Posted on 05/10/2013 1:44:35 PM PDT by drewh
Sure the Senate will go along with this. Obama could be be a gay, foreign born President and not be impeached.
Wait a minute!
What have you got to support that? That’s not a taunt, just a question becuz I am trying to figure this out too.
The way I have been looking at this is that the last thing the ‘administration’ would want to do would be to draw attention to this secret ‘diplomatic post’ which evidence suggests was a point in a secret CIA gun running operation.
Shut up Imhofe. The nightmare of BJ Clinton is fresh in many of our memories, the futility of it all. No impeachment, just total destruction and impotence. Enough MSM involvement to make repeal of Obamacare possible. No impeachment.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3017832/posts?page=21#21
Inohofe and Coburn know their stuff on this, My guess is Senator Jim wouldn't go out on a limb like this given his "clearance" ( and Coburn has it as well ) level and what he knows...
He just can't come out and say it...
I would believe Bob before I would believe Jay Carney.
Either a hit or some plot gone awry. It is just too precious that the “video” instantaneously provoked rioting all over the middle east just ahead of what occurred in Benghazi. It was just too coordinated. Something was being set up, and it went bad. Or someone, like the CIA, hadn’t gotten the message about the video and mucked up the plan. Something is dreadfully amiss, and it really does smell like murderous treason.
Ditto the helicopter.
The IRS “apology” by someone with a conscience may have more effect on Obie in the long run, because it’s a confessed and proveable crime.
But, please, no impeachment. This is no time for a few congressmen to be pleasuring themselves.
If this story continues to snowball expect a wag the dog maneuver soon. These people will stop at nothing to remain in power.
Impeach President Jarrett.
Let's see Hillary was responsible for the lack of security at the Benghazi consulate and was the only one authorized to approve the deviations to keep it open, she is the one that wanted Stevens in Benghazi at that time, why were there so many other CIA people at the annex, why and who was the person from Turkey that Stevens met and why did he get away and why has he not been interviewed, who gave all the stand down orders, why was AFRICOM CO General Ham retired the next day or relieved of command as has been reported and why has he not been interviewed by Congress, why were no other assets put into motion unless you already knew what was going on and wanted to control the outcome and limit the people involved, why did the two navy seals laser a target, why has no body from the assault been found, captured, questioned, why is the you-tube video guy arrested and still in jail, why did Hillary's chief of staff have to prevent Hicks from being interviewed by a member of Congress in Benghazi, who gave all those @#$*?FG>#%'ing stand down orders????????????????
Lying treasonous traitors thieves murderers SOB's need to answer all these and more and than go down hard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Perhaps a basketball lesson from that "special" dude...he isn't working.
“we need to go for the throat on this one. Expose the regime’s corruption.”
I’m on board. Even if the corrupt senate won’t convict, obuma’s treason, murder and lies would be exposed for Americans to judge.
It would be good to quickly review the impeachment parts of the Constitution. Article 1, Section 2.3 gives the House of Representative the sole power of impeachment. A simple majority vote of the House is enough to impeach. Article 1, Section 3.6 gives the Senate the sole power to try all impeachments. When it is the President who is under trial the proceedings are presided by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
Where many people get confused, impeachment is not a legal proceeding. It is a political proceeding which legal rules. Both houses of the legislature are very political and will only vote for how it benefits them politically. So you can see that impeachment (the House’s part) can happen when the opposing party controls the House if the majority of people who put them in office want it to happen.
The Senate on the other hand is much tougher. That is because 2/3 of the members present must agree with the verdict to remove the President from Office. With the current Senate that is very unlikely and still unlikely even with a GOP majority after 2014. The only way it could happen is if the people of the country consider the sitting POTUS so vile and such a criminal that they would vote out any Senator not voting to remove from office.
Therefore, it is quite logical that Nixon would most likely have been convicted in the Senate if he had not resigned. Clinton, on the other hand, had convinced America that what he had done was not that bad.
So it is way too early to tell what will happen to 0bama. It depends on what comes out and how the American voters perceive what comes out. Nixon was told by the Republicans in the Senate that they would not stand in the way of impeachment. So to avoid that he resigned. If 0bama leaves office before the end of his term, it most likely will be the Democrat party who forces him out because he is worse than useless to them. It will be because they think he will cost them many offices.
I don’t know what is going to happen. But every little trickle of new damning evidence that comes out weakens 0bama and makes him more of a lame duck. I’ll just watch the show and take what we can get.
2 Kool,
Re: your reply to galtoid’s remark about something sinister going on:
That bow 0 made to the Saudi king speaks volumes, and bears out what you said about 0 being a Saudi puppet.
2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten wrote:
—-———————————————————————————
There is something else much more sinister here.
——————————————————————————————
I think they are in the pocket of the Saudis. When you are basically doing someone else’s bidding you cannot act or look decisive - it’s like one year a friend of me said that his favorite basketball team’s point guard was always bringing the ball up the floor while constantly looking at the coach in effect saying “What now coach? What do I do now coach?”. I think we have a Saudi puppet government which inherently is going to look foolish.
He could be on countless things, but he won’t be.
Right. I like to relate things to daily life. Like the basketball example. Or say you take something back to the store that doesn’t work and you figure out right away that whoever you are talking to doesn’t have the power to make it right. They’ll hem and haw and point to youtube videos (OK I made that last part up) and in general just say a bunch of stuff that doesn’t even make sense instead of taking simple, decisive steps to fix the problem because they are NOT EMPOWERED to do that and it may be against the wishes of their boss. Doesn’t this feel a little like that?
I have several guesses.
1. Benghazi was entirely unanticipated by Zippy’s handlers. It was not part of their plan, so they did not have a canned response. They were caught off-guard and their figurehead, Zippy, was like a deer in the headlights.
2. Left on his own without a script and a teleprompter, Zippy was clueless about what to do or say. He was hanging out to dry waiting for instructions from the puppetmasters.
3. This was a huge dilemma. He didn’t want to risk offending his Muslim brothers.
4. Benghazi was a criminal enterprise from the get-go. He was trying to avoid calling any attention to it, so the natural instinct was to try to sweep it under the rug and hope it would go away.
5. He knew he just had to hold on until the election. So if he could minimize it until then, he was home free. No sense risking action that could go wrong when stalling was more likely to preserve the status quo.
6. Zippy in charge and making decisions? Are you crazy? Name even ONE time in the last 5 years where he has been in charge of ANYTHING!!!! Osama: He was called in off the golf course in order to pretend that he had something to do with the operation. Just in time to make a speech and take credit. Making a decision is toxic to Zippy. The thought is horrifying to him. If he ever made a decision he would risk getting blamed if it went wrong. His entire career is based on decision- and responsibility-avoidance coupled with taking credit for the accomplishments of others and pointing fingers and blaming his enemies. Not only is Zippy not capable of being in charge, he is not even capable of ACTING like he’s in charge. (Yes, he sometimes attempts to act in charge the same way a little boy shuffles around in Daddy’s big shoes, but it doesn’t fool anyone. Even the little boy knows he’s faking.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
