I essentially agree with Megan McArdle's view on this. Whatever the legal pros and cons of attempting the impeachment, it would occupy the entirety of Congress right up to and including the 2008 election.
More productive things can be done with that time, both in electoral terms (there's nothing further to be gained at the ballot box from an impeachment than is already available from Bush's own doings) and in practical, actually-doing-good-by-the-nation terms (not that we'll see any of that coming out before 2009 anyway).
If Congress finds irrefutable proof of illegal activity - and I suspect they will - then I have no problem with the Bush Administration being impeached. I believe it is important that the legislative is very very energetic and reasserts their sovereignty over the executive so that any future expansionist executive's have a tonne of precedents to climb over. I would not mind if bill passing came to a complete halt and the legislative spent their entire time investigating the Bush Administration.
The problem is that the legislative in the last six years, as per exception governance, has been so weak and has enabled and accelerated executive rule. They have passed legislation that enables arbitrary governance from the executive and a trampling of liberties. The legislative is one step ahead of the executive at this stage though as electoral will was forced on them in 2006.
It is a pretty crummy state of affairs.
Comments