The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG

[Doc Brown]

14 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Don't project Doc. I never said nor implied R good D bad.

 

On the other hand, you're hanging your hat on the notion that Obama was a viewed as a presidential Care Bear or he would have been impeached, and that's nothing more than mythology.   You can choose to believe it if it makes you feel good, but that does not make it fact. 

 

There are all sorts of mistakes made politically.  Is it fair to suggest that if the Rs allowed the Obama/Clinton Benghazi coverup to go unchecked that perhaps Clinton becomes president?  The death of an American ambassador on the presidential watch will always--100% of the time--result in investigations. When you factor in a bs storyline to explain why the US govt was caught with its pantsuit down, I'm not sure what you're thinking.  I'm comfortable calling it political, because it is, but you cannot revise history to suit your needs. 

The Benghazi cover up will always be the biggest black mark on the Obama administration, but Republicans using it as a political weapon in the guise of justice for the victims family irked me.  I think you're naive if you think Republicans wouldn't have impeached Obama over a number of things if the majority of the public supported it.  Sorry to project.

[sabrecrazed]

33 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

The Benghazi cover up will always be the biggest black mark on the Obama administration, but Republicans using it as a political weapon in the guise of justice for the victims family irked me.  I think you're naive if you think Republicans wouldn't have impeached Obama over a number of things if the majority of the public supported it.  Sorry to project.

What in the... I don't know if it was the biggest black mark considering what is coming on the 12th, but the trotting Susan Rice out to lie to every camera with a logo on the side of it was certainly done for, you know, personal political gain of the president.

Are you saying that investigating that in front of the country was against the wishes of the victims families? Because I remember it quite differently. I saw them with their broken hearts all over the tv. They were pretty ticked off at the administration for the lies, not for the investigation into them. 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

The Benghazi cover up will always be the biggest black mark on the Obama administration, but Republicans using it as a political weapon in the guise of justice for the victims family irked me.  I think you're naive if you think Republicans wouldn't have impeached Obama over a number of things if the majority of the public supported it.  Sorry to project.

As always I appreciate the civility extended as we disagree.  I'm many things, naive is not one of them. 

 

It surprises me to hear you say it irked you that the Republican's "used it", while sort of glossing over the cover up.  The cover up itself was political, why would anything else not be?  It is interesting to me though, that in the eyes of Obama/Clinton supporters, a President excersizing his authority when considering extending foreign aid to a corrupt nation (that seems to be acknowledged by all, including current candidates Joe Biden) is impeachable, yet allowing the assassination of an ambassador and those their to protect him and concocting an elaborate cover up to impact the elections that falls apart in 14 days is just another day in Washington. 

 

As for my naivete regarding Rs ans Ds, here is what I have come to conclude.  People like Obama, Clinton, Bush et al run in the same circles, form alliances and count on the collective innocence (or ignorance) of the voting public to not pick up on the scheme.  It's the only thing that makes sense given the aftermath of election after election where horrible, horrible things are said about the other candidate, "Bush manufactures a war and young people die as a result) giving way to alliances after all is said and done. 

 

Mutually assured destruction and alliances of the heart are the reasons Obama wasn't impeached. Trump falls outside that circle of friends, and as pointed out many times here, poses a threat to that "thing of theirs". 

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, sabrecrazed said:

What in the... I don't know if it was the biggest black mark considering what is coming on the 12th, but the trotting Susan Rice out to lie to every camera with a logo on the side of it was certainly done for, you know, personal political gain of the president.

 

 

I will never forget that! I knew she was lying when she went on those shows. And now people forget that it was just two months before the election. And Trump is ‘guilty’ of being focused on persons political gain? My arse!

[Foxx]

16 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

Schumer warns? Oh noooooos! Schumer warns. 

He could probably get Mitt, but he might lose a few Ds... I do not think the numbers add up for Chuckie no matter how he tries.

McConnell should just pull a Schiffty Nadler move and table any motions of said nature. while i would like to see a trial that allows any and all testimony, it is only right to play by the Houses rules here, with regard.

[Foxx]

cracks in the wall beginning to appear.

 

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1209452717065867265

 

[Koko78]

23 minutes ago, Foxx said:

cracks in the wall beginning to appear.

 

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1209452717065867265

 

 

Those idiots sacrificed their political careers to side with Nancy, what did they expect her to do, protect them?

