December 28, 2012

"Senate Republicans refuse to confirm Kerry until Hillary testifies about Benghazi."

I approve!

225 comments:

1 – 200 of 225   Newer›   Newest»
Nonapod said...

The National Enquirer seems to think Hillary has brain cancer.

SteveR said...

Sure, Its not like Harry Reid has anything productive planned.

Tim said...

Smart move.

gerry said...

The National Enquirer seems to think Hillary has brain cancer.

I knew Bill would figure out a way to get her out of testifying.

edutcher said...

Nice to see a little hardball.

Big Mike said...

I also approve.

Coketown said...

We won't know the full truth until Kathryn Bigelow makes a movie about Benghazi. Then the State Department will spill its darkest secrets.

Jeff Daniels would make a very convincing Hillary Clinton. You know, in case Senate Republicans wanted to concoct some Argo-type scheme in which a fake film is produced as subterfuge to achieve some far-fetched goal.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

This tactic assumes that Hillary Clinton wants John Kerry to be confirmed. And that she wants to step down from the job herself. Maybe she changed her mind, and this is whole thing has just been a double game to keep the Secretary of State job.

A.C. McCloud said...

The interesting angle will be seeing how McCain and Graham react. They were the biggest cheerleaders for getting to the bottom of Benghazi while pummeling Susan Rice, leading the left to accuse them of angling to get her out of the SoS to get their BFF Kerry in. Now that JFK has been safely nominated they seem to have fallen silent.

So will they back their fellow senators or will they backroom deal Hillary out of it to save Kerry? Them remaining silent would be one option but it would leave them wearing giant hypocrite hats.

Since she's a Clinton there's a ton of legacy baggage on the line here, not just for 2016. If she comes down with a sudden case of amnesia related to the concussion we'll know the fix is in.

chrisnavin.com said...

She's made a career of being the feminist "it" woman, the proper mix of gravitas, Democratic establishment credentials and the "right ideas," riding her husband's statesmanship and waves of public sentiment. 1/2 of a power couple and she's probably still angry at the smearing she and Bill got back in the White House.

She also hates Barry. The job at State was a consolation prize. Barry stole her people.

So, she's probably still aiming for Clinton Presidency and the true believers in the media are quite happy with the creation of the global technocratic planetary human league of economic justice and women's rights.

She's got a headache. She's tired, people, tired. It could be cancer. She's given her life for the cause. It's not her fault. What happened at Benghazi anyways? It's all theater, the right ideas are in place and global peace is next.

She's tired, you animals, just tired.

The Drill SGT said...

i say Hill is rooting for Schumer, for Sos. then she can have a senate seat back... :)

though I know the GOP Senators think they have leverage, but doesn't the House have more?

after all, the House leadership actually wants her to testify, unlike the Senate leadership. and the house can subpoena...

TosaGuy said...

She's tired!

Nonapod said...

Poor, poor Hillary. You can't expect her to answer all those impertinent questions those beastly men probably have for her. She's just a women and therefore can't be held accountable for her actions or inactions in her role as SoS in the whole Benghazi affair. Plus she's tired and probably sick and stuff.


machine said...

All politics, all the time!

wyo sis said...

What a filthy world Hillary lives in. And she has done nothing but make it worse.
I'm completely sick of her and of the whole ghastly crew in Washington.
Romney dodged a bullet. Imagine having to spend a single minute in that disgusting swamp with those shameless people.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Hillary shall not be empowered to escape accountability, simply by claiming an exaggerated case of the vapors.

Come clean, and forget about playing President. The State Dept was already a painful illustration of the Peter principle in action.

virgil xenophon said...

Brain cancer is the perfect ploy. (As long as she doesn't have to produce any medical records) It can conveniently wax and wane depending on her needs--go into remission and then return when/if
politically needed. Moi cynical? Naw, just a devotee of that great political philosopher Lilly Tomlin who famously observed: "I try to be cynical, but I can't keep up."

McTriumph said...

Poor Hillary, failure can be so debilitating.

edutcher said...

A.C. McCloud said...

The interesting angle will be seeing how McCain and Graham react. They were the biggest cheerleaders for getting to the bottom of Benghazi while pummeling Susan Rice, leading the left to accuse them of angling to get her out of the SoS to get their BFF Kerry in. Now that JFK has been safely nominated they seem to have fallen silent.

Since Lurch has been Junior's best bud in the Senate, it follows he's not particularly eager to rake him over the coals.

The Drill SGT said...

i say Hill is rooting for Schumer, for Sos. then she can have a senate seat back... :)

Astute point. She could grow old in the Senate, doing nothing, and nobody would yell at her, but would Chuckie give up all his perks?

TosaGuy said...

She's tired!

Hilgo only pawn in game of life.

McTriumph said...

On the other hand, maybe Hillary did fall and she's got a huge bruise on her face, black eyes and all. She doesn't want that photo going viral. We all know how those kind of photos are used by both sides.

But, with the Clintonian history of lies and obstruction, why give her the benefit of the doubt? She is morphing into a box of Rose Law firm files, she'll show up when the heat is off.

creeley23 said...

though I know the GOP Senators think they have leverage, but doesn't the House have more?

