Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

[EriktheRed]

I didn't know that about Bush. Hey anyone on the right made at Bush for all those deaths?

Apparently the deaths did not involve Americans so it's perfectly okay with the right that there is no outrage over it. Still 10 attacks that largely went unpunished and were "allowed" to happen without his activating the 82nd Airborne and the not sending in the B-52's seems, in light of the comments made about Ben Gotcha, like negligence on his part.

Just be consistent guys.

Still waiting for you so tell us how that is in any way relevant to Benghazi. Bush didn't lie about them, nor did he attempt to cover them up. yes, people died but people have died and are still dying under obama. How is it relevant?

You ask for consistancy, how about some consistancy from you. If it is irrelevant, and and therefor inconsistant itself, then it IS NOT possible for us to be consistant?

Because you don't have any proof that the current Prez did any of what you allege. Like another poster said, all this bullshit is about is focusing on taking down H. Clinton in 2016, in the likely event she runs.


You wingnut hacks don't have shit, and you never had it, but keep trying to spin anyway.

 

[EriktheRed]

No.

And with that denial, the only other possibility is that you're a fuckin' moron.

And how is that? It's easy for dumbasses like you to make that claim, it's quite another thing for you to prove it. I didn't bring F-18s up, I responded to an idiotic post and RW went off on a tangent. then you, being totally ignorant of the line of discussion and too lazy to check, come up that that brilliant post.

Dumbass.

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

And with that denial, the only other possibility is that you're a fuckin' moron.

And how is that? It's easy for dumbasses like you to make that claim, it's quite another thing for you to prove it. I didn't bring F-18s up, I responded to an idiotic post and RW went off on a tangent. then you, being totally ignorant of the line of discussion and too lazy to check, come up that that brilliant post.

Dumbass.

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

 

[EriktheRed]

And how is that? It's easy for dumbasses like you to make that claim, it's quite another thing for you to prove it. I didn't bring F-18s up, I responded to an idiotic post and RW went off on a tangent. then you, being totally ignorant of the line of discussion and too lazy to check, come up that that brilliant post.

Dumbass.

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

That would be original.

I suppose you have never made a prediction?

Or, if you have, they have all turned out to be perfectly accurate?



Fuck yourself. You are just a stupid hack.

 

[EriktheRed]

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

That would be original.

I suppose you have never made a prediction?

Or, if you have, they have all turned out to be perfectly accurate?



Fuck yourself. You are just a stupid hack.

Oh no, it's just I've never been such a blatantly arrogant jaggoff about it, that's all. That's why it's so amusing when you say shit like this about me, as if you have any room at all to talk.

But that's cool. Keep being your lovable dickhead self, sir.

 

[candycorn]

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

Wasn't going to go there myself....maybe President Romney will pardon Obama....LOL

 

[IlarMeilyr]

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

Wasn't going to go there myself....maybe President Romney will pardon Obama....LOL

You did go there. And you are just as much a phony as Erick the Dejected.

What would Obama need to be pardoned for?

I am not one of the ones suggesting that he has committed an impeachable offense.

And besides, you dunderhead, a pardon wouldn't erase an impeachment and a conviction in any case.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Um...


Do we need to bring up certain predictions your previous incarnation made?

That would be original.

I suppose you have never made a prediction?

Or, if you have, they have all turned out to be perfectly accurate?



Fuck yourself. You are just a stupid hack.

Oh no, it's just I've never been such a blatantly arrogant jaggoff about it, that's all. That's why it's so amusing when you say shit like this about me, as if you have any room at all to talk.

But that's cool. Keep being your lovable dickhead self, sir.

Bullshit. Lots of folks made predictions. Some more confident. Many less confident. Hypocrites like you, being the dishonest shallow pussy you always are, only "object" when the predictions (right or wrong) are not to your liking.

And of course I can talk about you for what you are. No "room" required to do so.

You are what you are and noting it is fair game.

But you remain just a stupid hack.

 

[PredFan]

Apparently the deaths did not involve Americans so it's perfectly okay with the right that there is no outrage over it. Still 10 attacks that largely went unpunished and were "allowed" to happen without his activating the 82nd Airborne and the not sending in the B-52's seems, in light of the comments made about Ben Gotcha, like negligence on his part.

Just be consistent guys.

Still waiting for you so tell us how that is in any way relevant to Benghazi. Bush didn't lie about them, nor did he attempt to cover them up. yes, people died but people have died and are still dying under obama. How is it relevant?

You ask for consistancy, how about some consistancy from you. If it is irrelevant, and and therefor inconsistant itself, then it IS NOT possible for us to be consistant?