 

***** them, they stood with her, they can take the electoral bullets for her.

[Deranged Rhino]

4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

The Benghazi cover up will always be the biggest black mark on the Obama administration,

The spying will be much, much worse in the end. 

[Warren Zevon]

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The spying will be much, much worse in the end. 

 

Has Obama lawyered up yet? He was supposed to be indicted by late summer/early fall.

Edited December 24, 2019 by Gary Busey

[Foxx]

31 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

Has Obama lawyered up yet? He was supposed to be indicted by late summer/early fall.

you make light of it, but there could be no more serious travesty for this country than to have a former President indicted. and, it is not really off the rails to think it  did happen with the limited amount of information that we do know.

[B-Man]

 

 

SHY IMPEACHMENT SYNDROME.

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

[row_33]

Articles still in the mail

[Koko78]

2 minutes ago, row_33 said:

Articles still in the mail

 

So what you're saying is that this is all Trump's fault for allowing the USPS to suck at delivering mail?!?

 

IMPEACH THE MOTHER *****!

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

10 minutes ago, row_33 said:

Articles still in the mail

...not so fast........more to follow...SMH.......

 

Trump Impeachment

Published 4 hours ago

Republicans fume over Dem threat of new impeachment articles: ‘Time to cut them off’

Republicans ratcheted up their accusations that Democrats are overplaying their impeachment hand after court filings from the House Judiciary Committee indicated the two articles of impeachment adopted last week may only be the beginning.

GOP lawmakers already were fuming at Speaker Nancy Pelosi over her surprise decision to delay transmitting the articles to the Senate in a bid to extract favorable terms for President Trump's trial. But in the latest twist, the Democrat-led Judiciary panel referenced the possibility of yet additional impeachment articles in briefs filed Monday related to their quest for testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn and secret grand jury material from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.

If the court allows them to obtain the information they seek, their attorney wrote, "new articles of impeachment" could be considered based on the evidence. GOP lawmakers reacted with stunned disbelief.

 

"Democrats are treating impeachment as an open bar tab," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., tweeted Monday afternoon. "Time to cut them off, take their car keys away (put GOP in control of the House), and end this insanity."

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-fume-over-dem-threat-of-new-impeachment-articles-time-to-cut-them-off

 

 

[Doc Brown]

4 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

As always I appreciate the civility extended as we disagree.  I'm many things, naive is not one of them. 

 

It surprises me to hear you say it irked you that the Republican's "used it", while sort of glossing over the cover up.  The cover up itself was political, why would anything else not be?  It is interesting to me though, that in the eyes of Obama/Clinton supporters, a President excersizing his authority when considering extending foreign aid to a corrupt nation (that seems to be acknowledged by all, including current candidates Joe Biden) is impeachable, yet allowing the assassination of an ambassador and those their to protect him and concocting an elaborate cover up to impact the elections that falls apart in 14 days is just another day in Washington. 

 

As for my naivete regarding Rs ans Ds, here is what I have come to conclude.  People like Obama, Clinton, Bush et al run in the same circles, form alliances and count on the collective innocence (or ignorance) of the voting public to not pick up on the scheme.  It's the only thing that makes sense given the aftermath of election after election where horrible, horrible things are said about the other candidate, "Bush manufactures a war and young people die as a result) giving way to alliances after all is said and done. 

 

Mutually assured destruction and alliances of the heart are the reasons Obama wasn't impeached. Trump falls outside that circle of friends, and as pointed out many times here, poses a threat to that "thing of theirs". 

I admit the cover up was pathetic but McCarthy admitted the endless investigations were to harm Hillary's public perception.  How's that not using it to achieve political goals?

 

I'd tend to believe that line of reasoning if it wasn't for the Clinton impeachment.  The Republicans hoped it would it would help them in the '98 midterms as impeachment of Clinton was popular among Republican pvoters at the time.  It backfired as Gingrich resigned, Clinton's approval rating increased, and that cautionary tale is the main driving force behind not impeaching Bush or Obama.  Polls conducted during the Bush and Obama years backed that up.  The difference now is support for impeachment is near 50% depending on the polls.  It may backfire but that's the difference.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I admit the cover up was pathetic but McCarthy admitted the endless investigations were to harm Hillary's public perception.  How's that not using it to achieve political goals?

