May 14, 2013
— DrewM Well, this all escalated quickly.
In case youÂ’re having trouble keeping up hereÂ’s a quick rundown of the scandals engulfing the beleaguered Obama administration. IÂ’ve put them in order of what I think is their seriousness.
1) Obama Sics IRS On Conservatives and Jews
You heard about the Jewish angle, right?
This is the most serious of scandals because itÂ’s an abuse of power that clearly crossing any concept of decency and legality. The idea of using one of the most powerful domestic agencies to deter political activities is such a clear abuse of power, it was once included in an Article of Impeachment.
It’s also the easiest scandal to explain to people. The first reaction of many idiots, er, low information voters is, “they all do it”. Well, they don’t and people know this because unless you’re a left wing loon, everyone hates/fears the IRS. Even idiots, er, low information voters, would remember if this type of police state activity were “business as usual”.
It’s also damning because the scandal has blown up from “some idiots in Cincinnati” to “top officials in DC” and from “giving some groups a hard time” to “illegally sharing information with liberal activists groups”.
One thing to keep in mind…liberals keep saying that the IRS is in a tough spot with enforcing the rules as written. Bull. Nothing about the “rules” made them focus only on political opponents of the administration or leak confidential documents to leftwing groups. Don’t buy the spin.
2) ObamaÂ’s Health And Human Services Secretary Is Extorting Money From HealthCare Industry To Support ObamaCare
This is a little bit of a dark horse but I think it ranks higher than most people seem to at the moment.
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is hitting up companies she has tremendous control over in order to circumvent the will of Congress.
Sure some of these companies are willing co-conspirators because contrary to the image Obama is trying to portray, ObamaCare is a boon for health insurance companies. But there are other health care stakeholders, like hospitals and medical device manufacturers who arenÂ’t as fond of ObamaCare but might be able to trade of a few bucks for a favorable waiver or ruling fromÂ…Kathleen Sebelius.
The Obama administration says they need the money because Congress wonÂ’t give them more. WellÂ…tough. Inaction is a policy choice as much as action is. Congress doesnÂ’t want HHS to have money to do certain things. ThatÂ’s not something Obama gets to decide to ignore by selling government favors for private money.
3) Super-Scandal Obama
I making this one up because Obama ‘s IRS and HHS scandals are connected through ObamaCare. Like Super Storm Sandy was a big storm that combined with other elements (location, tides, etc0 to magnify it’s effects, the nexus of the IRS and ObamaCare mean that when these two scandals interact, they have more power than either alone.
ObamaCare is still unpopular, well over budget and pretty much doomed to failure. Add in a corrupt and political active IRS getting involved in peopleÂ’s health care and (at least the appearance) of HHS selling ObamaCare indulgences, you have a powerful Super Scandal that a smart opposition party could use to do real damage to ObamaCare.
4) Benghazi Cover-Up
I know itÂ’s odd to push this one so far down the list since it has a body count but ultimately, Benghazi is a political scandal that lacks the legal jeopardy of the IRS and HHS scandals.
To me the biggest issues in Benghazi are:
A-The incompetence of not only failing to increase protection for our facility (despite numerous requests from those on the ground) as the security environment deteriorated during the summer of 2012 but the positive decision to reduce security assets available.
B-The “Talking Points” cover-up. Four Americans died not because of what the military did or didn’t do that night but because Hillary Clinton refused to properly manage her department in the months leading up to that night. She then had her hatchet woman ensure that the public was lied to about the information she had available to her in making those decisions.
Worst of all, she sold out a key concept of America…freedom of speech. She did this by knowingly lying about the role a “Youtube video” in the attack. By throwing an American’s right to produce and disseminate political thought, she took the tyrants way out to save her ass.
C-The lack of foresight by policy makers to have assets on standby on the anniversary of 9/11 is unforgivable. Why was the EuroCom special ops force on a training mission in Croatia and not on a heightened state of alert at a base more conducive to covering a known hot spot like North Africa? Could no one in the White House or the Pentagon look at a calendar, read the news and put 2 and 2 together?
ClintonÂ’s actions clearly render her unfit for the Presidency and Obama should be held to account for the actions of his handpicked Secretary of State and for not ensuring that the Department of Defense was ready to go.
All of that said, Benghazi as bad a failure as it was, is a political scandal lacking the abuse of law the other two have.
5) AP Phone Records
Honestly at this point I’m not even sure it’s a scandal. There’s no doubt that someone leaked the interception of a new type of “underwear bomb” to the AP. James Brennan may have made things worse (we don’t know for sure) by telling selected commentators that we had an inside man on the job but that was secondary to the leaking of the operation itself (which was plenty damaging alone).
Why the administration should not investigate who the source of the leak to the AP was is beyond me. I want people who are sworn to keep sensitive secrets to keep them.
There’s been a lot of claims the administration “spied” on the AP or that they “bugged” them but that’s not the claim the AP makes. They said their phone records were accessed (probably via subpoenas) . Well, investigators issue subpoenas for such records every day. The First Amendment protects the rights of news organizations to publish material; it’s not a blanket exemption from all laws.
Keep in mind, it doesnÂ’t appear that the AP is the subject of the investigation. What the DoJ knows is someone leaked information to the AP. The number of people who had access to that information may be relatively large but itÂ’s not infinite. By taking the APÂ’s phone records and matching them to the list of people who called them with the list of people who had access to the information, you can develop a universe of potential suspects.
The AP says it’s a “roadmap” to their reporting operations. I’m more worried about people who leak a “road map” to intelligence operations.
Politically this could be a loser. People tend to not like the press and they do like catching terrorists. When people find out this is about getting to the bottom of who leaked damaging national security information to the press, I think most people we say, “go get the bastards”.
One caveatÂ…we know this administration is power hungry and doesnÂ’t recognize any legal or traditional limits on its powers. Might they have abused the information they gathered? Obviously. So this could turn out to be a bigger deal. But based on what we know now, itÂ’s only a big deal because the press loves to protect themselves and their assumed privileges more than anything. Even more than they love Obama.
Dishonorable mentions:
Fast and Furious/Pigford
They should be bigger deals but for various reasons they simply arenÂ’t.
