

Impeachment Hearings Are All We Need

There isn't any likelihood that Bush will actually get impeached, but the hearings will be a terrific platform leading in to the 2008 campaign.

by Gary Boatwright 2006-01-15 06:53AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Impeachment Hearings Are All We Need

There you go. We now also have the Republican head of the judiciary committee saying that impeachment would theoretically make sense. Any time the GOP attacks us, we can now quote Specter.

by Scott Shields 2006-01-15 07:35AM | 0 recs

permalink

Your wording is wrong

There is no chance that Bush will be convicted (that would require 67 senators, which means a dozen or more Republicans). He is impeached the moment the House votes to hold hearings (which only requires a majority of the House). Clinton was impeached, for example. He was not removed from office, however. Bush probably will be impeached but not convicted.

by Geotpf 2006-01-16 01:40AM | 0 recs

permalink

Spector will talk, do nohing.

Remember this is "pro choice" Arlen we are talking about. They will put the screws on him and he will back down.

See his further comments with as reported by the AP:

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

by molly bloom 2006-01-15 08:38AM | 0 recs

permalink

Bush doesn't have anything to worry about

W isn't in any trouble, at least not from Specter. The Bushies are the only reason Specter is still in office, and they keep him on a short leash.

by bluenc 2006-01-15 08:49AM | 0 recs

permalink

A major tipping point?

I don't think so. It's just expectation management. Specter expresses some vague concerns and in later hearings will dutifully "discover" that there is no there there and that was all much ado about nothing.

by Fifi 2006-01-15 12:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Arlen is Lying

Last year, we all saw how that scabby-headed bastard sucked up to The Reverend Dobson just to keep his Judiciary Chairmanship. Last week we saw the payoff. Why would anyone take this creep seriously?

by bhelverson 2006-01-15 02:58PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Arlen is Lying

way off base.....you don't make fun of somebody who's fighting hodgkin's disease, pal....

by bluenc 2006-01-15 10:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

We've got nothing so far

Warrantless wiretapping in defense of the country will not persuade the public to impeach Bush. We haven't reached a tipping point here at all. What's needed is evidence showing Bush illegaly spied on Americans not for national security reasons but for political gain. That's the straw that breaks the camels back! Until then, this issue alone does nothing to motivate the public to oppose Bush and favor Democrats. Look what the public has tolerated so far from Bush! Misleading the country to war in Iraq, the deficit, corruption, incompetence, cronyism, the dirtiest Presidential campaign in US history, torture, outing CIA agents, etc, etc. (not to mention the marriage amendment and the war on science.)But the one thing the public can't stand is warrantless wiretapping in defense of the country! It doesn't fly people!As someone who has opposed Bush from day one I say a little spying on Americans can be a good thing in certain circumstances; Timothy McVeigh, the uni-bomber...etc. So for this issue to tip the scales in favor of impeachment you need to demonstrate the President had a malicious political motive. Right now can anybody say who the president spied on and why he avoided the courts? Nope. I don't see a tipping point. I wish I could but so far this issue isn't going to do it.

by PLANE1 2006-01-16 06:24AM | 0 recs

permalink

Specter is making a point

that is all too meaningless...

Now if the Judiciary Chairman in the House (Sensenbrenner) had said it, it would worth something.

Problem is half of the GOP in the House aint going for impeachment. (their district are solidly red and they'd get tossed in a primary) Of the 100 or so who recognize the real peril (their district could go blue in 2006), they risk the same primary problems and do not need a right wing attack in the primary and a left wing attack in the general

Rehnquist was right, you need divided government to impeach

by kmwray 2006-01-16 06:31AM | 0 recs

permalink

Specter Opens Possibility of Impeachment

The word impeachment comes out of the mouth of those who want to gain political security. The spying issue is one that all "Politically Correct Americans" are against, whether Red or Blue. Specter positions himself purple with this comment. Not sure too many Americans even know about "domestic surveillance," or even believe that this President could do such a dastardly thing.
The ignorant will label it political deception and the wise will sit in desperation as the ignorant have the majority vote. The political landscape of "Pro Life" and "Wade vs. Roe" are miniscule compared to this. It is a movement toward a police state and those of us that realize it can only sit and watch the loss of FREEDOM that our forefathers shed blood for. It is an American Tragedy! God Saves Us, from ourselves.

by mmartinmarie 2006-01-23 10:28AM | 0 recs