Gay Patriot Header Image

Which of these Presidents deserve to be impeached?

  1. It’s a presidential election. It’s not close; the Democrat has way more popular support. A few of his dumb zealots break into Republican headquarters to spy needlessly. No person is injured, but it’s still unacceptable. The more so, because the president and his crew then lie to obstruct official investigations.
  2. A Republican president was recently re-elected. A philanderer and “family values” hypocrite, he has an affair with his White House intern. It would have no public significance, except that it becomes a subject of testimony in lawsuits over his other affairs. And he lies about it, under oath. He, the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, has now lied to a court.
  3. A Democrat president must deal with a certain Third World dictator who has attacked four neighboring countries over a period of two decades, costing hundreds of thousands of lives. World intelligence agencies, and Republican leaders in Congress, are nearly unanimous that the dictator would be happy to launch yet another war, has been developing nuclear weapons, and may have nukes already. Acting on that consensus, the Democrat president gets legal approvals from Congress and the U.N. to invade (along with 40 other nations) and remove the dictator. The invasion works, but at a cost of several thousand American lives (including the occupation, afterward). It turns out that the dictator only had chemical weapons, plus some nuclear weapons research (no nuclear bombs, yet). That’s embarrassing, but multiple official investigations clear the President of any intentional wrongdoing.
  4. A Republican administration pushes thousands of guns into Mexico, causing the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans. Republicans claim the administration only did what the previous Democrat administration did. But that is not true: the previous operations had controls to minimize deaths and maximize the intelligence-gathering on Mexican drug cartels, controls that the Republican effort abandoned (for reasons unknown). The GOP Attorney General does everything he can to obstruct Congress’ investigation, and eventually is found to be in contempt of Congress. He does not resign.
  5. It’s a presidential election. It is going to be close; the Republican incumbent, plagued by four years of economic failure, is not way ahead. But he has been successful, he claims, in fighting terrorism. A month before the election, Islamist terrorists attack a U.S. consulate and kill an American ambassador, plus three others. The Republican administration had warnings and permitted the attack to succeed (through negligence or perhaps for reasons unknown). They lie to the American people about it, implying that it was not a terrorist attack, that they could not have stopped the attack, that the attack was somehow really a protest caused by a YouTube video that nobody ever heard of, etc. The lies work: the Republican wins re-election.

Oh, by the way: Party should not matter, in any of this. We should hold all of our leaders to the same, high standards.

But do switch the parties, in what’s written above. That will make it easiest to see that I’m talking about:

  1. Watergate (Nixon)
  2. Monicagate (Clinton)
  3. Gulf War II (Bush 43)
  4. Fast and Furious (Obama)
  5. Benghazi (Obama)

I haven’t gotten to Pigford (Obama) yet; that’s still coming.

So, which are impeachment-worthy?

(NB: Tweaked title and language after publication, especially to note the costs in human lives of example 3.)

Share

47 Comments

  1. Unfortunately Obama cannot be impeached for practical reasons. His one area of political/tactical brilliance was in copying a move by Bush the Elder: Bush I picked Dan Quayle, whom Dennis Miller once referred to as “the Rosetta Stone of contemporary American comedy,” as his VP. In so doing, Bush made himself impeachment-proof.

    Biden is–if anything–LESS intelligent than Quayle, and has either suffered a stroke to the inhibitory center (e.g., Bette Davis late in life) or has full-blown Tourette’s syndrome. Bad as Obama is, Biden likely either would destroy the country within a week of taking the reins, or find himself declared as “medically incapacitated” in a coup by his VP.

    Comment by JS — May 9, 2013 @ 1:39 pm - May 9, 2013

  2. JS, good point…. but Biden wouldn’t think so ;-) I think he’d be an improvement on Obama; he would at least take sane advice from his former Senate buddies.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 9, 2013 @ 2:30 pm - May 9, 2013

  3. Biden is making Quayle look like James Madison in comparison.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 9, 2013 @ 2:30 pm - May 9, 2013

  4. find himself declared as “medically incapacitated” in a coup by his VP.

    Jon Corzine would take time out from looting and partying to stage a coup? Really?

    Comment by heliotrope — May 9, 2013 @ 2:51 pm - May 9, 2013

  5. Speaking of impeachment, isn’t it funny, since Mark Sanford beat Stephen Colbert’s sister, how many Clinton-loving, Gore-loving, Edwards-loving, Jim McGreevey-loving Democrats have suddenly decided that a man who cheats on his wife is unfit to hold public office?