Drill SGT: I wonder the same.

According to the Constitution, the Republicans in the House could vote to impeach Obama by simple majority -- which they have.

Presumably Republicans want to get their ducks in a row first and perhaps this Senate investigation is part of that, but if Republicans aren't taking Benghazi seriously enough to be considering impeachment and threatening Obama with it, I want to know why.

Benghazi is far more serious than Watergate or Monica Lewinski. If Republicans aren't going to do something, really do something, it means that we now have a goon squad government supported by a Pravda media.

Impeach Obama.

Hagar said...

and not until then.

Hagar said...

Obama is not going to be impeached over a foreign policy adventure, especially not one he probably did not have that much to do with.

However, I will be surprised if he survives the next four years without being impeached over domestic policy over-reach, however reluctant the Republicans may be to go through that again.

EMD said...

Benghazi is far more serious than Watergate or Monica Lewinski. If Republicans aren't going to do something, really do something, it means that we now have a goon squad government supported by a Pravda media.

Impeach Obama.


This will never happen.

bpm4532 said...

I approve, too.

Tank said...

I have decided to hold my breath until Zero is impeached.

Here I go.

Marshal said...

EMD said...
Benghazi is far more serious than Watergate or Monica Lewinski. If Republicans aren't going to do something, really do something, it means that we now have a goon squad government supported by a Pravda media.

Impeach Obama.

This will never happen.


It's enough that we find out what did happen and why. The public can then understand who it voted for.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freeman Hunt said...

You approve? What? Are you trying to make the poor woman faint? Somebody get a fan and a cool cloth. Poor dear Mrs. William Clinton.

Tank said...

Tank said...
I have decided to hold my breath until Zero is impeached.

Here I go.



Fail.

creeley23 said...

Obama is not going to be impeached over a foreign policy adventure, especially not one he probably did not have that much to do with.

How so?

Obama had the US military stand down while an American ambassador and other Americans were killed during an hours-long attack.

How is this not serious? How is that he didn't have much to do with it?

Impeach Obama.

A.C. McCloud said...

So Inga, what do you have against transparency?

Inga said...

It's amazing how often you righties set yourselves up for disappointment. Still longing for impeachment?

TosaGuy said...

Obama voters do not care about this issue, therefore it does not matter.

Inga said...

AC, not a thing, I want her to testify, but it won't lead to impeachment. Sorry.

wyo sis said...

For a short moment I hoped that Inga had had a moment of clarity. Then she reposted.
Yes, once again I set myself up for disappointment.
Damn, it's hard being an optimist conservative these days.

mikee said...

I agree with an earlier Althouse commenter in another thread, who stated that Hillary is undergoing a face lift, at least.

I suspect she will appear in public after the bruises have gone, with a face 15 years younger and be 20 to 40 pounds lighter as well.

And more power to her for doing so, I say!

Inga said...

Wyo sis, take heart, let's wait for her to testify, maybe there is still some hope for some unforeseen scandal yet to be uncovered. One never knows.

Pogo said...

Hillary's got the vapors but won't lay off the curry.

Wally Kalbacken said...

I wouldn't trust her further than I could throw her, and that is looking less far all the time. She is simply trying to evade the creation of an under oath record that could foreclose her options in 2016.

Lydia said...

Inga said...
let's wait for her to testify, maybe there is still some hope for some unforeseen scandal yet to be uncovered. One never knows.

Four dead because of inadequate security and because someone gave orders to stand down doesn't qualify as a scandal to you?

Sam L. said...

It's her uvula.

Inga said...

Lydia, it is a scandal, but not one that will facilitate impeachment, sorry. We may hear about a different scandal perhaps? One that involves funding? Who knows?

Michael Haz said...

What a farce. An attempt to hold the Secretary of State accountable for her actions is being thwarted by rumors of an injury or an illness. This alone would make an independent press clamor for hearings, if we had an independent press.

George Schultz was Secretary of State, and statesman. When called to testify before congress, he walked in alone and when asked where was his attorney, he answered that he didn't need an attorney because he planned to tell the truth.

Meanwhile, HRC has a yeast infection or some such malady and under no circumstances appears willing to appear and tell the truth. In some eyes, this qualifies her as presidential material.

Sad.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I suspect she will appear in public after the bruises have gone, with a face 15 years younger and be 20 to 40 pounds lighter as well.

You know? I would actually admire her if she did and just came out and said something like: "I've decided to improve my appearance and have elected (as many women have done) to have some cosmetic surgery. After all, everyone has been carping and bitching about my appearance, about my hair and my butt, so.....I've fixed it. TA DAH!!!! How do you like me NOW!!!"

But no. We are all supposed to pretend that a few weeks off and it is magical and never ever speak of it again.

:-)

Inga said...

I AM very interested in hearing more about a "stand down" order. Has it been proven yet there actually WAS a stand own order to anyone? Either to the military in the vicinity or to the two ex seals.

My biggest unanswered question is why were we still in Libya after the Brits left, that seems very negligent.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Four dead because of inadequate security and because someone gave orders to stand down doesn't qualify as a scandal to you?

