I originally called this post "An encouraging sign for the future of the republic," but that got no response, so I changed it to "future of the nation." Still no response. So I changed it again.
A front-page post by kos about the upcoming Army, Navy, Air Force (and perhaps) Marine Times calling for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is certainly unprecedented. But it is a great deal more than that. I originally intended to leave a comment on kos's thread, but I believe that it requires a more thorough discussion.
There is no doubt in my mind that once Congressional hearings begin under a Democratic Congress (assuming we get over the vote-stealing hurdle), impeachment will once more be on the table. Even without WH documents subpoenaed by the Congress (the turning over of which will be denied on the grounds of executive privelege or state secrets, or both), enough evidence will surface from other testimony to warrant the impeachment of Bush, Cheney and Gonzales, for starters.
One of my great fears (shared by Larisa
)is that a cornered Bush Maladministration might simply refuse to cooperate with impeachment proceedings, even a conviction; claiming plenary power under the "unitary executive" theory, it might order all branches of the executive, including the Attoreney General and DoD, not to enforce any such Congressional or even judicial decision. My worry was: under these circumstances, who would carry out the order of Congress?
Nixon, when cornered, was advised by Al Haig: "There's the military." Given martial law as a last resort, Nixon folded.
It seems to me that in this editorial, those closest to the military are putting the administration on notice that it will not cooperate unconditionally with orders from the executive branch.
Is this too much to hope for?