    Comment by V the K — May 9, 2013 @ 3:54 pm - May 9, 2013

  6. Which one had Hillary Rodham take part in the investigation of their actions?
    Which one has the same individual screech “What difference does it make?”

    Comment by Bill G — May 9, 2013 @ 4:33 pm - May 9, 2013

  7. There would be riots in the inner cities along the lines of the Watts riots if Obama was impeached. Unfortunately, he is Teflon because of the color of his skin, no matter how poor his character proves to be.

    It is truly startling how many deaths have occurred that are directly a result of the Obama Adminsitrations policies.

    Comment by Texann — May 9, 2013 @ 5:55 pm - May 9, 2013

  8. ILC,

    You have created a terrific exercise for impelling one to examine the facts objectively. Without a doubt, the committed ideologue can weasel around and charge you with myopia, bigotry and several hate crimes.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 9, 2013 @ 6:00 pm - May 9, 2013

  9. The Left decided it wanted to use impeachment as a political weapon. They started that against Nixon.

    When a Democratic president misbehaves, and Republicans have the temerity to suggest impeachment as a consideration, the Left cries “foul.” But let’s not forget who started it.

    Comment by Lori Heine — May 9, 2013 @ 6:29 pm - May 9, 2013

  10. Exactly my point. Biden doesn’t think, and never has. Frankly the only sane Senators I can think of are Paul and Cruz, and I doubt Biden knows them, much less considers them friends.

    As to the coup, I suspected he’d put Pe-lousy in, trying to be trendy, since ol-bug-eyes feels left out of things these days.

    Comment by JS — May 9, 2013 @ 6:38 pm - May 9, 2013

  11. heliotrope – Well, it’s clear to me that 1, 2, 4 and 5 are all impeachable. (Watergate, Monicagate, Fast and Furious, Benghazi – but not the Iraq war).

    And, although 1 (Watergate) may well deserve impeachment, 5 (Benghazi) seems rather worse.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 9, 2013 @ 6:51 pm - May 9, 2013

  12. Obama can do anything because of the color of his skin and not the content of his character. Hmm, where did I paraphrase this comment?

    Comment by davinci — May 9, 2013 @ 7:11 pm - May 9, 2013

  13. Looking at the five examples, if a Democrat President does any of these things, it is OK, and in fact, congratulatory. Now if a Republican does any of these things, he/she ought to be impeached, convicted, and executed by a firing squad. Then his/her body should be dragged through the streets and burned with gasoline.

    Comment by davinci — May 9, 2013 @ 7:14 pm - May 9, 2013

  14. I think you have to rank them in order of impeachability-ness. #4 Fast and Furious is top, follow by #5 Benghazi, then 1 (Watergate), 2 (Monica) and 3 (Iraq) in that order.

    I would also add in violating the oath of office by failing to uphold the immigration laws.

    Comment by Bryn — May 9, 2013 @ 7:46 pm - May 9, 2013

  15. #3 isn’t impeachable by any stretch.

    WMD or not, the pretext could just as easily have been the sanctions for Hussein’s noncompliance with over one dozen UN resolutions (I think it was 17?).

    Watergate?
    The reality is that it was a third rate burglary of some nearly meaningless DNC files that wouldn’t get so much as a ‘sniff’ nowadays, but the Left hated Nixon with a white hot passion and the complicit media (more effective then as it consisted of the big three and PBS….no internet and cable alternatives) couldn’t wait to string him up by his cajones.
    It also made for lengthy and profitable careers for a lot of ‘has beens’ and ‘never weres’ (those two daring journalists, Woodward and Bernstein, et al).

    Dozens of people have been murdered as a direct result of “Fast and Furious’ and the terrorist attack on the Benghazi consulate.

    The worst that happened with Watergate were a few paper cuts and a stubbed toe during the daring nighttime getaway.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 9, 2013 @ 10:05 pm - May 9, 2013

  16. “The worst that happened with Watergate were a few paper cuts and a stubbed toe during the daring nighttime getaway.”