Inga/Allie has a daughter in the military. I suspect if it were HER daughter who was hung out to dry, denied the ability to protect and abandoned to DIE for Obama's political expediency, we would be hearing a different tune.

However, since these dead and wounded are hypothetical, nebulous and facilitate liberal talking points we get a big dose of "nevermind".

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

DBQ, that was very low, even for you. Please point out where I have indicated that I don't want more information or for Clinton to testify.

chickelit said...

Inga said...
DBQ, that was very low, even for you. Please point out where I have indicated that I don't want more information or for Clinton to testify.

You have fought back and ridiculed all curiousity in this matter since the story broke, intimating that it is partisan BS. The record is all here on Althouse. You are unworthy of my linking to it.

BTW, you resemble, but are better-looking, than Sonia Sotomayer.


President-Mom-Jeans said...

Ah, Inga has returneded from her holiday face stuffing to feign interest in what happened in Benghazi.

"Low, even for you"

Is it as low as those gays you "don't get" since they don't have lockstep groupthink in your leftist idealogy?

DBQ, you must never critisize Inga for her make believe military daughter, it upsets the other made up people who populate her mind.

Cedarford said...

Inga said...
It's amazing how often you righties set yourselves up for disappointment. Still longing for impeachment?


Consider it the same sort of loud braying from right wingers like Creeley23 - that comes from Lefties screaming about marching Bush, John Yoo to the Hague for committing war crimes related to terrorist rights.

Just ideologue assholes braying loudly to fellow true believers to show they are down with them.

Impeach Obama and Hillary over 4 DEAD HEROES?????
Said by the same fools that thought 45,000 DEAD AND MAIMED HEROES!! and 2 trillion where a small price to "Free the Noble Iraqi Freedom Lovers" and nation-build Afghanistan even more diligently than the Soviets tried to do so the Afghans would love Americans and all the wise Neocons.



Chip Ahoy said...

doesn't qualify as a scandal to you?

The media she absorbs has ignored it or worse ridiculed it as significant. There is no independent sputtering of thoughts there. You're asking for something that does not exist. Your reformed question becomes, "so what have you heard?"

EMD said...

Clinton should testify.

I just don't think it leads to an impeachable offense.

Roger J. said...

I gotta tell you folks, but talk of impeachment is really stupid and only makes conservatives look like lunatics. Several reasons: (1) do the math. A simple majority in the to impeach but you need a Senate to uphold and that Senate is controlled by democrats. (2) Mr Obama just won reelection by a majority. And he is half black. Someone please tell me how impeachment is an option. Incompetence, does not rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Talk about impeachment seems to me to be foolish.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

Chickelit, if you want to deny that there wasn a partisan feeding frenzy going on, then you are being disingenuous.

I have asked the same question all along, which is why were we still in Libya after the Brits left? Why wasn't there adequate security? Please feel free to go back and find any comments in which I ridiculed these questions. What I ridiculed was BS conspiracy theories for Fox news.

As for President Jay Jeans, who has never met me, does not know me personally, but shows up when "it" feels "it" has an opening, well it's uncanny. Same Modus Operendi.

Nonapod said...

Said by the same fools that thought 45,000 DEAD AND MAIMED HEROES!! and 2 trillion where a small price to "Free the Noble Iraqi Freedom Lovers" and nation-build Afghanistan even more diligently than the Soviets tried to do so the Afghans would love Americans and all the wise Neocons.

As opposed to a non-interventionist policy that we've applied in Syria where an estimated 45-57k people have died in about a 10th of the time.

Mind you, I'm not advocating anything here, I just get a little tired of people behaving like there's some sort of ideal solution to all wars and America is always on the wrong end of it.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

It's "modus operandi" you ignorant donkey witch.

I guess the Latin language is just one of the multitude of things you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

Have another drink, and make up another child.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Is that like the "juris doctis" you used to claim your other fictional spawn had obtained?

Inga said...

Sure Jay, that makes you sound very intelligent, proceed.

Lem said...

"so what have you heard?"

I heard Hillary fell after getting tripped up by a shoeless Susan Rice... Here she is laying on the track wailing inconsolably, watching her hopes fade away.

Nathan Alexander said...

AC, not a thing, I want her to testify, but it won't lead to impeachment. Sorry.

Nothing like an open mind.

Why do you even care if she testifies, since you have already decided there was absolutely no incompetence or wrongdoing?

Inga said...

Nathan, who said I have already made up my mind about negligence or other wrongdoing, I'm saying it won't rise to the level of impeachment.

You keep attempting to place yourealf inside my head and then you proceed to say what you think I'm thinking, as I've said before Nathan, you are almost always wrong when you do this.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

who said I have already made up my mind about negligence or other wrongdoing, I'm saying it won't rise to the level of impeachment.

And we will never know if the media keeps sweeping the issue under the rug, diminishing the possible importance, poo pooing the idea that anyone is responsible and is aided by the caterwauling of liberal voices who insist that any investigation into the Obama administration is either racist, sexist or BOTH.

