IMPEACHMENT? Okay, damnit!

See AMERICAblog -- for this story... What follows below is an excerpt(MY EMPH.) of an excerpt (from Kevin Drum's blog).

...Bush signed an order allowing the NSA to spy on US citizens without a warrant.

This is AGAINST THE LAW... the law forbids warrantless surveillance of US citizens, and it provides procedures to be followed in emergencies

Bush's order is arguably UNCONSTITUTIONAL as well: it seems to violate the fourth amendment...

I think that IMPEACHMENT is a trauma for the country, and that it should only be considered in extreme cases. Moreover, I think that the fact that Clinton was impeached raises the bar...

And for a President to order violations of the law meets my criteria for impeachment... This is exactly what got Nixon in trouble: he ordered his subordinates to obstruct justice... (I)t's not as though warrants are hard to get, or the law makes no provision for emergencies. Bush could have followed the law had he wanted to. He chose to set it aside...If the New York Times report is true, then Bush should be IMPEACHED.

John [link], over at
AMERICAblog agrees...
I concur, Herb.