    The problem was the cover-up. Using donor’s money to pay people to be quiet, pressuring AGs to toe the line, and then of course audio evidence of how corrupt Nixon was. That was the real issue. If it wasn’t for the audio tapes, I doubt Nixon would’ve resigned. Also, I don’t think 2,3,4 or 5 would classify as a “high crime” that would be impeachable without an amazing amount of evidence of some nefarious deed with intent to seriously damage the country.

    One more for you to consider:
    A Democratic Prez was caught red handing aiding and abetting an Islamic theocracy by selling weapons despite a clear Arms Embargo by Congress. This Islamic theocracy openly advocated suicide attacks as part of Sharia law, came to power by killing and holding American citizens hostages and is a staunch enemy of Israel.

    Comment by mike — May 9, 2013 @ 10:32 pm - May 9, 2013

  17. The problem was the cover-up. Using donor’s money to pay people to be quiet, pressuring AGs to toe the line, and then of course audio evidence of how corrupt Nixon was. That was the real issue.

    Thanks for reminding me!

    I had forgotten about the Watergate security detail that had two of it’s contingent gunned down, and the 6 pedestrians run over by the ‘plumbers’ as they fled the scene in their getaway car.

    Much, much worse than those other so called ‘scandals’………

    A Democratic Prez was caught red handing aiding and abetting an Islamic theocracy by selling weapons despite a clear Arms Embargo by Congress. This Islamic theocracy openly advocated suicide attacks as part of Sharia law, came to power by killing and holding American citizens hostages and is a staunch enemy of Israel.

    You ignorant Muslim hating Islamophobe!

    I call on every commenter who reads this to denounce the hateyhatinghatefulness of this hateyhatinghater!

    So there!

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 9, 2013 @ 10:42 pm - May 9, 2013

  18. when you ask someone in the media if what a politican is doing is bad they have to ask you what party the politican is in before they can answer the question.

    Comment by tommy651 — May 9, 2013 @ 11:35 pm - May 9, 2013

  19. I think we as Republicans need to be careful not to put the cart before the horse, obsessing over impeachment. It’s not that Obama doesn’t deserve to be impeached, but I think it’s generally counterproductive for the other party to always be talking about impeachment, even when there’s merit. Better, I think, to investigate wrongdoing appropriately, with passion but not making everything into a witch hunt. It’s certainly appropriate in the case of Benghazi, and I’d say also we shouldn’t think things have been left okay with F&F. So, we should continue and see where things lead.

    As for Biden, actually, I do think he’d be a better president than Obama. He lacks Obama’s charisma and ability to rally people. He is, quite simply, a clown without makeup. He would, therefore, be much less effective than Obama. However, I think he’s no less intelligent or substantive than Obama on policy and actually has much better ability to work out deals than Obama, who would rather just demonize his enemies than actually work with them. None of this is to say Biden is exceptional at anything, but when you’re judging against Obama, you’re going to have some upsides.

    Comment by Chad — May 9, 2013 @ 11:54 pm - May 9, 2013

  20. Why do people still conflate “impeach” with “removed”? Sloppy thinking….

    Impeachment is merely the political-equivalent of indictment, with the US House sitting in-panel as a grand jury. There still needs to be a (political) Trial by the Senate to dismiss a Federal Judge, a Cabinet Officer—or the President or Vice President—from office.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 10, 2013 @ 1:16 am - May 10, 2013

  21. A Democratic Prez was caught red handing aiding and abetting an Islamic theocracy by selling weapons despite a clear Arms Embargo by Congress. This Islamic theocracy openly advocated suicide attacks as part of Sharia law, came to power by killing and holding American citizens hostages and is a staunch enemy of Israel.

    Comment by mike — May 9, 2013 @ 10:32 pm – May 9, 2013

    That’s easy.

    You, mike, as well as your fellow Obama supporters, would scream and sh*t themselves that this was perfectly OK, that anyone who dared criticize the Obama Party for doing such things was a traitor, rant about “right wing conspiracies”, insist that any whistleblowers were liars, demand that the media silence themselves, etc.

    But if it were a Republican, you would demand they be impeached, give payoffs to the whistleblowers, and ensure that it was covered 24/7 on every news network.

    That really is all the thought that you and your fellow Obama puppets ever put into anything, mike. You have no morality or values, nor do you have any respect for laws or the rule of law; all those represent checks on your hate and ability to steal from others, and thus you will never tolerate or abide by them.