Maybe now the floodgates are breaking open these two scandals will get a second look.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:19 AM
| Comments (279)
Post contains 1309 words, total size 9 kb.
Posted by: NY Slime Editors at May 14, 2013 06:24 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: Associated Press at May 14, 2013 06:26 AM (Q9qpj)
I know itÂ’s odd to push this one so far down the list since it has a body count but ultimately, Benghazi is a political scandal that lacks the legal jeopardy of the IRS and HHS scandals.
The Benghazi *cover-up* may only be political, but the whole Bengahzi attack should have ended Barack Obama's career immediately.
Imagine if a General had simply refused to take his Army into battle because he "didn't know how long [a conflict] would last." At the very least he'd be removed from duty. In extreme cases (say, where a US Ambassador was murdered and (quite likely) sodomized), he'd probably receive further disciplinary action. In even more extreme cases (say, where he then claimed that the enemy responsible for the attack was not the enemy, thus providing them "aid and comfort"), he'd be dishonorably discharged, at minimum.
Barack Obama sided with Islamic Terrorists over the US Ambassador to Libya. At the bare minimum that should have seen him impeached.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:27 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: Chechen-Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at May 14, 2013 06:27 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Iowa Bob at May 14, 2013 06:28 AM (RJ+Yj)
Posted by: USA at May 14, 2013 06:28 AM (VIaw0)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at May 14, 2013 06:28 AM (DuH+r)
Posted by: Vic at May 14, 2013 06:28 AM (53z96)
Posted by: Michael Moore's Boobs at May 14, 2013 06:29 AM (rCS6C)
Tweet from Bette Midler:
I LOVE THE IRS!!! HOW CAN A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION BE CALLED A NON-PROFIT THAT PROMOTES GENERAL WELFARE??
I think the all capitals adds that certain je ne sais quoi.
Posted by: WalrusRex at May 14, 2013 06:29 AM (XUKZU)
Fast and Furious/Pigford
"They should be bigger deals but for various reasons they simply arenÂ’t."
That whole Birth Certificate kerfuffle ain't looking quite so tinfoiley now, amirite?
Posted by: Jaws at May 14, 2013 06:29 AM (4I3Uo)
Posted by: Baldy at May 14, 2013 06:30 AM (tyDFN)
The CIA will not be silent under Barry's bus.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 06:30 AM (lVPtV)
1. The lies are quite possibly to cover up 'gunrunning' in form of trafficking weapons through Turkey into Syria.
2. Obama is continually lying about his statements in the immediate aftermath in which he called this 'an act of terror' not 'a terrorist act' which is quite a different thing.
3. There is the added complicity by Candy Crowley in 'covering' for Obama by her comment upholding (falsely) Obama's comments in the Romney/Obama debate she 'moderated'
Posted by: onlyme at May 14, 2013 06:31 AM (J4kQ3)
Posted by: JPS at May 14, 2013 06:31 AM (g11mv)
Posted by: LGoPs at May 14, 2013 06:31 AM (g9KEM)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 06:31 AM (XYSwB)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 06:32 AM (eMP2S)
I still think IRS is a squirrel- clumsily released- to distract from Benghazi.
Which tells me how damaging they think Benghazi could be.
Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (SCcgT)
Posted by: Body Builder at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (XYSwB)
Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectal at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: William Teach at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (vRNdo)
Which leads one to wonder what truly horrible calumny she was brewing up at the time.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: GuyfromNH at May 14, 2013 06:34 AM (ILXYI)
Posted by: Baldy at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (tyDFN)
Posted by: Iowa Bob at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (RJ+Yj)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (GVxQo)
5 -
It's important to remember that Watergate did not sink Nixon immediately either. The left was screaming as loud as they could before Nov. '72, and Nixon won in a landslide anyway.
These things take time. It's frustrating when you're in the middle of it, and clearly the big difference between then and now is the participation of the press, but I can't help but be optimistic at this point that we're going to see some good come from all of this.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: BSKB at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (4KWOY)
Posted by: JPS at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (g11mv)
The AP thing is a scandal because the media says so. Scandals can slowly evolve, or they can be declared. This one was declared
I think the media, although they'll never admit it, has finally figured out that sucking Obama's dick ain't helping them stay employed.
Revenues down, credibility down, loss of market share, mass firings, newspapers closing, magazines (literally) being sold at Dollar Menu prices, salary haircuts, big names being shown the door, etc.
Happy talk ain't been putting any gelt in their pockets.
Posted by: @PurpAv at May 14, 2013 06:35 AM (4ckfP)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 06:36 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 06:36 AM (XYSwB)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 10:34 AM (XYSwB)
I'll have to read that, and it seems pretty inflamatory. However- isn't that just one more reason not to send your kid to college?
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:36 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectal at May 14, 2013 06:36 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: WalrusRex at May 14, 2013 06:36 AM (XUKZU)
Posted by: Count de Monet at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (BAS5M)
>>>The most striking thing about Benghazi is that Jamie Gorelick does not appear to have been involved.
***
Heh. No shit. Gorelick to me epitomizes the fact that Democrats never, ever, ever - not even once - get held accountable for anything. EVER.
Posted by: LGoPs at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (g9KEM)
Posted by: Jaime Gorelick at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (vJ+mj)
Posted by: Exceptionally Mediocre at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (ZKGJl)
33 -
If the evidence indicates criminal intent on the part of this administration, impeachments (yes, many) will have to come. Regardless of the outcome in the Senate.
I want to see how Reid got ahold of Romney's tax records.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Pug Mahon at May 14, 2013 06:37 AM (K+mtQ)
Posted by: Tex Lovera at May 14, 2013 06:38 AM (wtvvX)
Fast and Furious/Pigford
"They should be bigger deals but for various reasons they simply arenÂ’t."
Pigford wasn't an Obama thing. That was a CBC push that went through during the infamous Christmas Eve lame duck session; with the help of two Republicans.
Posted by: Vic at May 14, 2013 06:38 AM (53z96)
Tweet from Bette Midler:
I LOVE THE IRS!!! HOW CAN A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION BE CALLED A NON-PROFIT THAT PROMOTES GENERAL WELFARE??
