US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Great Rumbler]

IRS jihad against conservative groups

lmao

[Joe Molotov]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/there-witch-somewhere

Responding to Democratic allegations that the new Republican Benghazi committee is a “witch hunt,” Sessions argued, “Well, Mr. Speaker, that must mean there is a witch somewhere.”

 

[benjipwns]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/05/08/obama-benghazi-libya-howard-baker-terrorist-watergate-column/8809559/

Where is the Democrats' Howard Baker? Where is the courageous member of President Obama's party willing to stand up and ask, "What did the president know, and when did he know it?"

Indeed, the big unanswered question is, What did the president know about what looks more and more like a coverup or fabrication of the cause of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi? The bloody attack, orchestrated by a known terrorist group, left four Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

In the aftermath, many Republicans asked, and continue to ask, what the president knew. But the question cannot step from behind the shadows of political partisanship until a Democrat also asks. Then, it might force the news media to demand that the White House provide some answers.

That is precisely what happened in 1973 when Tennessee Republican Sen. Howard Baker, a minority member of the Senate Watergate Committee, famously asked what President Nixon knew and when did he know it about the botched 1972 break-in of the Democratic National Committee offices in Washington.

...

But when an e-mail surfaced last week suggesting that Obama aides might have been crafting a cover story to protect the president, no Democrat has been willing to step up and publicly ask the tough questions that need to be asked of the White House:

Did White House officials, including Susan Rice, then ambassador to the United Nations, fabricate and disseminate a story that traced the attack to an angry mob protesting an anti-Muslim video to protect the president, then in the midst of a hard-fought re-election campaign?
Did people in the White House cover up or alter information from the CIA and the Defense Department that indicated the attack was made by terrorists?
Did the president know the full facts and still continue to publicly attribute the attack to the video?

Without Democratic questioning, rather than blind support for the president, the major news media --except for Fox News -- will continue to play the story that Obama and fellow Democrats are spinning: The Benghazi investigation is a partisan witch-hunt full of old news. And creation of a special House committee to look into the role of the White House in crafting the video story will continue to be dismissed as an election-year stunt by Republicans.

Ironically, Fox, much ridiculed for its Benghazi coverage, finds itself in a similar position as The Washington Post back in late 1972 and early 1973 when it was aggressively investigating the Watergate scandal that seemed to reach into the Nixon White House. While Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein investigated, most of Nixon's fellow Republicans and much of the news media just yawned. Republicans spun the Democratic allegations of a White House coverup as a partisan witch-hunt against Nixon, whom Democrats despised.

But the tide turned against Nixon in the Spring of 1973 when the Senate, controlled by Democrats, created the Senate Watergate Committee to hold hearings into the alleged coverup of the burglary of the DNC offices. When the bipartisan committee was announced, there was partisan carping from Republicans that Democrats had a vendetta against Nixon. But there were not orchestrated calls for Republicans to boycott the hearings like we hear today from Democrats opposed to the GOP-created committee to look into Benghazi.

Where is the Democrats' Howard Baker?

[Great Rumbler]

DID THE PRESIDENT KNOW IT WAS AN ACT OF TERROR WHEN HE SAID THE NEXT DAY THAT IT WAS AN ACT OF TERROR?!?!?!?

[benjipwns]

DID THE PRESIDENT KNOW IT WAS AN ACT OF TERROR WHEN HE SAID THE NEXT DAY THAT IT WAS AN ACT OF TERROR?!?!?!?

[benjipwns]

New Hampshire: Christie vs. Clinton   Clinton 37, Christie 34   Clinton +3
New Hampshire: Paul vs. Clinton   Paul 38, Clinton 36   Paul +2
New Hampshire: Bush vs. Clinton   Clinton 42, Bush 32   Clinton +10
New Hampshire: Huckabee vs. Clinton   Clinton 38, Huckabee 36   Clinton +2

Okay, shut it down. Paul's won, no need to have the election, everybody go home. 

[ZephyrFate]

Chant Benghazi three times in a mirror and a Republican will show up and spend hours dancing around any actual reason it is important

[DCharlieJP]

Responding to Democratic allegations that the new Republican Benghazi committee is a “witch hunt,” Sessions argued, “Well, Mr. Speaker, that must mean there is a witch somewhere.”

this basically sums up where the GOP are. lol.

