OK Senator Inhofe talks of the "I Word"

Quote:

---

A senior U.S. senator says Republicans could impeach President Barack Obama over what he is calling a high-level cover up of the administration’s handling of the deadly Benghazi attacks.Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., on a nationally syndicated radio show Thursday accused Obama of overseeing “the most egregious cover up in American history” to avoid potential damage on Election Day.


As more details about the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, emerge, Inhofe said “people may be starting to use the ‘I word’ ” before long.
The host of the show, Rusty Humphries, then asked: “The ‘I word’ meaning impeachment.” Inhofe replied: “Yeah.”


Republicans on Capitol Hill allege Obama and his top national security aides knew before the two-pronged attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans was over that militants linked to al-Qaida were responsible. GOP lawmakers and pundits say there is proof the president and his aides collaborated on a decision to withhold that information in public statements immediately after the attack.


The reason? Obama was in the homestretch of a re-election campaign, and a major plank of his argument for a second term was a severely weakened al-Qaida.
“If people thought his Middle East policy was a failure,” that could have altered the results of the November 2012 presidential election, Inhofe said.
“They didn’t want it to come out at that time,” Inhofe said, referring to Obama and his aides. “Clearly, by definition, a cover up.”
Full Story: http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...hazi-Cover-Up-

---

Of course I don't think the liberal media would allow any articles of impeachment to actually happen, but it's good that the idea is getting floated around in, what I perceive to be, earnest.

Could we really be that lucky?
Everything he does has 'Chicago Style Politics' written all over it.

Please God, I would love to see that POS impeached!

When CBS, ABC, and now NBC cover Benghazi on the same day, especially going into a talkshow circuit weekend, you know it's not being ignored.

Add to that the thing about the IRS paying special attention to Tea Party type groups, which has been blamed on "rouge agents". Sounds like plausible deniability to me.

Add to that the further stepping back of this "red line" or "pink line" or "imaginary line" on action in Syria, and El Jefe is having some trouble, no matter if the DNC or Dem voters want to acknowledge it.

With regards to impeachment...not going to happen. Someone at State will fall on their sword first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikedubs

When CBS, ABC, and now NBC cover Benghazi on the same day, especially going into a talkshow circuit weekend, you know it's not being ignored.

Add to that the thing about the IRS paying special attention to Tea Party type groups, which has been blamed on "rouge agents". Sounds like plausible deniability to me.

Add to that the further stepping back of this "red line" or "pink line" or "imaginary line" on action in Syria, and El Jefe is having some trouble, no matter if the DNC or Dem voters want to acknowledge it.

With regards to impeachment...not going to happen. Someone at State will fall on their sword first.

---

I agree with all of the above save the last sentence. This will cause F&F to be scrutinized again plus a few other tidbits.
Envision the dam with a small leak. No matter whose finger goes in it another will follow along shortly.
The whole "Nixon lied, nobody died" notion has some credence here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

I agree with all of the above save the last sentence. This will cause F&F to be scrutinized again plus a few other tidbits.
Envision the dam with a small leak. No matter whose finger goes in it another will follow along shortly.
The whole "Nixon lied, nobody died" notion has some credence here.

---

It will become a sound bite, once manchin & toomey reintroduce another UBC law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim

It will become a sound bite, once King & Thompson introduce another UBC law.

---

FIFY

Impeachment? Really? Does no one remember the pointless exercise of Clinton's impeachment? It was a few weeks of political theater and nothing changed. So long as the Dems control the Senate, it's pointless. In fact, it would be used to bludgeon the Republicans as racists in the next election.

I just don't see it happening, Bert. Holder will "retire" before anything of import happens regarding F&F.

I reiterate that el presidente is untouchable simply because so many true believers are willing to kill their careers and take the fall...think Scooter Libby.

It's like a toilet after Taco Bell: a huge stink and a godawful mess, but it still flushes.

Impeachment..........?........Shit we're gonna have trouble kickin him out of the white house in 2016!

I doubt there are any Republicans with balls enough to try.

This is me NOT holding my breath. I could see it in the house but the senate would NEVER have enough votes to convict.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Inconel710

Impeachment? Really? Does no one remember the pointless exercise of Clinton's impeachment? It was a few weeks of political theater and nothing changed. So long as the Dems control the Senate, it's pointless. In fact, it would be used to bludgeon the Republicans as racists in the next election.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theGinsue

Post deleted

---

You're both looking at the wrong conditions involved... Clinton? That's what you want to try to use as comparison? The reason for his impeachment was "concealing an extra-marital affair", not exactly big potatoes here. Only three US Presidents have ever been impeached (would have been 4, but one was assassinated), 1868 Andrew Johnson for his removal of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton in violation of the Tenure of Office Act, Nixon in 1974 for Watergate, Clinton 98/99. Would have been Lincoln if he hadn't been assassinated for violating Posse Comitatus and illegally declaring martial law during the civil war (probably wouldn't have gotten anywhere since he is credited as freeing the slaves and ending the war). All four of these cases considered, IRS targeting political opponents of the president during re-election, DOJ targeting journalists without just cause and/or due process, F&F, and the Benghazi snaffu, this is 10x more serious than anything an administration has ever done... in the entirety of 237 years of U.S. History.

nixon wasn't impeached

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jreifsch80

nixon wasn't impeached

---

No he resigned before the impeachment process got off the ground. [Coffee]

Screw obummer... He's too well protected. That said, I wish it was possible. They need to hang Billary out to dry for Benghazi to prevent that hag from running in 2016.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin13

You're both looking at the wrong conditions involved... Clinton? That's what you want to try to use as comparison? The reason for his impeachment was "concealing an extra-marital affair", not exactly big potatoes here.

---

I'd go past concealing and say Clinton's impeachment was for lying under oath. Extra-marital BJs isn't big potatoes, but lying under oath comes a lot closer to benghazi than what the typical response for why Clinton was impeached is. $0.02
That said, as noted many times here, it isn't going to happen, and even if it did it goes nowhere.