 

I'd tend to believe that line of reasoning if it wasn't for the Clinton impeachment.  The Republicans hoped it would it would help them in the '98 midterms as impeachment of Clinton was popular among Republican pvoters at the time.  It backfired as Gingrich resigned, Clinton's approval rating increased, and that cautionary tale is the main driving force behind not impeaching Bush or Obama.  Polls conducted during the Bush and Obama years backed that up.  The difference now is support for impeachment is near 50% depending on the polls.  It may backfire but that's the difference.

Am I being punkd?  Is that you Ashton Kuchner, over behind the potted plant?? 

 

I said 3 times Benghazi was political.  Impeachment is political.  My point was only that given what happened in Benghazi, there is not a political adversary that would not 'launch an investigation'.  The cover up made it uglier than it was.  It was an outright lie to the American people, manufactured and as I indicated earlier, imo, an effort to sew seeds of hatred against Libyans.  

 

But political, yes.  Always.  100% of the time.

 

 

 

 

[reddogblitz]

8 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I will never forget that! I knew she was lying when she went on those shows. And now people forget that it was just two months before the election. And Trump is ‘guilty’ of being focused on persons political gain? My arse!

 

I was at the airport getting ready to fly to Buffalo for a game.  My wife, the social media butterfly, tells me, there was an embassy blown up by protestors because of an internet video.

 

I'm thinking, it's September 11.  Those "protestors" had some serious fire power to gather together at the last minute due to a video.  Didn't make sense. Still doesn't.

 

And then there was that email to Chelsea ...

 

Quote

In the email, Mrs. Clinton tells her daughter  -- who used the email pseudonym “Diane Reynolds” -- that the attacks were undertaken by an “Al Queda-like group.”

 

https://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/10/22/hillary-clintons-email-to-chelsea-stars-in-benghazi-hearing/

[LSHMEAB]

13 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

The Benghazi cover up will always be the biggest black mark on the Obama administration, but Republicans using it as a political weapon in the guise of justice for the victims family irked me.  I think you're naive if you think Republicans wouldn't have impeached Obama over a number of things if the majority of the public supported it.  Sorry to project.

Totally weaponized the families for an opportunity to grandstand, but that's just the way it goes. 

 

Off topic a bit, but the impeach Obama thing made me wonder what happened to the Tea Party. That whole thing seemed to magically disappear.

 

While taxes were indeed cut, they were also very "interested" in fiscal responsibility. Deficit is spiraling out of control and not a peep. I think we all know the next step is the slashing of entitlements, but I'm also quite sure that won't be mentioned on the campaign trail.

 

I always respected Paul Ryan even while I vehemently oppose his Any Rand approach to government. He didn't tippy toe around the issue and create the facade that you could slash taxes WITHOUT slashing entitlements/government spending. Straight shooter.

Edited December 25, 2019 by LSHMEAB

[3rdnlng]

5 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I admit the cover up was pathetic but McCarthy admitted the endless investigations were to harm Hillary's public perception.  How's that not using it to achieve political goals?

 

I'd tend to believe that line of reasoning if it wasn't for the Clinton impeachment.  The Republicans hoped it would it would help them in the '98 midterms as impeachment of Clinton was popular among Republican pvoters at the time.  It backfired as Gingrich resigned, Clinton's approval rating increased, and that cautionary tale is the main driving force behind not impeaching Bush or Obama.  Polls conducted during the Bush and Obama years backed that up.  The difference now is support for impeachment is near 50% depending on the polls.  It may backfire but that's the difference.

Do you have a link to the above highlighted statement?

[/dev/null]

1 minute ago, LSHMEAB said:

Totally weaponized the families for an opportunity to grandstand, but that's just the way it goes. 

 

Off topic a bit, but the impeach Obama thing made me wonder what happened to the Tea Party. That whole thing seemed to magically disappear.

 

While taxes were indeed cut, they were also very "interested" in fiscal responsibility. Deficit is spiraling out of control and not a peep. I think we all know the next step is the slashing of entitlements, but I'm also quite sure that won't be mentioned on the campaign trail.

Republicans are only fiscal conservatives when out of power.  In power they are Democrat-lite

 

Disagree with the next step is cutting entitlements.  The next step is 401k confiscation, err I mean federal oversight of individual retirement plans