I am constantly amused that trying to make sure people of certain race, sexual orientation, gender and religious creed are treat fairly in the US are being labeled "Nazis"

The GOP is literally moaning about being denied the right to discriminate. History is going to piss in everyone of these peoples faces.

[benjipwns]

Responding to Democratic allegations that the new Republican Benghazi committee is a “witch hunt,” Sessions argued, “Well, Mr. Speaker, that must mean there is a witch somewhere.”

[Oblivion]

Damn..how did I not immediately think of Christine O'Donnell when the witch comments popped up.

[brawndolicious]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/opinion/show-us-the-drone-memos.html?hp&rref=opinion

rand paul op-ed on drones. at the last bit about minorities tho

It's true in the modern context but not when the Bill of Rights was written. He could say there's supposed to be a system of laws followed to distinguish between political dissent and endorsing terrorism or leaking NSA secrets.

[Great Rumbler]

Shelly Sterling also said she "eventually" will divorce her husband, and that she hadn't yet done so due to financial considerations.

"For the last 20 years, I've been seeing attorneys for a divorce," she said. "In fact, I have here — I just filed — I was going to file the petition. I signed the petition for a divorce. And it came to almost being filed. And then, my financial adviser and my attorney said to me, 'Not now.'"

[Phoenix Dark]

That could result in a 10 page Devolution troll thread.

[Human Snorenado]

All part of the GAY AGENDA I suppose

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/clay-aiken-opponent-keith-crisco-dead-n103551

[TakingBackSunday]

toxicadam pls

[benjipwns]

http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/05/11/the-day-obamas-presidency-died/?singlepage=true

The curious thing about September 11, 2012 — the day of the Benghazhi attack — is that for some reason it marks the decline of the Obama presidency as clearly as a milepost. We are told by the papers that nothing much happened on that day. A riot in a far-away country. A few people killed. And yet … it may be coincidental, but from that day the administration’s foreign policy seemed inexplicably hexed. The Arab Spring ground to a halt. The secretary of State “resigned.” The CIA director was cast out in disgrace. Not long after, Obama had to withdraw his red line in Syria. Al-Qaeda, whose eulogy he had pronounced, appeared with disturbing force throughout Africa, South Asia and the Arabian Peninsula. Almost as if on cue, Russia made an unexpected return to the world stage, first in Syria, then in the Iranian nuclear negotiations.

Worse was to follow. America’s premier intelligence organization, the National Security Agency, was taken apart in public and the man who took its secrets, Edward Snowden, decamped to Moscow with a laptop full of secrets. But it was all just a curtain raiser to the dismemberment of Ukraine and the disaster in Eastern Europe

The Ukraine has now been effectively partitioned. The Obama administration talk about inflicting “consequences” and “costs” on Russia turned out to be empty. Almost as if to add insult to injury, Iran has declared victory in Syria over Obama. “‘We have won in Syria,’ said Alaeddin Borujerdi, chairman of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy committee and an influential government insider. ‘The regime will stay. The Americans have lost it.’”

And still there’s no acknowledgement of anything being fundamentally wrong.

...

Let us now return to Parshall’s observation that “all military failures fall into three basic categories: failure to learn from the past, failure to anticipate what the future may bring, and failure to adapt to the immediate circumstances on the battlefield.” It’s possible that Obama did exactly that on the night of September 11, 2012. He didn’t see the double-cross coming; he had no Plan B for Syria, for al-Qaeda, having bet the farm on Plan A and he covered the failure up.

He went and committed all three categories of failure. ”Finally, at the apex of failure stand those rare events when all three basic failures occur simultaneously — an event known as catastrophic failure. In such an occurrence, the result is usually a disaster of such scope that recovery is impossible.”

And now he’s living with the consequences of having to pursue a strategic assumption he knows is wrong but does not dare denounce.

Suppose Benghazi was a catastrophic failure, made all the more dangerous by the possibility that Russia had a hand in it. If Putin, having studied how Reagan used the jihad to bring down Soviet Union, played the same game on Barack Hussein Obama, it would explain many otherwise inexplicable things. The role of Snowden. The disgrace of Petraeus. The exile of anyone and anything to do with Benghazi. The kid-gloves treatment of the Ansar attackers. The strange enmity between Hillary and Obama. Each is bound by the same secret. Each lives in fear of the same smoldering fire burning in the bowels of the administration.

