Interesting story, but anyone who thinks Congress if going to impeach the president with less than a year to go before the next election is chewin' locoweed. McClellan's comment is being interpreted through some rose colored glasses. He certainly doesn't heap praise on the man, but when you examine the words there no there, there.

Scott McClellan may prove to be the canary in the coal mine, if his remarks receive adequate exposure. That's why this piece is important: this story needs oxygen, and deserves more eyeballs than one news cycle's worth. Whether the comparison to Dean turns out to be hyperbole depends entirely upon what, if anything, Congress does.

Wow! Great argument for impeachment--though no less than I'd expect of Nichols who is a terrific writer and passionate proponent for progressive values. I especially liked the information about the Nixon articles of impeachment and the connection to Conyers. Very interesting. And I have to agree with both Nichols and Pingree that Congress must subpoina McClellan in light of this new information.

Author explains why he thinks Bush should be impeached based on the revelation they knowingly and illegally exposed Plame as a CIA agent. He does an excellent job of backing up his opinion by comparing it to Nixon's impeachment.

The problem is that this is 2007, not 1975. Today’s Americans lack the political will and courage to impeach anyone. After all, this is the electorate which thought Bush was a refreshing change after that liar Clinton. An electorate which didn’t want to be bothered with anything so mundane as politics. An electorate which let the media do their thinking for them.

the story almost presupposes in its potential follow-thru consequences, not simply the truth of what it quotes from mcclellan, but also presupposes the context within which it was said and that we haven't seen yet. the statement seems too small to carry by itself such a heavy load as impeachment, etc. the comparison about dean and nixon would seem appropriate if all the suppositions come to pass.

This is an explosive story akin to the Pentagon Papers or the infamous 15 minutes of deleted Nixon tapes. The White House press spokesperson, a Bush loyalist, admits that the President and Vice President provided him with false information, covering up the felonious outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. As Nichols so astutely notes, McClelland has fessed up to actions that the Judiciary has previously found to be impeachable offenses. I am astonished that the major TV networks have failed to cover this story at all. Kudos to the nation for having the courage to tell its readers the truth. I have never given a perfect rating to any story before, but this one is clearly deserving. I hope the rest of the media will pick up this ... More »

The first of the reviewers (above) of this opinion piece has made the crucial argument: this Plame matter may have serious consequences "ONLY IF [the author's] REMARKS RECEIVE ADEQUATE EXPOSURE". Well, we may be certain that it will decidedly NOT happen if it is left to the mainstream media or the Congress, the efforts of a few members of the Congress notwithstanding. First, there will certainly be no impeachment effort launched during the final 11 months of the Cheney/Bush administration - - unless Cheney declares a police state, dismisses the Congress, nullifies the Constitution, and calls off the 2008 election, in which case a popular uprising could possibly ensue. But the press will probably sympathize with the White House ... More »