    You cannot demand piety dances from decent people, mike, because decent people recognize that you are not one. When you endorsed Obama’s slander and malicious lies calling Romney a murderer and a tax cheat, you proved that you care nothing for truth or values, and will say and do anything for power.

    Romney was absolutely right. You are the 47%, mike, a worthless piece of lazy trash who won’t work, who has no self-control, and is nothing more than a beast that loots and steals from others. You are a disrespectful pig, a worthless thief who steals from others who work harder than you ever will and who behave better than you ever can.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 10, 2013 @ 1:58 am - May 10, 2013

  22. NDT
    calling the opposition “lazy trash” is very similar to what the Dems did during the Bush regime and exactly why they lost so many elections.

    Such name calling only makes one an election loser. I suggest you reconsider your use of such language.

    Comment by mike — May 10, 2013 @ 4:02 am - May 10, 2013

  23. Don’t let the media engendered parodies of Republicans fool you. Quayle was not the Buffon you seem to believe he was.

    Comment by Frumious Bandersnatch — May 10, 2013 @ 6:10 am - May 10, 2013

  24. #23 Anecdotal story I know,

    Father of a friend gave congressional/presidental briefings in the late 80′s in DC. He said Reagan, Bush and Quayle would always ask for more detail. Gore OTOH simply would thank them for whatever they said and shoo them out.

    Like I said, an anecdote, but valid to me.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 10, 2013 @ 8:46 am - May 10, 2013

  25. So, suppose a Tea Party guy kidnapped three young girls and kept them in his basement as sex slaves for ten years of constant rape and abuse. Would media coverage of his arrest mention his political affiliation?

    Comment by V the K — May 10, 2013 @ 9:54 am - May 10, 2013

  26. [...] actually, as long as we’re here at GayPatriot let’s rundown some impeachable offenses and see how they [...]

    Pingback by QOTD and Friday Fun | Ruminants — May 10, 2013 @ 9:55 am - May 10, 2013

  27. We are no longer a nation of the rule of law. We are a nation of people who are so comfortable exchanging truth for lies we can no longer tell the difference. This administration understands that and with compliant media is manipulating the country for their own ideologies, power, and control of every aspect of our lives.

    Comment by Linda Strickland — May 10, 2013 @ 10:06 am - May 10, 2013

  28. littlelettermike’s suggestion of an Iran-Contra addition to the list is a valid one.

    What is surprising is that littlelettermike is so anxious to put the focus on Obama, et. al. and their regime change activities in Egypt, Lybia, Syria, Yemen, and their vast interlocking relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood and even Hizballah* in some areas of interest to them.

    Iran-Contra is not exactly as littlelettermike posed it, but with some honest editing of the particulars, it is a valid addition which did result in Jessie Jackson calling for Reagan’s impeachment, Congressional hearings and convictions of several key players. I would liken it to the stuff the Democrats pulled off in the 9/11 commission damage control exercise and the work of Sandy Burgler on behalf of covering up for President Clinton.

    We are currently having Congressional hearings to get at whether Obama permitted an Ambassador and three other Americans to be stranded under heavy attack in a vastly under protected State Department facility without additional efforts to save them.

    If that is so, why were they denied the support of the might and power of the United States to protect an Ambassador and his supporting personnel?

    If the President and his people were under the impression that the whole business was a bunch of rowdy demonstrators, why did they stick to the story for long after it was clear that it was not so?

    The common sense “fact” is that if they were so lulled by the rowdy demonstrator theme, that would have to mean that our entire CIA, DIA, State Department apparatus is worse than the average management style of the local DMV office.

    There is malfeasance and misfeasance. Look them up. In both cases, the head of the Executive Branch, the head of the State Department, the head of the CIA, and the head of the DIA are all responsible for “being in the loop” to the extent that they can know about and prevent malfeasance or misfeasance before it happens.

    As the drumbeat went in Watergate: What did (X) know and when did (X) know it. After you get those questions answered and the timeline assembled, it becomes clearer and clearer where the SNAFU originated and who was primarily responsible.

    Of course, littlelettermike and his ilk may well consider a dead Ambassador and three others as a “what difference does it make” point in the “death is a part of life” theme and it time to paraphrase Rodney King and ask if “can’t we all just move along?”

    How about it, littlelettermike: Did Obama take the briefing and go to bed and then head to Las Vegas for a fund raiser because “sh*t happens” and that was then and this is now? If so, how do you reconcile that?