Time for a fun new game: NAME THAT PILL!
I'm going with Dilaudid for the win.
Posted by: Jaws at May 14, 2013 06:38 AM (4I3Uo)
Which leads one to wonder what truly horrible calumny she was brewing up at the time.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 14, 2013 10:34 AM (Q9qpj)
She bailed on defending Duke against the civil claims by the LAX students so even that witless bint knows there are times to throw your cards in and take a hike.
Posted by: Captain Hate at May 14, 2013 06:38 AM (Vn7Sn)
Posted by: rickb223 at May 14, 2013 06:39 AM (KvM9d)
Posted by: Fritz at May 14, 2013 06:39 AM (UzPAd)
Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectal at May 14, 2013 06:39 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: Serious Cat at May 14, 2013 06:39 AM (Qh0T+)
. . . and can we bag the impeachment talk? It ain't gonna happen.
***
Yeah, and Boner is not exactly covering himself with glory. Circumstances have lobbed several softballs right over the plate and he refuses to swing.
Posted by: WalrusRex at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (XUKZU)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (QXlbZ)
It's egregious, preposterous, lewd, lascivious, salacious, outrageous!
Posted by: Jackie Chiles Obama at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (jKWYf)
" (probably via subpoenas) "
You "know" this how?
Subpoenas are specific to person or persons as you well know.
Posted by: Gulermo at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (LaLuv)
Posted by: meh at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (NA9mY)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 06:40 AM (XYSwB)
. . and can we bag the impeachment talk? It ain't gonna happen. The Republicans shot their wad with Billy Jeff. Even if they had enough votes in the Senate to convict (which they don't and won't), the Dims would portray an impeachment effort as evil Rethuglicans going after a Dim president for purely political reasons. And racism. Mostly racism.
No. Just because people will slander you does not mean you don't do what's right. Let them say what they will. It's our timidity about doing what's right that has led to so many problems.
See, what happens is Conservatives (including conservative Republicans) start on a course that is just and right, but then start getting called mean names. Then the Republican portion of that coalition says, "OH NOES! This is hurting us politically!" and they stop. They never bother to think "doesn't stopping show that we agree that we're in the wrong?"
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:41 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:41 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at May 14, 2013 06:41 AM (XYSwB)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:41 AM (+98Gb)
Mika's brain has been replaced by the one on the other end of her Blackberry.
She literally cannot speak without reading what to say at this point.
A real-time puppet.
Stupid scrunt has never even tried to hide her receiving WH talking points.
Mika, looking at Blackberry: "Joe, Valerie said you're wrong on that point."
Beyond disgusting. Completely in the pocket of the administration.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 06:41 AM (lVPtV)
Posted by: Baldy at May 14, 2013 06:42 AM (tyDFN)
Posted by: rickb223 at May 14, 2013 06:42 AM (KvM9d)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 06:43 AM (9Bj8R)
But the MSM has poisoned that well, so give up, right? [sarcasm font]It's OK to back down. The LIV's will still respect you [sarcasm font close]
Posted by: Michael Moore's Boobs at May 14, 2013 06:43 AM (rCS6C)
Posted by: AmishDude at May 14, 2013 06:43 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: jakeman at May 14, 2013 06:43 AM (96M6e)
1Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.
---
You know, i used to find this an amusing piece of hyperbole.
Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (SO2Q8)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (XN0LR)
Where are you going to find one of those?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (O6Tmi)
So Jews are gonna get "Special Handling" under obama. Interesting. And you wonder why that "term" was not caught by anyone in the obama admin- because liberal Jews have no idea what that means, the ignorant sluts
What's beyond "chilling?" 'Cause that's beyond chilling.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (uIz7u)
Where are you going to find one of those?
Sorry, the only smart party is the one involved in all the scandals.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:44 AM (/PCJa)
You know, i used to find this an amusing piece of hyperbole.
Really? I was never engaging in hyperbole.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:45 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: Waldo at May 14, 2013 06:45 AM (sXWmd)
I don't know exactly how the IRS works, but my guess is that there are all kinds of warnings, etc. in place to prevent casual political bias in audits and denying of tax-exempt status.
***
Since this happened at several offices through out the country then either the IRS is completely corrupt or this was directed from the top.
Posted by: WalrusRex at May 14, 2013 06:46 AM (XUKZU)
Imagine how they feel with Choom Boy as their CiC.
If they do go in, and one life is lost...ugh. Can't go there.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 06:46 AM (lVPtV)
Since this happened at several offices through out the country then either the IRS is completely corrupt or this was directed from the top.
Those are not mutually exclusive statements.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:46 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at May 14, 2013 06:47 AM (a33IE)
Posted by: Citation X driver at May 14, 2013 06:47 AM (AVQ2x)
Posted by: blaster at May 14, 2013 06:47 AM (W6bkf)
Posted by: Nate at May 14, 2013 06:48 AM (i3OIF)
I'm going with Dilaudid for the win.
Posted by: Jaws at May 14, 2013 10:38 AM (4I3Uo)
Good guess, I'll submit Retardozine.
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 06:48 AM (+xmn4)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at May 14, 2013 06:48 AM (kENHJ)
Posted by: pep at May 14, 2013 06:48 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Darth Randall at May 14, 2013 06:49 AM (mV8sg)
Obama's a Chicago politician and Cook County Illinois is famous for its very colorful and corrupt politics. Only a fool would think that he was the sole virgin in that whorehouse.
And by 'fool' I mean a lot of voters.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Pirate Scum of Umbar at May 14, 2013 06:49 AM (hLRSq)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:49 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 10:41 AM (+98Gb)
Thanks.
Posted by: polynikes at May 14, 2013 06:49 AM (m2CN7)
None of these are hills to die on. Too hard. The media won't cooperate. Democrats will call us racists.
What is most important is that candidates with an "R" after their names win elections, and the only way they're going to do that is by refusing to dig our heels in on anything. Stay nimble. Adapt to the circumstances, mainly by bowing to every Democrat demand, letting their scandals pass by in silence, and moving ever further to the left. We simply can't afford principles. They might cost us elections.