The lie is much more dangerous than the truth. America can live with an Obama mistake. But it can’t live with an Obama who cannot acknowledge his mistakes.

[Oblivion]

http://gawker.com/bundy-ranchs-armed-defenders-seek-welfare-to-sit-around-1574052982

[Joe Molotov]

http://gawker.com/bundy-ranchs-armed-defenders-seek-welfare-to-sit-around-1574052982

Of course, the one black guy would be involved.

[Brehvolution]

And still there’s no acknowledgement of anything being fundamentally wrong.

There is a huge acknowledgement that the GOP is fundamentally wrong about Benghazi.

[Great Rumbler]

Look, I'm even willing to let the first part of that article go, because...whatever, but the idea that Russia orchestrated the Benghazi attack to make Obama look bad and destroy his foreign policy so that they could invade Ukraine?

[Phoenix Dark]

Putting a face on policy.
http://m.arktimes.com/arkansas/the-faces-of-health-care-expansion-in-arkansas/Content?oid=3284892

Flawed, compromised, whatever you want to call it...the law is literally saving people's lives.

[Great Rumbler]

Putting a face on policy.
http://m.arktimes.com/arkansas/the-faces-of-health-care-expansion-in-arkansas/Content?oid=3284892

Flawed, compromised, whatever you want to call it...the law is literally saving people's lives.

Republicans' worst nightmare came true.

[Brehvolution]

They should be reminded of it every day.

[Brehvolution]

I saw that yesterday.

This is the product of right wing radio. How brazen and pathetically stupid.

[Great Rumbler]

Hillary's concussion [which used to be a phony injury to keep from testifying about Benghazi] was actually a really serious injury and she probably has permanent brain damage:

[T]he terrorist attack in Benghazi proved that Mrs. Clinton certainly wasn't up to the task.

After months of dodging, evasions and doctors' visits, Mrs. Clinton finally lashed out in public about the attack. "What difference at this point does it make!" she bellowed at her interlocutors.

Well, the families of the four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, would like clear answers and closure. They would like to know why Mrs. Clinton and the White House were far more interested in immediately covering up their handling of the attack than protecting American property and personnel in the first place.

This inability to relate to the pain felt by those around her is a frequent sign of varying degrees of psychosis.

In any event it was an awkward MRI moment that should have gotten the former first lady checked into a rubber room for further evaluation

And, if she really wants to be president, the American people have a right to know what the results of that MRI showed.

[Brehvolution]

It's the new "Where's the birth certificate?"

[Joe Molotov]

What did Hillary's neurologist know and when did he know it?

[Brehvolution]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/operation-american-spring

The idea behind Operation American Spring is simple: the restoration of constitutional government, the rule of law, freedom, and liberty. The plan calls for the removal from office of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Attorney General Eric Holder. And that's just to start.

 

"Those with the principles of a West, Cruz, Dr. Ben Carson, Lee, DeMint, Paul, Gov Walker, Sessions, Gowdy, Jordan, should comprise a tribunal and assume positions of authority to convene investigations, recommend appropriate charges against politicians and government employees to the new U.S. Attorney General appointed by the new President," according to the website.

[Phoenix Dark]

appoint a new president without an election brehs

[Dickie Dee]

Phase One of Operation American Spring – Beginning Of Tyranny Housecleaning

These barely literate baboons

[Dickie Dee]

Hillary's concussion [which used to be a phony injury to keep from testifying about Benghazi] was actually a really serious injury and she probably has permanent brain damage:

[T]he terrorist attack in Benghazi proved that Mrs. Clinton certainly wasn't up to the task.

After months of dodging, evasions and doctors' visits, Mrs. Clinton finally lashed out in public about the attack. "What difference at this point does it make!" she bellowed at her interlocutors.

Well, the families of the four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, would like clear answers and closure. They would like to know why Mrs. Clinton and the White House were far more interested in immediately covering up their handling of the attack than protecting American property and personnel in the first place.

This inability to relate to the pain felt by those around her is a frequent sign of varying degrees of psychosis.