We will not know the level of involvement from the TOP down if we don't do a thorough investigation.

I also agree that to talk about impeachment is a giant waste of breath since the Senate, controlled by Democrats will just sit on their hands and do nothing. Doing nothing is their modus operandi. ;-)

Nathan Alexander said...

re: Impeachment Math.

I agree that it is too early to discuss impeachment.

I agree that as things stand (media-led embargo of asking tough questions about Benghazi, allowing Obama to refuse to provide even the most basic of information without penalty), there is no chance of Obama being removed from office.

However...


If the media actually did their job and investigated, followed up on leads, sought out witnesses protected from disclosure by 1st Amendment principles, etc, it could get to the point where it was politically dangerous for some Democrat Senators to support Obama.

The point being:
Obama is responsible for our national interests, and the welfare of his direct subordinates.

He can (and does) delegate decision-making authority for routine and even important issues.

But life and death decisions when there is a clear, actionable threat stream are POTUS responsibility. If he delegated those decisions, he is still responsible for the delegation. Meaning, if there was dereliction of duty in either the order to reduce security despite threats, or dereliction of duty to not send military assistance during a gunbattle, then Obama is fully responsible whether he delegated those decisions or not. The only question is if a subordinate would go down with him or not.

Then there is the aftermath.

It is clear that the White House made the deliberate decision to deceive the US public regarding the nature of the attack, i.e. Rice announcing on five (!) Sunday morning shows that it was a spontaneous protest related to the video, SecState Clinton telling family members they would "get" the video producer responsible for the attack, etc, and blaming that misinformation on the Intelligence Community when that information did not come from the Intelligence Community in any way, shape, or form.

The decision to deliberately deceive the US populace is 100% Obama's responsibility, and there can be zero delegation of accountability in this case.

But again, for Obama to be held accountable, low information voters have to care.

And the media is expending every effort to ensure that low information voters are not exposed to information that might get them angry at Obama.

For example, I don't think Inga or Garage could be considered low information citizens, and the fact that even they consider it unimportant that Obama committed impeachable acts shows how difficult it would be to get low information voters to even notice, much less care.

But while some fires fizzle out, sometimes just a spark can turn into an inferno. Getting Ms. Clinton to testify under oath is a necessary but not a sufficient step to enforcing accountability for the evil actions of the White House regarding the attack in Benghazi.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Let's revisit one of your Libya greatest hits, shall we you wrinkled old sow?

There is of course this chestnut:

AllieOop said...
Do you Althouse commenters not recognize the possibility that this guy was engaging in a much bigger, more sinister plot to incite some sort of holy war? You are screaming about his freedom of speech, he is yelling " fire", people have been trampled and are now dead. Oh poor bad movie guy, taken in for questions by the brownshirts.

9/15/12 10:26 PM

Would you like me to go grab your bigotry from the other day towards homosexuals as well? It's a slow Friday at the office, after all.

Inga said...

Well DBQ, I've been caterwauling for investigations from day one. I've also said if negligence or wrongdoing is found, let the chips fall where they may.

It's in the archives Chickelit.

Nathan Alexander said...

Inga,
Nathan, who said I have already made up my mind about negligence or other wrongdoing, I'm saying it won't rise to the level of impeachment.

By saying "it won't rise to the level of impeachment", you are revealing that you have already made up your mind about negligence and wrongdoing.

I don't have to assume anything about your mindset when you continually spell out your assumptions.

Nathan Alexander said...

It is undeniable that the White House deliberately lied about the nature of the attack.

That is already an illegal offense in violation of his oath of office, and thus worth removing Obama from office.

You have already made up your mind, and continually repeat, that you don't think there is anything impeachable.

The undeniable conclusion, from your own statements, is that you don't care about illegality where Obama is concerned.

So why do you even want Clinton's testimony?

See, if I were actually assuming I knew what you were thinking, I wouldn't ask "why?".

I deal only with what is clearly and unambiguously stated, in light of the undeniable, indisputable facts already known.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Nathan, I advise you absolutely to try and stay out of "her" head. It is already quite crowded in there with fictional characters.

It's almost hard to keep up with, what with the brother who was in vietnam, the combat medic daughter, the lawyer daughter, and the son who is a carpenter? Or was it a butcher, baker, or candlestick maker? And thats just the ones she had made up since I wandered over from Instapundit.

To get back to the topic at hand, I have no faith in either branch of congress to bring any meaningful inquiry into what happened before, during, and after the assasination of an american ambassador on 9/11.

The only sow on the planet wrinklier and more corpulent than Inga (Hilldawg) will either find another excuse not to testify or be lobbed softball questions and claim ignorance of the whole affair.

Nathan Alexander said...

I've also said if negligence or wrongdoing is found, let the chips fall where they may.

And you've also said you have already pre-determined that there is no negligence or wrongdoing worth impeachment.

So which time were you deliberately lying?

Inga said...

Nathan,
Since when is negligence or most wrongdoing that is not high crimes and misdemeanors rise to the level of impeachment?

Perhaps you know more about the ins and outs of impeachment than I do, please elaborate. I'm not being snarky, maybe I've missed something.