Once we've done that and won back the Senate and the White House, then we can make a quick jump to the right and all will be well.
Sound like a plan?
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 14, 2013 06:49 AM (CJjw5)
Posted by: pep at May 14, 2013 10:48 AM (6TB1Z)
That won't stop the LIVs from writing it all off as "Both sides do it!!1!".
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 06:50 AM (+xmn4)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies. at May 14, 2013 06:50 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 06:50 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 06:51 AM (XN0LR)
I've always said he looks like the black version of Yanni, minus the awesome hair.
Eric Holder: http://tinyurl.com/b46guco
Yanni: http://tinyurl.com/6m5nycr
Why don't we ever see the two of them together at the same time?!?!
Posted by: EC at May 14, 2013 06:51 AM (GQ8sn)
That depends on your success criteria.
If growing government and confiscating private property is the goal, then it's working just fine thank you.
Posted by: BlearyTruth at May 14, 2013 06:51 AM (uazKL)
I may be a cynic, but there is no way congress will impeach the nation's first black president.
I'm afraid you're right.
Of course, I'm not sure impeachment means anything. Only two impeachments in history, and neither succeeded. The second failed on purely political grounds. That is: no one disputed the facts regarding the articles of impeachment. Democrats just decided their party being in power was more important than the law.
That lead directly to TFG.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:51 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: meh at May 14, 2013 10:40 AM (NA9mY)
Warning, Ace has considered bans over comments considered to be attacks on the Cobloggers.
Posted by: Nate at May 14, 2013 10:48 AM (i3OIF)
That's hardly an attack. It's a sarcastic disagreement with Drew's take on the AP story.
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at May 14, 2013 06:51 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 06:52 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: jwb7605 ([i][u]Let it Burn[/u][/i])[/s][/b] at May 14, 2013 06:52 AM (Qxe/p)
"If you name your party after a historical armed tax revolt you should expect to be audited by the IRS. If you named your club the "Burning Things Unsafely Club" you would expect the fire marshal to show up, right?"
I can't even begin to comprehend the hypocritical stupid in that. Wait, no, I've got it:
"I hate the Tea Party and anything that the Greatest Human Being Who Has Ever Lived Or, Indeed, Will Ever Live does to them is A-OK by me, even if it is a grossly illegal abuse of power."
Posted by: Fart at May 14, 2013 06:52 AM (2aB+q)
Posted by: Waldo at May 14, 2013 06:52 AM (sXWmd)
101 -
I'm going to go with the medication not taken. As in, she stopped.
Simple, but time-tested: Lithium.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 14, 2013 06:52 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:53 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Waldo at May 14, 2013 06:53 AM (sXWmd)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 14, 2013 10:49 AM (CJjw5)
everything except the part about winning the Senate and White House. It still may be a little to soon. We need to weigh our options.
Posted by: polynikes at May 14, 2013 06:53 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: The RNC at May 14, 2013 06:53 AM (XN0LR)
Posted by: cu'chulainn at May 14, 2013 06:53 AM (Vk2CC)
Posted by: jason in phoenix at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (DNED1)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (+98Gb)
Here's what I think.. Obama got caught with his pants down.. maybe literally.
No one has yet to ascertain who in the White House received the flash traffic message from Benghazi at the White House. We need to know what chain that went through. I'm betting either Obama wasn't there or blew it off. (or maybe he was blowing Reggie off.. who knows?)
If we can get someone to testify that Obama was AWOL or blew it off personally, then we have a real scandal. Otherwise, it's merely a FUBAR situation that can be blamed on miscommunications and nameless bureaucrats.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Nate at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (i3OIF)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (KZ5KD)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 14, 2013 10:49 AM (CJjw5)
You know what's really embarrassing?
The fucking retards believe it.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (O6Tmi)
From this point on will the AP be more likely to be critical of Obama?
It's our fault. If we hadn't made him angry, he wouldn't have hit us.
Posted by: The Associate Press at May 14, 2013 06:54 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at May 14, 2013 06:55 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Decaf at May 14, 2013 06:55 AM (z+Ems)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 14, 2013 06:55 AM (jucos)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:55 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 06:55 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies. at May 14, 2013 06:56 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Juicer at May 14, 2013 06:56 AM (VpZSG)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at May 14, 2013 10:55 AM (7ObY1)
Spoken like a true tax cheat.
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 06:56 AM (+xmn4)
Posted by: Barack Millhouse Obama at May 14, 2013 06:56 AM (jucos)
Posted by: Waldo at May 14, 2013 06:56 AM (sXWmd)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 06:57 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: AmishDude at May 14, 2013 06:57 AM (T0NGe)
It's not the same kind of "special handling" enjoyed by David Gregory, I'm sure.
Posted by: mrp at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (HjPtV)
But if they had no warrant then someone should go to JAIL.
Posted by: Vic at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (53z96)
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (a33IE)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies. at May 14, 2013 10:56 AM (VtjlW)
I think I'm starting to get burned out. Which, I think, is part of what TFG is hoping for. I'm on the side of him purposely releasing the info about the IRS scandal and the AP bugging scandal- specifically to "saturation bomb" us with scandals just so we can't keep up.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (/PCJa)
You got a direct line to the boss man? Because "getting attacked" (AKA "being gently mocked" to those of us not wearing our pants up around our nipples) is part and parcel of co-blogging here, and has been for years.
Jesus Christ collecting lawnmower catalogs, man, that was an "attack?"
Really? Who are you, Ned Flanders?
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (Q9qpj)
Honestly, it sounds more like a straw man. Granted, Boehner and Cantor aren't going to be on the cover of He-Man Quarterly any time soon, but I expect that lots of Pubs will want to take this opportunity to put a stake in the heart of Barry's little socialist putsch. I guess we'll see.
Posted by: pep at May 14, 2013 06:58 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (gvWL9)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (9Bj8R)
What I don't get about how people view all this is, why is it necessary to tie this back to trying to GET THE BLACK GUY IN THE WHITE HOUSE???
Seriously you guys, you can chip away at all the Presidents men. You don't have to start at the top. History tells us that.