    Harry Reid has done a terrific job of keeping the Senate from looking into this in any meaningful way. Is it your wish that Nancy Pelosi had control of the House to keep the lid on Benghazi? Who and what are you? A Progressive, amoral power-hungry hack or someone who can handle the truth? You likely know more about Jodi Arias than you know about either Benghazi or Kermit Gosnell. Perhaps your core is so married to your ideology that “you can’t handle the truth.”

    (*Hizballah: is The Party of Allah. For some mysterious reason, those who control American journalism prefer “Hezbollah” as the spelling. It seems to be a choice that masks Allah and denigrates Allah all at the same time.)

    Comment by heliotrope — May 10, 2013 @ 10:57 am - May 10, 2013

  29. V the K — that’s easy, of COURSE it would be worthy of not if they were teabaggers. It’s a “fun” game, actually. Whenever I see a story in the media and the political party ISN’T mentioned … heh, I know it’s a Dem. Pretty sure everyone else knows, too.

    Linda Strickland — agreed, we are now a Nation of Men. I hope the Left is happy with their role in causing it, because it isn’t going to be nearly as much fun for them as it has been once the Right starts playing by the same rules they have been. When and if the public starts to hit back, be it figurative or literal, I hope each and every Liberal remembers how they pretty much asked for it.

    After all, if unindicted felon David Gregory gets a pass for an illegal magazine on air — how does the police (or the government) justify new gun control law when it won’t enforce existing law?

    Comment by acethepug — May 10, 2013 @ 12:04 pm - May 10, 2013

  30. Hey, instead of beating up on lower case mike, I want to commend him for dropping the concern troll facade and coming out as an open Obama shill. Honesty really is the best policy.

    Comment by V the K — May 10, 2013 @ 12:04 pm - May 10, 2013

  31. And I would like to thank concern-troll mike for reminding us about how he and his fellow Obama supporters regularly refer to Republicans and conservatives as Nazis.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 10, 2013 @ 12:33 pm - May 10, 2013

  32. Oh, and since concern-troll mike likes to play in hypotheticals, let’s do another one.

    Or even better, let’s do reality: Barack Obama and the Barack Obama Party-controlled IRS deliberately targeted and attacked conservative and Tea Party groups, using governmental resources to harass and make illegal demands of them.

    Don’t worry, mike; we don’t expect you to answer. After all, being a concern-troll puppet for Obama who has shrieked over and over again that the CEO is responsible for everything that goes on in an organization, this really puts your Obama, your Mocha Messiah, the man you worship as your progressive god in the spotlight.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 10, 2013 @ 12:39 pm - May 10, 2013

  33. I prefer “Mahogany Marxist Messiah.”

    I am a bit fascinated with the phenomenon of Leftists claiming to be “center-right” and that Obama is a “center-right” politician. Are these people trying to deceive, or are they delusional on the scale that they can stand in the middle of Times Square and swear that they’re in Kansas?

    Comment by V the K — May 10, 2013 @ 12:54 pm - May 10, 2013

  34. I prefer “Mahogany Marxist Messiah.”

    Change that first word to “Mocha,” V. SnObama’s only half-black.

    Or as I like to say: “Half honkey, all donkey.”

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 10, 2013 @ 1:09 pm - May 10, 2013

  35. I don’t think 2,3,4 or 5 would classify as a “high crime” that would be impeachable without an amazing amount of evidence

    mike: I’m glad that we agree on 1 (impeach Nixon if he doesn’t resign first), and on 3 (don’t impeach Bush). And yes, adding an Iran-Contra example is a legit (though I would go more with heliotrope’s view of it).

    Having said that: It is amazing to see you give Clinton a pass on number 2 (his lying ‘constructively’ or while carefully pretending not to, as a sitting President, in a judicial process under oath), after your having gone on about Nixon’s corruption.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 10, 2013 @ 1:12 pm - May 10, 2013

  36. Just checked in to see if littlelettermike had taken my invitation for a civil debate. I guess he has gone off to a Mensa Pilates session.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 10, 2013 @ 3:13 pm - May 10, 2013

  37. Wow, someone pointed me to this website and I’ve now read a couple of diatribes here and the “interesting” comments of the site’s followers. Unfortunately, the articles and comments here come across to this outsider as political trash talking common at many conservative websites. Frankly, the poor logic, one-sided historical accounts and ad hominem attacks only play well to people with a shared political agenda. There’s a reason why these sites tend to be ignored by mainstream readers.