Inga said...

Nathan, why must impeachment be the criteria that makes my statment true or untrue? Are all "chips" impeachment?

Nathan Alexander said...

President Mom-Jeans,
Nathan, I advise you absolutely to try and stay out of "her" head. It is already quite crowded in there with fictional characters.

I'm not in her head. I'm just responding to her clear and ambiguous statements.

Then again, she's part of the crowd that insists that Obama didn't say "you didn't build that" when the commercial Obama released to prove it actually contains a clip of him saying "You didn't build that." So maybe expecting her to be accountable for the words that are coming out of her own mouth (fingers?) is too much to ask.

A.C. McCloud said...

Inga, you can't say "let the chips fall where they may" then say "this will not lead to impeachment".

Well, you can, but it doesn't follow any logic.

Chances are this will not harm Obama--it hasn't even grazed him yet despite the 4 State employees that may not have actually been fired--but the bigger question on Benghazi is WHY.

What was going on there that required the CIA GRS teams and dissuaded use of a military rescue? How involved was Mohammed Zawahiri from Egypt, who was behind the protest of our embassy there? Was the "Abdel-Rahman brigade" involved in this attack (they had been implicated in previous attacks there) and if so, was all of this connected to AQ's/Muslim Brotherhood goal of getting the Blind Sheikh released? Or was it arms transfers to Syria?

Many questions linger. The State accountability report is probably a McGuffin.

Inga said...

Jay Jeans, are you insane? If not, you are doing a good impression.

Roger J. said...

I have my own, totally unsupported theory, that the administration used the Beghazi consulate as a conduit to try to run arms to Syrian rebels--the operation was discovered by AQ or AQ's operatives thus the attack. We will never know, I fear.

SteveR said...

I agree with Roger J. The reason HRC's "testimony" creates a higher level of interest than it might otherwise merit is that the handling of the Benghazi event was, to my view anyway, something that was (and still is) being swept under the rug.

That very possibly led to results of Nov 6 and when you add in the longstanding Clintonian tradition of lying, is a sore spot. We think we know what happened, we want to know why and who's responsible. Not some State Dept flunky who resigned and then didn't. Not Valerie Jarrett or David Axelrod who gave Susan Rice the bogus talking points.

We are rightfully skeptical we'll get the truth from Clinton yet we are left woth no real explanation of why we haven't heard from her or if we ever will.

Am I a bit pissed off? No this is not impeachable. Its just a damn shame we can't get the fucking truth from anybody.

Shouting Thomas said...

You keep attempting to place yourealf inside my head and then you proceed to say what you think I'm thinking, as I've said before Nathan, you are almost always wrong when you do this.

The thought of being placed inside Inga's head is simultaneously hideous and hilarious.

Got help me, I don't want to see the thicket inside that noggin. Abandon all hope ye who enter here.

At last Inga is in her reasonable mode. This is often true at the beginning of threads. I guarantee you it won't last for long.

chickelit said...

Perhaps you know more about the ins and outs of impeachment than I do, please elaborate. I'm not being snarky, maybe I've missed something.

Since we're talking about Clintons here, I'd like to interject that WJC was under threat of impeachment and this probably made him a better man for it--it least more humble. Government fearing the people as someone quoted Jefferson in another thread.

Inga has conceded (3:36 PM, above) that minimally, negligence or most wrongdoing may be involved. And yet we have a stonewalling White House and an utterly incurious WH Press Corpse (save Fox). That is arrogance--Obama personified.

Shouting Thomas said...

Jay Jeans, are you insane? If not, you are doing a good impression.

As I said, I didn't expect the reasonable bit to last long.

Soon, Inga and Ritmo will be having a heart to heart. You must read it to believe it.

Nathan Alexander said...

Inga,
Because of what we already know for a fact.

What we already know the White House has done is in violation of his oath of office. That is worth impeachment.

But even aside from that, you haven't even heard Ms. Clinton's testimony yet, and you are already insisting that nothing happened that deserves impeachment.

You can say let the chips fall where they may, which includes the possibility of impeachment, or you can say that there will be no impeachment (which you have), meaning that you are expressedly excluding one possible* the chips may land.

Inherently self-contradictory.

*I say "possible" even though Obama's undeniable deliberate lying to the American populace for political gain is already grounds for removal from office. See: Nixon, Richard M.

Nathan Alexander said...

There are two ways to not support Obama's removal from office for his deliberate lies to the American people:
1) Ignorance
2) Preference for Power over Accountability.

And the media is doing its part to ensure most Americans fall into category 1.

chickelit said...

Roger J. said...
I have my own, totally unsupported theory, that the administration used the Beghazi consulate as a conduit to try to run arms to Syrian rebels--the operation was discovered by AQ or AQ's operatives thus the attack. We will never know, I fear.

This is consonant with Inga's insistence after the story broke that "Loose Lips Sink Ships."

Shouting Thomas said...

Forget the impeachment stuff, boys.

It makes you look as whacky as Inga.

Obama is not going to be impeached. Short of being observed in the act of murder on videotape, that ain't gonna happen.