Figure out who in the Administration had the direct line to the IRS twits. LEAVE BARACK OBAMA OUT OF IT!
Or risk having it all fall apart because, racist.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (TOk1P)
When we seize back power, we need to build Motte and Baileys. Throw them up every couple of miles across the entire land. It worked for the Normans and it will work for us, too.
------------------------
Fixed fortifications are monuments to man's stupidity.
Posted by: Gen. George S. Patton at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (CJjw5)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (8sCoq)
Cuba is lovely this time of year, I hear.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 06:59 AM (lVPtV)
If I were in charge of a committee investigating Benghazi I would first request the presence or subpoena if necessary, the special ops team that was ready to deploy on a rescue mission to Benghazi.
I would ask one question. Who ordered you to stand down?
And then I would subpoena that person. And so on and so until I got to Obama. Of course, he would have had someone thrown under the bus by that time.
Posted by: polynikes at May 14, 2013 07:00 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 07:00 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (a33IE)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (7ObY1)
They should be bigger deals but for various reasons they simply arenÂ’t
Example Number One of the current strength of the Ed "Poppin' Fresh" Morrissey "conservatives."
Despite massive law-breaking and a number of dead victims, we have to go all "in fairness..." on Choom Boy and hope maybe the next friggin' felony causes him some discomfort.
This really bugs me. All the stuff about the "rule of law" I was taught as a child now proves to be so much bullshit, when we (and I mean some commenters, too) decide we have to be concerned about what some other liberal felons think of our actions.
NOT impeaching President Historic First© is racism, straight up. It means we are judging him as above the law because of his skin color.
Posted by: MrScribbler at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (mHrip)
http://tinyurl.com/cr8h2bz
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (uIz7u)
Posted by: Minnfidel at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (dedTA)
Posted by: Nate at May 14, 2013 10:54 AM (i3OIF)
ace said he does not consider disagreement with the post as an attack.....it's personal insults against a cob he has a problem with.
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (X6akg)
I am disappointed I didn't hear Rush or Quinn mention the IRS Jewish angle... Drudge has it on his page, but not very prominent. There is something viscerally disgusting about that.
The Obama base is composed of self-hating Jews or stone-cold anti-Semites. They'd line up to be TFGs Einsatzgruppen or Sonderkommandos in a moment.
Posted by: Helen Thomas at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 07:01 AM (9Bj8R)
When you realize the whole thing (yes, even impeachment) is run by the lawyers for the lawyers, you realize that you won't get justice and if you're lucky, you'll get an application of the law.
-------------------------
If The Lawyers and The Jew Bankers ever form an alliance, we are truly doomed.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (CJjw5)
God bless them and comfort their poor families.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (lVPtV)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Tami at May 14, 2013 11:01 AM (X6akg)
Correct. There is world of difference with snarking on the content of a cob's post and calling one a "faggot".
Posted by: EC at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (KZ5KD)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 07:02 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: imp at May 14, 2013 07:03 AM (VoUg8)
Posted by: jwb7605 ([i][u]Let it Burn[/u][/i])[/s][/b] at May 14, 2013 07:03 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at May 14, 2013 07:03 AM (a33IE)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 14, 2013 07:03 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 07:03 AM (gvWL9)
Posted by: Uncle Milty at May 14, 2013 07:04 AM (YsFN3)
Posted by: imp at May 14, 2013 07:04 AM (VoUg8)
All right. I want this to be a fair fight when disagreeing with the cobloggers.
I want none of this namecalling like dumbass. Or none of this like half tard monkey. Or none of this like twitter pussy. Or incompetent gutter wipe.
Now lets have a clean fight. Ding Ding.
Posted by: polynikes at May 14, 2013 07:04 AM (m2CN7)
Caption on video:
Not so green: Obama administration allows wind-energy plants to kill eagles despite federal law (May 14)
Willy-nilly!
Posted by: LC LaWedgie at May 14, 2013 07:04 AM (2iU3x)
It was a bad idea against Clinton and it is a bad idea now. The MSM is finally committing a few acts of journalism. Watch them fall into Protect Barry mode immediately and irrevocably if we try to impeach.
Should he be impeached? Yes.
Will he be impeached? No
Will trying to impeach him hurt us? Yes.
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at May 14, 2013 11:01 AM..................This! Times eleventy. And I would even throw in an uptwinkle for good measure. I've only heard a few voices on the right side of the aisle mention this. But it's obviously getting attention because it's not something that's thrown out everyday. It's a gigantic mistake to do so.
Posted by: Minnfidel at May 14, 2013 07:04 AM (dedTA)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: USA at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (VIaw0)
That would explain it.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (Q9qpj)
Disparate treatment of FOIA fee waiver requests based on political position. These guys just can't help it. The politics creeps into everything.
Posted by: Haiku Guy at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (wKFky)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 10:58 AM (/PCJa)
I've been commenting for a while that the volume of obviously corrupt bullshit that the JEF and his minions toss out there can't be by accident and it works to stymie the country on moving ahead on anything productive.
Posted by: Captain Hate at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (Vn7Sn)
Posted by: toby928 at May 14, 2013 07:05 AM (evdj2)
Will he be impeached? No
Will trying to impeach him hurt us? Yes.
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at May 14, 2013 11:01 AM (7ObY1)
Would impeachment deliver positive change? No.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let it Burn) at May 14, 2013 11:03 AM (Qxe/p)
What are our options other than letting him get away with it or hoping for an errant meteor?
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 07:06 AM (+xmn4)
EPA waives fee requests for friendly groups, denies conservative groups
http://tinyurl.com/czldp24
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at May 14, 2013 07:06 AM (X6akg)
Well that settles it.. who needs principles. Only the ends matter.
Posted by: meh at May 14, 2013 07:06 AM (NA9mY)
8 Drudge editor Joseph Curl: ‘CIA source says still one more shoe to drop’ for Obama administration.
Hope it's a huge boot to his neck
Posted by: Marybeth at May 14, 2013 07:06 AM (Ks0w4)
That's some kind of drink, right?
It's been done already. They were called National Guard Armories, built after the Civil War in response to things like the NYC draft riots and Clement Van Landingham. They looked like forts, and for quite a while they were.