You want impeachment for Obama
You didn't want it for Bush

Yeah so? Obama lied and tried to cover it up. Bush didn't lie nor did he try to cover it up. It is irrelevant.

The relevance is in the reaction...not a peep about people dying under Bush, you're ready to impeach Obama for what was still tragic but way fewer deaths. As for the "lying" part...Tom Ridge said that the terror threat level was massaged under Bush for political effect. Are you ready to impeach Bush now after the fact or are we still pretending you're impartial?

The relevance is in the reaction...not a peep about people dying under Bush, you're ready to impeach Obama for what was still tragic but way fewer deaths.

No one is focussing on the deaths, we are focussing on the lies and the cover up. There is no correllation, other than the one you are making up.

As for the "lying" part...Tom Ridge said that the terror threat level was massaged under Bush for political effect. Are you ready to impeach Bush now after the fact or are we still pretending you're impartial?

Terror threat level? Now you are even further away from the subject.

Obama lied about the cause of the attack to shield himself with an election so close at hand. Bush did not lie about anything on your list. Those people died yes, but if you want to get into a pissing match over how many were killed under each president than go make a thread about it. It isn't relevant to obama's lies and cover-up over Benghazi, and all the spinning you can muster isn't going to change that simple fact.

But let me give you credit for answering the question finally.

 

[EriktheRed]

That would be original.

I suppose you have never made a prediction?

Or, if you have, they have all turned out to be perfectly accurate?



Fuck yourself. You are just a stupid hack.

Oh no, it's just I've never been such a blatantly arrogant jaggoff about it, that's all. That's why it's so amusing when you say shit like this about me, as if you have any room at all to talk.

But that's cool. Keep being your lovable dickhead self, sir.

Bullshit. Lots of folks made predictions. Some more confident. Many less confident. Hypocrites like you, being the dishonest shallow pussy you always are, only "object" when the predictions (right or wrong) are not to your liking.

And of course I can talk about you for what you are. No "room" required to do so.

You are what you are and noting it is fair game.

But you remain just a stupid hack.

Who said you can't talk about me? No way I can stop you, obviously. but like I said before, I've never been the kind of arrogant prick you were last year in my prediction-making (and other times in the past, as well). I'm usually honest enough to admit when I see some uncertainty.

You wanna put me down for that while you keep being a dickhead hack (because you are, as I'm fairly noting), go ahead.

 

[PredFan]

I see a lot of guilty until proven innocent scenarios in here but not facts. We'll see how the hearings go this week. Until then, it's nothing but speculation. No proof. Many of you would make terrible jurors.

True, but our point mostly is that there wouldn't even be hearings if the GOP waasn't keeping this on the front burner. I am eagerly awaiting the hearings.

 

[EriktheRed]

I see a lot of guilty until proven innocent scenarios in here but not facts. We'll see how the hearings go this week. Until then, it's nothing but speculation. No proof. Many of you would make terrible jurors.

True, but our point mostly is that there wouldn't even be hearings if the GOP waasn't keeping this on the front burner. I am eagerly awaiting the hearings.

Yeah, how would you nutbags function without the GOP continually feeding your hate-cravings?


Btw, you just said "True" to the post you were responding to, but you keep claiming the Prez lied, as if you know this for a fact.

 

[Againsheila]

This should get all the turds in here to start foaming at the mouth:

On October 27th, 2012, only days before the presidential election, I wrote:

If Barack Obama is reelected, will he face impeachment over Benghazi — a yet more unpleasant and far more wrenching result than to lose an election?

It could happen — and in my estimation should happen — the way revelations are playing out over the bloody terror attack that took four American lives and has led to weeks of prevarication and obfuscation.

The scandal thus far has at least tarnished and quite possibly implicated everyone from the CIA director, to the secretaries of State and Defense, to the UN ambassador and, of course, the president himself — with no end in sight, because Obama, normally loath to expose himself and even less so in an election season, refuses to answer questions on the subject.

It’s not the crime, but the cover-up, we learned in an earlier impeachment, only in this case the crime may be just as bad or worse.”

Roger L. Simon » Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

Sorry, but thanks to Clinton, even impeachment doesn't mean what it used to mean. Big deal. Clinton was impeached, but nothing happened, and not because he wasn't guilty, but because it "wasn't worthy of removal" according to the democrats and my senator in particular. Why even bother trying to impeach anyone now?

 

[PredFan]

Apparently the deaths did not involve Americans so it's perfectly okay with the right that there is no outrage over it. Still 10 attacks that largely went unpunished and were "allowed" to happen without his activating the 82nd Airborne and the not sending in the B-52's seems, in light of the comments made about Ben Gotcha, like negligence on his part.