Shouting Thomas said...

And for those of you who are carrying on about impeachment, do you really want to see the bloodbath that's going to provoke?

Really, you've got to be nuts to contemplate that.

Inga said...

Nathan, if you haven't noticed I'm not the only one in this thread who thinks impeachment won't be the end result and they are conservatives.

Inga said...

Shouting Thomas, LOL, it's wacky, not whacky. Althouse pointed that out to you the other day, dontcha remember?

Shouting Thomas said...

It's whacky, as in a slap upside the head.

machine said...

Impeachment? Hahahahahaha

Roger J. said...

Chicklit-were my theory correct, the big question is how AQ--or other bad guys--managed to crack the operation.

Shouting Thomas said...

Remember, boys, no president has ever deserved impeachment and conviction more than Clinton, and Congress couldn't even get that done.

And, I voted twice for Clinton.

He lied to a grand jury, a crime for which he was later disbarred, and the Senate refused to convict him.

Policy disputes are not going to lead to impeachment. No matter how much this Benghazi thing sticks in your craw, there's no impeachable offense here to carry on about.

Roger J. said...

And to add a small bit fuel to my theory re using the Libyan embassy to run arms to Syria rebels: that smacks to me of a CIA operation. And since General Petraeus's fall from grace, the CIA testimony has been notably lacking. To paraphrase deep throat: follow the silence.

machine said...

Must...save...country...from...

Inga said...

Roger, you always make so much sense! :)

Shouting Thomas said...

Roger, you always make so much sense! :)

Coming from Inga, that's not necessarily a compliment!

chickelit said...

@Roger J: The WH's ham-handed attempt to scapegoat the videomaker was—in the context of the election—galling on the national stage, which is all that really matters. Inga's (and her bedfellow Cedarford's) vociferous defense of that smear as the root cause of Benghazi were also prominent here at the time. I suspect these are reasons why both are despised so here. But under your theory, all points are moot.

Shouting Thomas said...

You guys might also want to remember that, even if Hillary testifies before Congress and drops bombshell after bombshell incriminating the Obama administration in malfeasance...

The press is going to downplay it. Remember? They're on Obama's side.

Half of what is needed to make impeachment possible is public condemnation, usually stoked by the press. That's the way it worked with Nixon.

Not gonna happen with Obama. The press is in the bag with him.

Roger J. said...

Chicklit: exactly--the perfect storm for deniability--all kinds of atmospherics to detract from the basic of objective of the operation. As a general rule, I don't give much credence to conspiracy theories. But I can see why the administration might want to support Syrian rebels and not antagonize other players in the region. Were the operation compromised, and in my judgment it was, then all the other incidental events draw attention away from the basic goal of the operation.

OK--I am now getting into Tom Clancy territory here--I recognize that. And ironically were the goal of the administration to arm Syrian rebels, I would have supported that goal.

Enough of my theories.

chickelit said...

There is something unassailable about Democrat leaders which differs from what they used to mean by "Teflon Ron" on the other side.

I mean, beginning with JFK and including but not limited to his brothers, Clinton, and now Obama--and even in the face of clear evidence--these men can do no wrong. I suspect it has to do with charismatic attraction--sexual even at some level (whether it be attractive for women or emulative for men). This is utterly different than what Reagan had going which was more based on character.

Jack Sparks said...

@President Mom-Jeans

It's almost hard to keep up with, what with the brother who was in vietnam, the combat medic daughter, the lawyer daughter, and the son who is a carpenter? Or was it a butcher, baker, or candlestick maker? And thats just the ones she had made up since I wandered over from Instapundit.

Making up kids is Inga's bread and butter. That and snapping an endless series of 3/4 headshots highlighting her grotesque bug-eyes. And compulsively hitting refresh on her perpetually empty eHarmony in-box.

Why people bother responding to her posts is beyond me. Even my son, who was three times decorated in two World Wars, can't understand it.

Inga said...

Jack Sparks=President Mom Jeans= Jay= insane Althouse commenter.

Proceed.

chickelit said...

Inga said...
Chickelit, if you want to deny that there wasn a partisan feeding frenzy going on, then you are being disingenuous.

There was a frickin' election going on at the time so yes, of course there was partisanship involved. There was also blind partisan allegiance on display.


chickelit said...

From you, especially.

ricpic said...

Is there no end to this dastardly Tea Party interference in Ruling Party rule? Wreckers!

Shouting Thomas said...

chicklit, there is something to what you say.

In the popular memory, JFK was assassinated by a right wing bigot.

In fact, Lee Harvey Oswald was a commie double agent who had studied in the USSR and had connections to the KGB.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

chickelit said...

There is something unassailable about Democrat leaders which differs from what they used to mean by "Teflon Ron" on the other side.


I don't get it either, but what it boils down to is the perception that that's just the way Democrats are. If a Republican fucks an intern, that's hypocrisy, but if it's a Democrat, well, heh, heh, that's just how those rascals operate.

Jack Sparks said...

@Inga

Sorry, grandma. Jack Sparks is a Jack Sparks original.

chickelit said...