Step 1 in the modern federalization of state militias, which went on and on. And, oh, they worked, too. But even in the North they were seen as the heavy hand of the New Union government. You can still hear, anywhere, how they were seen in the South.
Posted by: comatus at May 14, 2013 07:06 AM (JNUY4)
Posted by: Yip at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (/jHWN)
Posted by: Wonkish Rogue, now with 50% more protein at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (8iy5P)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (+98Gb)
101Time for a fun new game: NAME THAT PILL!
I'm going with Dilaudid for the win.Posted by: Jaws at May 14, 2013 10:38 AM (4I3Uo)
---
Gardisil?
Posted by: Michelle Bachmann at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (SO2Q8)
Posted by: WVinMN at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (4Pleu)
Posted by: Darth Randall at May 14, 2013 07:07 AM (mV8sg)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 07:08 AM (8sCoq)
This just occurred to me:
The President really is above the law. He's not supposed to be. I'm pretty sure the founders are spinning so quickly in their graves that we could use them to power the entire continent. But it's true.
Impeachment is supposed to be about the law. It's "political" in that it is (by necessity) a political process (the House votes to Impeach, the Senate tries the case), but it was supposed to be a real threat to make sure Presidents remember that they're not above the law.
Now, we don't dare use it because "racism" and "it will hurt us politically." Rather than pursue actual justice and hold the President to actual standards (really- he should be impeached just on the number of times he's been held in Contempt of Court) means that the President has become King. He may be a temporary king who will be replaced by another one in about 4 years, but the President is King.
Maybe the mot and baileys would be a good idea, if as symbolism if nothing else.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 07:08 AM (/PCJa)
Posted by: RioBravo at May 14, 2013 07:08 AM (eEfYn)
Not trying to impeach a guy who uses the IRS as a weapon seems more dangerous to me.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 11:03 AM ................If there's a smoking gun, yes. If not it's stupid to even bring it up right now. The press and the WH are suddenly not on as great of terms and they are starting to cover some of these scandals. Let Barry wallow in his shit filled diaper. But unless there is evidence he directed and or knew about it I think it' s a horrible idea. The left and the press (redundant terms I know) will rally around the JEF and we'll be right back to where we started.
Posted by: Minnfidel at May 14, 2013 07:08 AM (dedTA)
We can't discuss those here. Suffice it to say, lots of people had better hope to hell that he can be impeached. Because that is the constitutional remedy we have.
Posted by: comatus at May 14, 2013 07:09 AM (JNUY4)
It took Democrats 2 1/2 years to get Nixon and this was with tapes with the president's voice authorizing the coverup. It was aided by one of the senior FBI officials, Mark Felt, and helped by the fact that Dems had large majorities in the House and Senate. 56-43-1 in Senate and 241 to 192 in the House. Hugh Scott (Sen. Minority Leader) helped send Nixon out the door when he declared Republican Senators would not block the impeachment.
If you are going to impeach someone and make it stick, go after Eric Holder who has been Obama's protector. Bill Clinton was handicapped when an outsider Janet Reno took the office of AG. Most LIV don't care about the Atty Gen. but this office can extend a whole lot of protection from investigation. Notably, look at what happened to Nixon after his loyalist Mitchell left the DOJ--others such as William Ruckelshaus weren't going to hold the bag for Tricky Dick.
Posted by: wg at May 14, 2013 07:09 AM (DFHva)
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 11:06 AM (+xmn4
As been pointed out one option is to keep sounding all this, let the LIVs stew in scandalous shit for a few more years then reap the gains that come from a discredited party. It's a long shot admittedly, but less so (I think) than impeachment is.
Posted by: tsrblke (work)[/i][/b][/u][/s] at May 14, 2013 07:10 AM (ULkyQ)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at May 14, 2013 10:55 AM (+98Gb)
And all before his first term was up. Who said he was a slacker??
Posted by: dananjcon at May 14, 2013 07:10 AM (jvd3N)
Posted by: Vic at May 14, 2013 07:10 AM (53z96)
Posted by: Ragamuffin at May 14, 2013 07:10 AM (fzFF6)
Posted by: jwb7605 ([i][u]Let it Burn[/u][/i])[/s][/b] at May 14, 2013 07:10 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: thunderb at May 14, 2013 07:11 AM (NzlD2)
Now maybe you're scoring this solely from a "what gains traction from the proles" angle. That's fine. But Benghazi is important because it shows how craven and self-serving this leadership is.
Posted by: Holmes at May 14, 2013 07:11 AM (zwxCM)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 07:12 AM (gvWL9)
Posted by: Darth Randall at May 14, 2013 10:49 AM (mV8sg)
As has been pointed out, they don't have to. They just have to keep "impeachment" on the table, no matter what. Keep TFG sucking back Kools (and Reggie) and snorting coke off the Resolute desk.
Posted by: Helen Thomas at May 14, 2013 07:12 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: toby928 at May 14, 2013 07:12 AM (evdj2)
Don't need to impeach Holder. He has a contempt citation already. File a new one with the Washington circuit court for perjury/lying to congress in FnF. They are required by law to then form a Grand Jury to indict him.
Posted by: Vic at May 14, 2013 07:12 AM (53z96)
Posted by: pep at May 14, 2013 07:12 AM (6TB1Z)
129The AP is not really a nexus of conservative reporting. So the thing that stands out for me is did the administration just backstab one of their foot soldiers. From this point on will the AP be more likely to be critical of Obama?
---
Hell NO
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin of AP at May 14, 2013 07:13 AM (SO2Q8)
question... Do they have to have a judge sign off on the subpoena. ?
Posted by: willow at May 14, 2013 07:13 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: RioBravo at May 14, 2013 11:08 AM (eEfYn)
Except for that one time Bin Laden was killed. I heard Obama was directly controlling the soldier with an xbox controller and taking the shot himself by proxy.
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 07:13 AM (+xmn4)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 07:13 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: joncelli at May 14, 2013 07:14 AM (RD7QR)
Debating with a Lefty, a case study from last night:
Her: The Senate is going to vote an important bill regulating the SEC to prevent all the speculating and sub prime usury crap. The banks get richer and the middle class eats it.