Just be consistent guys.

Still waiting for you so tell us how that is in any way relevant to Benghazi. Bush didn't lie about them, nor did he attempt to cover them up. yes, people died but people have died and are still dying under obama. How is it relevant?

You ask for consistancy, how about some consistancy from you. If it is irrelevant, and and therefor inconsistant itself, then it IS NOT possible for us to be consistant?

Because you don't have any proof that the current Prez did any of what you allege. Like another poster said, all this bullshit is about is focusing on taking down H. Clinton in 2016, in the likely event she runs.


You wingnut hacks don't have shit, and you never had it, but keep trying to spin anyway.

Jesus Christ you liberals are thick headed. What does your post have to do with my post you quoted or the question posed in it? Nevermind, i know the answer.

True, we dont yet have proof, yet. Why do you liberals have such a problem with questions being asked of your president? Nevermind, I know the answer to that question as well.

 

[Wolfsister77]

I see a lot of guilty until proven innocent scenarios in here but not facts. We'll see how the hearings go this week. Until then, it's nothing but speculation. No proof. Many of you would make terrible jurors.

True, but our point mostly is that there wouldn't even be hearings if the GOP waasn't keeping this on the front burner. I am eagerly awaiting the hearings.

I am also.

 

[PredFan]

And with that denial, the only other possibility is that you're a fuckin' moron.

And how is that? It's easy for dumbasses like you to make that claim, it's quite another thing for you to prove it. I didn't bring F-18s up, I responded to an idiotic post and RW went off on a tangent. then you, being totally ignorant of the line of discussion and too lazy to check, come up that that brilliant post.

Dumbass.

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

Yeah, just as I thought, you have nothing. Loser.

 

[PredFan]

And how is that? It's easy for dumbasses like you to make that claim, it's quite another thing for you to prove it. I didn't bring F-18s up, I responded to an idiotic post and RW went off on a tangent. then you, being totally ignorant of the line of discussion and too lazy to check, come up that that brilliant post.

Dumbass.

And you can shove it up your wingnut ass.

You're a fuckin' moron for even entertaining the idea that it would be a good idea to use f-18s in the first place.

^ studiously obtuse.

Fucking leftwing fubar hacks like Erik the Dejected are funny.

For all the wrong reasons.

And he apparently has reading comprehension difficulties.

 

[PredFan]

I see a lot of guilty until proven innocent scenarios in here but not facts. We'll see how the hearings go this week. Until then, it's nothing but speculation. No proof. Many of you would make terrible jurors.

True, but our point mostly is that there wouldn't even be hearings if the GOP waasn't keeping this on the front burner. I am eagerly awaiting the hearings.

Yeah, how would you nutbags function without the GOP continually feeding your hate-cravings?


Btw, you just said "True" to the post you were responding to, but you keep claiming the Prez lied, as if you know this for a fact.

You definitely have reading comprehension problems dude. Tough luck.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Oh no, it's just I've never been such a blatantly arrogant jaggoff about it, that's all. That's why it's so amusing when you say shit like this about me, as if you have any room at all to talk.

But that's cool. Keep being your lovable dickhead self, sir.

Bullshit. Lots of folks made predictions. Some more confident. Many less confident. Hypocrites like you, being the dishonest shallow pussy you always are, only "object" when the predictions (right or wrong) are not to your liking.

And of course I can talk about you for what you are. No "room" required to do so.

You are what you are and noting it is fair game.

But you remain just a stupid hack.

Who said you can't talk about me?

Nobody. That includes me. But nice attempt at a straw man, you moron. What I DID say was talking about you FOR WHAT YOU ARE. Words (all of them) have meaning, you mindless twat.

No way I can stop you, obviously. but like I said before, I've never been the kind of arrogant prick you were last year in my prediction-making (and other times in the past, as well). I'm usually honest enough to admit when I see some uncertainty.

Liar. You have ALWAYS been an arrogant prick. You state your opinions as flat out facts and you rarely if ever concede error, much less admit that you are prone to making grandiose pronouncements as though they were handed down on stone tablets. You are a bombastic hypocrite.

You wanna put me down for that while you keep being a dickhead hack (because you are, as I'm fairly noting), go ahead.

I just note you FOR WHAT YOU ARE. And it is fair to note that you are bombastic, hypocritical, arrogant and a prick. Factually speaking.

Now, hurry back with more of your typically baseless invective.

By the way, unlike you, I don't deny when I have made mistakes. I made a poor prediction. I truly did not imagine that the majority of the American voters would repeat the horrible mistake they had made 4 years earlier. But, I was wrong. They did. Now we are stuck with the idiot in chief for a second term. Truly tragic.