If a Republican fucks an intern, that's hypocrisy, but if it's a Democrat, well, heh, heh, that's just how those rascals operate.

There used to be a double standard for Democrats too. It concerned taxes. If a Democrat or a generic lefty were caught cheating or avoiding taxes it was scandalous precisely because it was hypocrisy. For Republicans it was "just what they do." But look at that French actor--he's a lefty, a tax dodge, and a hero. So were the Beatles and the Stones. Maybe there's a different standard for citizens vs. politicians? John Kerry did catch some grief over his yacht. There should be countless opportunities in the coming years for the press to excoriate Democrat tax hypocrisy. The question is whether they will care. It used to be that all such stories sold. Maybe that's the root problem--news isn't sold anymore--at least directly--is it?

Jake Diamond said...

Jack Sparks is a Jack Sparks original.

Hey, a new member of the Inga Fan Club. Have fun with this one, Inga!

Shouting Thomas said...

Jake, I've been meaning to ask.

Are you shiloh's evil twin brother?

You've have many of the same verbal tics as shiloh, although shiloh has a decent disposition.

You're more of a demented, rabid dog.

n.n said...

The gates of the castle are not impenetrable.

Finally, this administration may actually be held accountable for something. The reason they have chosen to run amuck is because their risk for being censured or incarcerated was low and the opportunity cost for various agendas was also low, courtesy of purchased support through emotional extortion and redistributive change, and lies of commission, omission, and deception, especially by JournoLists, but other special interests as well.

chickelit said...

If I had to guess who Jake (Adamant) Diamond used to be on Althouse under a different name I'd guess: link

Same intonations, obsessions, sense of humor, etc. Just a hunch, though.

Shouting Thomas said...

chickelit,

You call that a "sense of humor?"

chickelit said...

Not my flavor, but yes.

ricpic said...

The biggest irony of all is that it was the "planetary humanist" who cooked up our Libyan "adventure" in the first place, in cahoots with Susan Rice and that Responsibility to Protect gal herself, Samantha Powers. It was those three harpies who essentially dragged Barry into leading from behind in that undeclared kinetic military operation. Which makes her responsible for everything (murdered Americans at Benghazi and gun running included) that happened during and after the war that was not a war.

Inga said...

Jake, he's nothing more than a cook in a greasy spoon. A nobody who thinks he's somebody online.

AJ said...

"Jeff Daniels would make a very convincing Hillary Clinton."


... greatest line on this blog. ever.

Inga said...

And he's bald and fat! LMAO.

SteveR said...

ST: Careful Jake will call you a dumbass (again). Of course now he will call me a dumbass. He's a dumbass expert. He's a dumbass commenter. No one knows more about being a dumbass, he'll tell you.

Remember when "Jeremy" (et al) would end every comment with "DuH!' Jake's got that dumbass beat.

Inga said...

And the Vikings suck.

Lem said...

Impeach Inga.

Lem said...

Oh, and deport that British guy while you are at it.

Deb said...

Hilary tired? I thought she didn't feel no ways tired.

creeley23 said...

It's amazing how often you righties set yourselves up for disappointment. Still longing for impeachment?

Inga: We might have been disappointed when we entered World War II. There were no guarantees that would have a happy ending. But most of us thought it was the right thing to do.

Any liberal who believes that Watergate was wrong and the impeachment of Nixon should have been pursued is an utter hypocrite if they do not apply the same reasoning to Benghazi.

Unfortunately for the nation, most liberals are utter hypocrites.

Impeach Obama.

Michael K said...

"So will they back their fellow senators or will they backroom deal Hillary out of it to save Kerry? Them remaining silent would be one option but it would leave them wearing giant hypocrite hats."

This doesn't make sense. Sorry but Rice lied about the Benghazi events on national TV. Hillary also lied but it wasn't as brazen and we expect everyone in the Obama administration to lie anyway. Maybe he should nominate Lisa Jackson as Sec State. She has the necessary qualifications. She's black.

We've known about Kerry since 1972 and Massachusetts keeps electing him.

Michael K said...

"How is this not serious? How is that he didn't have much to do with it?"

Ask Valerie. She has his balls in her brief case.

Coketown said...

Oh my God, im-peach-mint cobbler sounds delicious.

But nobody's getting impeached. BUT, also, impeachment fantasies are a healthy expression of frustration that both sides enjoy. The Bush years were the pinnacle. The way the left lathered themselves with the froth of Bush impeachment delusions was a delightful spectacle.

I'm actually comforted by the fact that there are so few things that can actually eject the president--any president--from office. Otherwise it'd be fucking Wisconsin all the goddamn time.

Tonight I'm going to enjoy a warm bubble bath with tea and candles. Maybe even tea candles. And I'll fantasize about Obama being impeached and having to go work as a line cook at some shitty Denny's in Chicago. And when he gets fired for being too liberal with the bacon, I'll reach total blissful relaxation and slide into the tub, totally submerged beneath the bubbles.

Coketown said...

Oh, yeah, umm, back on topic...Hillary...needs to be pumped for information...James Bond style. John McCain, now's your time to shine. There. A productive addition to the conversation.