Me: I wish they (SEC) would enforce the laws and regulations already on the books. Congress' attempts to fix things usually have hidden consequences that take years or more to show up.
The laws were deregulated under Reagan and it has finally caught up with us. They were fine for generations before... Since Great Depression, brought on by much the same and the Great Recession. Time to reinstall those old rules that worked!!!
[bait the hook]
Like Glass-Steagall separation of banking and investments? I agree.
yes!
She descibes herself as a dyes-in-the-wool Liberal, very passionate about politics, very informed, and very adamant on her positions. Like the Citizens United decision must be repealed via amendment.
Posted by: Count de Monet at May 14, 2013 07:14 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: goy at May 14, 2013 07:14 AM (QsFws)
Posted by: Jones in CO at May 14, 2013 07:14 AM (8sCoq)
not enter into it.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 11:12 AM.......Of course. That's why I think unless the hearings and or investigations have a smoking gun I think it's foolish to bring it up until then. There's no point in giving the left and press lackeys a rallying point.
Posted by: Minnfidel at May 14, 2013 07:15 AM (dedTA)
I've been hearing talk of impeachment. None of these scandals will result in impeachment--wait, let me qualify that: if the GOP enjoys a major 2010-like blowout in 2014, some of the more impulsive and grandstanding Republican House members, flush with victory, may view this as a mandate to go after the President for reals, but I'm telling you here and now it would be a wasted effort, doomed from the start, one that would damage the chances of whomever we nominate to go against Hillary in 2016.
The MSM, although peeved at the AP scandal, will soon come back home and start doing their real job again, which is to cover for their beloved, meaning that the vast majority of Americans would not hear or see even a small part of the truth and even if they did, so what? 'They all do it, right?' Or at least that would be the majority response. In case you've haven't noticed, the President's popularity numbers have barely moved since all this came out.
Bottom line: the first Black American President will not be--like Nixon--faced with the choice of resignation or the certainty of a successful impeachment. His failures will be buried or obfuscated. History books will paint him as a saint. The best we can do right now is use those scandals to keep his Administration (and the Democratic Party) on the defensive, hopping around in frantic attempts to put out the various fires, thus limiting the damage they might do if given time and room to govern.
Posted by: troyriser at May 14, 2013 07:16 AM (vtiE6)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at May 14, 2013 07:16 AM (+x8q5)
Posted by: tsrblke (work) at May 14, 2013 11:10 AM (ULkyQ)
I've no faith that the LIVs can stew in anything. It's all dismissed with "They're all corrupt!" with the throwing up of the hands and resumed ignorance.
Posted by: Heralder at May 14, 2013 07:16 AM (+xmn4)
Posted by: Wonkish Rogue, now with 50% more protein at May 14, 2013 07:16 AM (r2mIz)
Posted by: toby928 at May 14, 2013 07:16 AM (evdj2)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at May 14, 2013 07:18 AM (+x8q5)
Courts dispense process, not justice. If any justice happens, its strictly coincidental.
Posted by: @PurpAv at May 14, 2013 07:18 AM (4ckfP)
Posted by: Bigby's Whistling Fingers at May 14, 2013 07:19 AM (oQ9Vj)
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at May 14, 2013 07:19 AM (a33IE)
OutFront tonight: CNN's Brian Todd has the story.
typical, The WH is Never responsible for anything.
Posted by: willow at May 14, 2013 07:19 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at May 14, 2013 07:19 AM (kENHJ)
Time to reopen the book on the GM/Chrysler shakedown by the UAW, as managed by Obama...
http://bit.ly/hTqHJ6
That is to say - the media should actually report on this for the first time... Posted by: goy
Absolutely not. That would give them exactly what they want. "This is old news and an obvious witchhunt."
You don't topple someone with old scandals that didn't work in the first place. You use the new scandals that are emerging daily.
Posted by: pep at May 14, 2013 07:21 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: NukemHill at May 14, 2013 07:24 AM (7WLzC)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at May 14, 2013 07:25 AM (ZSnCv)
Posted by: Donavo nPfeiffer at May 14, 2013 07:26 AM (jBIzT)
Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at May 14, 2013 07:26 AM (sojHv)
Thorazine for second!
Has Obama's man juice been reduced to pill form yet? If so, I'm going with that. If not, and Bette has been drinking straight from the tap....so to speak...I don't believe that's grounds for immediate disqualification.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at May 14, 2013 07:27 AM (0IhFx)
Four U. S. troops killed by a road side bomb in A-stan today.
God bless them and comfort their poor families.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 14, 2013 11:02 AM (lVPtV)
Bring them home NOW
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 14, 2013 11:02 AM (9Bj8R)
I remember when that was the siren call of the left - you know, back before dissent became the Highest Form of Treason.
I guess they're back to being "baby killers" again.
Posted by: Helen Thomas at May 14, 2013 07:27 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: MaureenTheTemp at May 14, 2013 07:30 AM (DLUX7)
Posted by: toby928 at May 14, 2013 07:30 AM (evdj2)
Posted by: phil at May 14, 2013 07:31 AM (lB/5N)
And because of the absolute proof that the POTUS was involved in Fast and Furious: The Stimulus he wrote financed it, and THE POTUS HAD TO CHANGE THE POLICY OF THE BATFE IN ORDER FOR FAST AND FURIOUS TO OCCUR
By the way as far as scandals go Reverend Wright and the Black Panther intimidation squad are peeking out from under the bus. Gangwalker is also waving "Hi". Say maybe the MFM could find Obamao's drug dealer while they're at it. Maybe the LA Times could release that video tape they're sitting on.
Posted by: An Observation at May 14, 2013 07:32 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: Dr. Mr. Badman at May 14, 2013 07:40 AM (MlqTY)
Any. body.
Absolute means to absolute fear and absolute revenge for any kind of anyone who says anything like the truth to any reporter.
Of COURSE they are not looking to protect national security by finding the leaker. It's a pretext with an immediate and longer-run practical purpose.
The first is to punish the AP for getting out ahead of Obamy's story and Obamy's best spin with best-for Obamy timing...