In any event it was an awkward MRI moment that should have gotten the former first lady checked into a rubber room for further evaluation

And, if she really wants to be president, the American people have a right to know what the results of that MRI showed.

WASHINGTON -- Former President Bill Clinton on Wednesday mocked Karl Rove's recent claim that Hillary Clinton may have brain damage, invoking a previous right-wing conspiracy theory about his wife's December 2012 fall.

"Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," Bill Clinton said when asked about Rove's comments at a fiscal conference. "First they say she faked her concussion; now they say she's auditioning for a part on 'The Walking Dead'!"

[Steve Contra]

Phase One of Operation American Spring – Beginning Of Tyranny Housecleaning

These barely literate baboons

That's reverse racism

[Great Rumbler]

BRAINGHAZI

[Phoenix Dark]

ether 

I completely forgot about that, they did indeed claim she was faking her injury.

I will say that the rush to accuse conservatives of sexism here seems ridiculous, given how much time was spent noting McCain's age. Ageism.

[Great Rumbler]

I will say that the rush to accuse conservatives of sexism here seems ridiculous, given how much time was spent noting McCain's age. Ageism.

Was McCain's age ever really talked about that much, though? I know it got mentioned a couple times, but I don't know that it was ever seriously considered an impediment. Nothing at all like the 2000 GOP primary, where he was basically accused of being crazy.

[Phoenix Dark]

I will say that the rush to accuse conservatives of sexism here seems ridiculous, given how much time was spent noting McCain's age. Ageism.

Was McCain's age ever really talked about that much, though? I know it got mentioned a couple times, but I don't know that it was ever seriously considered an impediment. Nothing at all like the 2000 GOP primary, where he was basically accused of being crazy.

I remember it being mentioned quite a bit in contrast to Obama's young age, especially after he chose Palin as VP.

[Great Rumbler]

To be fair, choosing Palin as VP was a pretty clear sign of dementia.

[Phoenix Dark]

wait until Hillary chooses Sasha Obama.

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

McCain's age was an issue, but it was also pertaining to his overall health, as he's had multiple bouts of skin cancer.

and putting Palin one heartbeat away from the big chair didn't assuage anybody about those same concerns.

[benjipwns]

BILL O'REILLY: Do you believe that under President Obama that we have lost the respect of the world? I mean, are we still respected overseas?

LT. COL. RALPH PETERS: No, and I can put it very simply to you. First of all, Obama wants to be loved and Americans want to be loved. Great powers are never loved. They're often hated out of shear jealousy. What our rational goal should be around the world, unwavering goal should be to be trusted by our allies, respected by neutrals, and feared by our enemies. Today, we are not trusted by our allies, we are not respected by neutrals, and we are not feared by our enemies. Thank you, President Obama.

[Joe Molotov]

Thanks, Obama!

[Joe Molotov]

I assume everyone's seen this, but still...

[AdmiralViscen]

....fuck

[Human Snorenado]

Does everyone feel reassured that the Senate puts Idaho on equal footing with every other state? I sure do.

[Raban]

[Brehvolution]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/operation-american-spring

The idea behind Operation American Spring is simple: the restoration of constitutional government, the rule of law, freedom, and liberty. The plan calls for the removal from office of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Attorney General Eric Holder. And that's just to start.

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/operation-american-spring-fails

“It’s a very dismal turnout,” Jackie Milton, the head of Texans for Operation American Spring, told The Washington Times. “We were getting over two inches of rain [an] hour in parts of Virginia this morning. … Now it’s a nice sunny day. But this is a very poor turnout. It ain’t no millions. And it ain’t looking like there’s going to be millions. Hundreds is more like it

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/16/watch-live-operation-american-spring-warns-of-fema-roundup-civil-war-chemtrails/

“I’m so fed up with the tyranny I sold my jet ski,” the caller said. “I’m so fed up with the way the government is manipulating the water with the chemtrails, I’m afraid I can’t even use my jet ski.”

[Dickie Dee]

[Joe Molotov]

Foiled by Obama's weather drones. 

[Himu]

Can someone tell me why Democrats seriously want Hilary as a candidate? What exactly are her qualifications besides having a familiar name and being a woman? So, why is the democratic party interested in making dynasties in a country that is anti-monarchy when there are equally suitable candidates such as Olympia Snowe? Are they going for brand recognition to fight against Rubio? Is that even necessary against a modern republican party?