    Comment by Paul Avery — May 10, 2013 @ 9:06 pm - May 10, 2013

  38. You are so right, Paul Avery.

    After all, if we wanted to appeal to “mainstream” folks like yourself, we should be screaming that our political opponents are tax cheats and murderers.

    Perhaps we should also throw in how our political opponents are going to put people back in chains and reinstate slavery, plus how they’re going to ban birth control pills and tampons.

    And then we can insist that everything that goes wrong is due to our predecessors of five or six years prior, how any political dissent is due to racism, and how our political opponents should just shut up and do as they’re told or we’ll sicc the IRS on them.

    Is that what you want, Paul Avery? Because it’s certainly what “mainstream” individuals like you are endorsing and supporting.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 11, 2013 @ 1:14 am - May 11, 2013

  39. Wow. This Paul Avery fellow….

    One gets the impression he doesn’t feel the need for air fresheners when visiting the loo.

    The paint on the wall, however…now that’s a different story.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 11, 2013 @ 10:37 am - May 11, 2013

  40. Frankly, the poor logic, one-sided historical accounts and ad hominem attacks only play well to people with a shared political agenda. There’s a reason why these sites tend to be ignored by mainstream readers.

    Comment by Paul Avery — May 10, 2013 @ 9:06 pm – May 10, 2013

    How perfectly elitist of Paul Avery not to take his valuable mainstream reader time to point out examples of “poor logic” and “one-sided historical accounts” and then inconvenience himself a little to educate us on how a logical, open minded mainstream reader would approach the matter.

    Don’t you just hate it when a mainstream diversity maven enters the room, sniffs, looks around and mutters: “rednecks.”

    I will now retire to my cave and do hours of satisfying self-flagellation employing a wet noodle while watch Gangman Style YouTube videos. How mainstream is that?

    Comment by heliotrope — May 11, 2013 @ 11:09 am - May 11, 2013

  41. Don’t you just hate it when a mainstream diversity maven enters the room, sniffs, looks around and mutters: “rednecks.”

    I don’t know about you, Helio, but I call that RAAAAAAAAAAACIST.

    So funny how often one finds it on the libtard side of the aisle.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 11, 2013 @ 12:55 pm - May 11, 2013

  42. I love it when a blatant, raving leftie comes to a GP thread and says “I’m mainstream! And you people are so obviously (insert: insane, racist, stupid, etc.).” – As if his labels / pronouncements count.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 11, 2013 @ 5:11 pm - May 11, 2013

  43. The reason why is very simple, ILC; the only way people like Paul Avery can rationalize what their Obama is doing is to insist that those to which he’s doing it are subhuman animals who deserve it.

    Once one realizes that bigots like Paul Avery are no longer capable of acknowledging that any criticism of Obama whatsoever is valid, their attitudes and attempts to demean and ghettoize conservatives become blatantly obvious. Paul Avery did not come here to discuss or be intelligent; he came here already planning to hate us, and was just looking for a tidbit here or there to justify his predetermined conclusions.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 11, 2013 @ 7:23 pm - May 11, 2013

  44. That’s if you even believe “Paul Avery” is a naif who just stumbled onto the blog, and not just a long-time troll playing pretend.

    Comment by V the K — May 12, 2013 @ 11:22 am - May 12, 2013

  45. “Naïf.”

    Leave it to V to be generous.

    Not the word I would’ve chosen.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 12, 2013 @ 11:51 am - May 12, 2013

  46. There is no evidence that the Obama administration broke any laws over what transpired in Benghazi, so you are left with ad hominem attacks, which is a point that Paul Avery accurately made and none of you has refuted. Name-calling, unsubstantiated rumors of conspiracies, and accusations of collusions between liberals and the media are crutches for people who have no basis for a sound argument. As Paul said, that is why you are left with an echo chamber here instead of a place to debate people who represent the majority of Americans – i.e. those that think that investigating Benghazi is an utter waste of taxpayer money.

    Comment by blah — May 14, 2013 @ 3:31 am - May 14, 2013

  47. Comment by blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah — May 14, 2013 @ 3:31 am

    Thank you for sharing.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 15, 2013 @ 1:24 am - May 15, 2013

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.