The second to have a tighter grip on methods and means of information flow to the AP, and to get back at anyone at all who has or would or could cross them.
Posted by: SarahW at May 14, 2013 07:51 AM (LYwCh)
Posted by: vikings fan at May 14, 2013 07:51 AM (7alS3)
I like the scorecard idea, but this was kind of inadequate.
First of all, it completely missed the notion - one that would hit home with anyone - that our people were apparently abandoned in the field. The military angle is still very much under investigation - we really don't know whether troops could have arrived to help in time, except we DO know that there were a few in Tripoli who were literally about to get on a plane, who were told to stand down. There are teams that are supposed to have a 4 hr response time, but they were not even called. The idea that the military couldn't have had any kind of response is BS. Secondly, people don't like to be lied to, and they might be waking up to the obvious fact that they are STILL being handed out a string of outrageously obvious lies. So the Benghazi bit is pretty inadequate.
The list could get pretty long, but Fast and Furious has even resulted in the first cabinet member in history being held in contempt of Congress, along with an illegal invocation of executive privilege. Then there were the illegal recess appointments without a recess. But how about the "historic" lawsuit(s?) against the DHS, where her employees are suing because they're being told not to follow the law?
Posted by: Optimizer at May 14, 2013 08:16 AM (Mxt9o)
Posted by: mkn at May 14, 2013 08:20 AM (SXu8/)
Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at May 14, 2013 08:34 AM (X2SbM)
The scorecard idea is a great one and we should all keep a copy in our wallet for the next election.
But there is one overriding point that I want to make. There was a time when I thought that our elected leaders, some of whom have differing political ideals than my own, would always do what was intrinsically right no matter the political consequences. Of course they would lean towards their own political nature but "right" and "truth" always come first.
This scorecard is an incomplete list of lies and deceit all motivated by political ideology to the detriment of our way of life. The problem is systemic. The people in this administration are a collection of political hacks with one goal, to "Fundamentally change the United States of America" and the ends justify the means.
Shame, shame on all of them.
Posted by: TheOtherJay at May 14, 2013 08:34 AM (nojhZ)
"...Of course they would lean towards their own political nature but "right" and "truth" always come first..."
Posted by: TheOtherJay at May 14, 2013 12:34 PM (nojhZ)
This viewpoint is valid only if the definitions of 'right' and 'truth' are mutually agreed-upon. If you believe in concepts such as 'right' and 'truth' and the other guy thinks 'right' and 'truth' are archaic social constructs devised by an oppressive, capitalist patriarchy to oppress the unprivileged Other, then you've got a problem.
Posted by: troyriser at May 14, 2013 08:45 AM (vtiE6)
Posted by: Avi at May 14, 2013 08:54 AM (Gx3Fe)
Posted by: troyriser at May 14, 2013 12:45 PM (vtiE6)
Well put. "Houston, we have a problem."
Posted by: TheOtherJay at May 14, 2013 09:20 AM (nojhZ)
Posted by: Blake at May 14, 2013 10:11 AM (e+hz7)
Posted by: Mr_Fastbucks at May 14, 2013 10:32 AM (b67KU)
I am going to outline a theory on Benghazi that I have not heard from anyone but I think someone should look into it. I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have problems looking at the Benghazi attack and response and logically coming up with anything else.
First, the real questions that need to be asked are:
1. Why was Benghazi embassy not prepared for attack when they had told the state department a number of times that their security was poor?
2. Why was the military/CIA not prepared to respond when the embassy was attacked? Even more to the point, why were multiple responders told to stand down?
The Obama administration's response to these questions have been inadequate and
deflecting when you realize what has been going on in the Middle East and Northern
Africa over the past 2 years. Everyone has already given the genius label to
both Obama and Hillary Clinton over the past 10 years so I don't think they
could realistically be expected to be unprepared for an event like this to have
happened.
There is only one logical response to both the questions above-----it was a
premeditated event. They had expected it and most probably were involved in it.
They were setting up their own "October/November Surprise." It is
difficult to remember what was going on during the election back in 2012 but
the economy was struggling and Romney was gaining ground. Is it possible the
Obama administration set up the attack with the intention of the kidnapping of
the US ambassador so that they could later set up a rescue event?
I think it is quite possible and probably the only logical answer to all the
questions around Benghazi.
Why were they unprepared even after they asked for more security?
Why were multiple rescue teams told to stand down?
Why was military unprepared for incidents on the 9/11 anniversary?
Why were CIA officers Woods and Doherty told to stand down?
Why has the response by the administration been so botched?
Why were the President and Secretary of State out of touch during this entire series of events as if they couldn't be bothered? They micromanage everything else.
Where were the PresidentÂ’s on-staff photographers taking pictures of the President making heroic decisions?
There are a lot more questions but the only logical response is that it was a
planned attack where they wanted to capture the US ambassador and later free
them in some type of either diplomatic or military mission. The Obama
administration's response has been so poor because they have more to cover up
than just ineptitude. No one really believes that they are that inept. The
problem occurred when CIA employees Woods and Doherty decided to disobey the
order to stand down and they went to help the Ambassador. What was supposed to
be a surrender and kidnapping of the US ambassador turned into a serious
firefight which led to the death of the ambassador and the further attack on
the CIA annex.
I believe this theory needs to be investigated because it is far worse than
just the ineptitude that has been portrayed. Another good question is who was
really responsible for the Benghazi attack and have they been apprehended? Why
the lack of info on the attackers. We knew everything about the 9/11 hijackers
within a few months of their attack and yet there is still enormous confusion
about the Benghazi attackers.
Let me know what you think.
John M
Posted by: JohnM at May 14, 2013 11:13 AM (XygAY)
Posted by: i4cu2 at May 14, 2013 02:19 PM (piPOg)
Posted by: Frank Rosato at May 14, 2013 04:42 PM (SXvBJ)
Posted by: Rachel at May 15, 2013 02:33 AM (d0PNL)
Posted by: brad at May 15, 2013 05:04 AM (9PjJh)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.394 seconds, 407 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at May 14, 2013 06:23 AM (/PCJa)