Do dems really think she'll be an improvement over Obama?

[Phoenix Dark]

Can someone tell me why Democrats seriously want Hilary as a candidate? What exactly are her qualifications besides having a familiar name and being a woman? So, why is the democratic party interested in making dynasties in a country that is anti-monarchy when there are equally suitable candidates such as Olympia Snowe? Are they going for brand recognition to fight against Rubio? Is that even necessary against a modern republican party?

Do dems really think she'll be an improvement over Obama?

You do know Olympia Snow is a republican right?

And I don't think "dynasty" means what you think it means.

[Himu]

Yeah, I know she's an R. Sorry, brain fart. Your post doesn't answer my question though. And I think it does. In the past 20+ years of American politics we have had three different families as president, and people want another Clinton, ignoring Hilary's politics.

[Positive Touch]

dems know shell win, and lots of beltway people know theyll have guaranteed jobs when she does

and no one in politics cares about political purity or whatever; its about winning and making money and having access

[Boogie]

In the past 20+ years of American politics we have had three different families as president,

I know you put a "+" there, but in the past 20 years of American politics, there have only been three different presidents.  I'm not sure how you are supposed to get more than three families as president in that scenario.

[Himu]

You're right, Boogie. People - R's - still want Jeb Bush to run just to complete a Bush trilogy. We have had two Bush's and people want another Clinton. People agree that corruption is high in Washington, so why want to vote in someone from the old guard - especially after the disappointment of Obama? That's what I'm confused about.

[Phoenix Dark]

The people who want Jeb Bush to run hated W Bush. No offense but I get the impression you don't know what you're talking about.

I'll take Hillary over any insane person who wins the republican nominee in 2016. I would have preferred her in 2008.

[Boogie]

You're right, Boogie.

I don't think you're getting what my point was.

[Himu]

The people who want Jeb Bush to run hated W Bush. No offense but I get the impression you don't know what you're talking about.

I'll take Hillary over any insane person who wins the republican nominee in 2016. I would have preferred her in 2008.

What gives you confidence that Hilary would be a good president? Sat on Wal-Mart board for 6 years, had a failed healthcare bill, anti-video game pap, voted yes on Iraq, was in charge of handling security in Libya. Hilary Clinton is a train of endless failures and represents the elite America now abhors. The Dems can do so much better. It is a shame Warren isn't running, because unlike Hilary, she has actually done shit to improve peoples lives, but on the other hand, if she wins her political career is over and we still need politicians like her.

I think that the Democratic party would probably be in trouble if she ends up as the candidate. If there's anything Americans want less of, it is the same shit. Then again, against a crippled Republican party, anything is possible.

And in Texas, I've met more than a few people who support Jeb simply because he is a Bush.

[Phoenix Dark]

Never said she'd be a good president. However she knows what she'd be getting into, and thus wouldn't waste valuable time courting republicans who would rather see her impeached. There will be no Lucy football moments with her. I think she'd enter office in a wave election but still have to deal with a republican House due to gerrymandering, and thus her first four years would look a lot like post 2009 Obama. Which is great but again, I'll take that over Jeb/Paul/Cruz/Christie/etc any day of the week.

If she gets the nomination she wins - barring some massive scandal or economic implosion in the next couple years. I can't come up with one logical scenario where she loses under normal circumstances.
http://www.270towin.com/

The current republican party is fucked, they'll have to change in the coming years. Demographics+Obamacare are going to fuck them.

Your anecdotal evidence doesn't really carry weight on Bush. Jeb is hated on the far right and would have to move to the right in order to get the nomination - similar to what happened with Romney. The Bush name is pretty much trash on the national scale, and I think the GOP will figure that out before 2016.

[Himu]

Ultimately, Republicans are going to go with an asshole neocon no matter what. The way I see it, now that there's not a president to re-elect this is the perfect opportunity to reel in an actual progressive and not another corporate slut with shit all for qualificiations. The fact many Dems  are already going in "I'd rather have _______ than ______ republican candidate" mode is pretty sad. If Hilary is the the nom, I'm definitely voting Green again.

[Great Rumbler]

Everybody here wants Elizabeth Warren, but that ain't gonna happens so bring on 8 years of Hillary.