Marshal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Coketown said...

A cook in a greasy spoon? WTF is that? A metaphor? Is it like a wolf in sheep's clothing? Or a tempest in a teapot? I have an image of a cook in a greasy spoon, but it doesn't mean anything.

Aridog said...

Inga said...

Jake, he's nothing more than a cook in a greasy spoon. A nobody who thinks he's somebody on-line ... And he's bald and fat! LMAO.

How cute. You certainly seem to enjoy hurling personal invectives as if you actually know someone. Maybe you do. But remember, not so long ago you were clearly identified by your full name...right here in river city ... because you just couldn't shut up yakking at your purported "stalker."

I'd be careful who I pissed off if I were you. But I'm not, so have your fun calling people fat, and insignificant.

Marshal said...

Inga said...
Jake, he's nothing more than a cook in a greasy spoon. A nobody who thinks he's somebody online.


Revealing that Inga's so comfotable supporting Jake and Shiloh. It's almost like her professed desire for decency is an act.

chickelit said...

Anybody here old enough and situated to remember Marco's Restaurant in a two storey Milwaukee cream brick building on the corner of Parmenter and University in Middleton, WI? It's long gone--a The Bank Of Middleton sits there now--but my mother always referred to Marco's as "The Greasy Spoon." They had great Friday Fish Frys.

I never worked there.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

Does Jack Spark/ Jay / President Mom Jeans know me personally or anything at all about me? What gives this lunatic the right to say I have invented my own children? What the hell is the matter with you people?

Turnabout is a bitch. I'm done being abused here and not fighting back.

Inga said...

Aridog, it's amazing how you ethical conservatives turn your head when a liberal is being abused here, I've come to the conclusion you folks have absolutely no decency or morals.

Aridog said...

Inga...let me quote you:

Turnabout is a bitch.

I admit, I don't think you have clue one about why you get "attacked".


As you were, carry on...

Inga said...

Aridog, read the thread from the beginning , then let me know what I said that warranted a personal attack of the magnitude that followed, can you honestly say it was warranted? If so you need to examine your own soul.

Marshal said...

Inga said...
Aridog, it's amazing how you ethical conservatives turn your head when a liberal is being abused here,


I'd ask how the ethical liberals act but unfortunately none post here.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

I've been disgusted many times by the behavior of some commenters here, but what is truly more disgusting and disturbing is the way most of you stand by when someone is being attacked viciously and personally here, it's cowardly, low.

I've stuck my neck out and defended conservatives here on occasion, as a matter of fact, one of them was Shouting Thomas, way back when Spinelli was accusing him of pedophilia. What have I gotten in return from ST?

It's shameful that many of you call yourselves Christian, it's sickening to see the rank hypocrisy, disgusting.

chickelit said...

Now this is cool! It really works too!

Inga said...

But you know what? It's all good, because it serves the purpose of putting you fine conservatives on display to the rest of the political blogging world, shows off the caliber of a typical Althouse commenter, bravo! Keep up the good work.

Be proud of yourselves, this blog comments section serves as a mirror for those not completely blind.

Aridog said...

Inga...I can only suggest one thing to you, based upon your comments today and previously. The blog is about a conversation, not a contest where defenses and offenses are germane.

Oh, and thanks for the guidance on things "Christian" ... since I've only been one since 08 April 2012. I'm beginning to think it was a mistake.

Marshal said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMTT0LW0M_Y

This one seems to express her lack of self awareness.

Inga said...

Well Aridog, that makes two of us, my experience here at Althouse has been a real eye opener, I never knew so many cowards and bullies and hypocrites could congregate in one place.

creeley23 said...

Oh my God, im-peach-mint cobbler sounds delicious.

But nobody's getting impeached. BUT, also, impeachment fantasies are a healthy expression of frustration that both sides enjoy.


Coketown: Ridicule is not an argument.

I don't claim to know that Obama will be impeached.

I am saying that Benghazi is a very serious matter, and it's clear that something is being covered up. So Republicans can and should push for it.

If Nixon could be threatened with impeachment over Watergate, there is no reason that Obama can't be threatened with impeachment over Benghazi.

Impeach Obama.

EMD said...

Well Aridog, that makes two of us, my experience here at Althouse has been a real eye opener, I never knew so many cowards and bullies and hypocrites could congregate in one place.

Enough of your moral preening.

Heat. Kitchen. Get out.

EMD said...

Well Aridog, that makes two of us, my experience here at Althouse has been a real eye opener, I never knew so many cowards and bullies and hypocrites could congregate in one place.

Enough of your moral preening.

Heat. Kitchen. Get out.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lydia said...

Coketown said...
Hillary...needs to be pumped for information...James Bond style. John McCain, now's your time to shine. There. A productive addition to the conversation.

Don't think that's going to happen.

Remember his pal Lindsey Graham is on record having said this about her: "She is extremely well respected throughout the world, handles herself in a very classy way and has a work ethic second to none."

Hard as it is to believe, they like her.

Inga said...

As far as moral preening, at least I have some to preen.

tiger said...

If you're not angry with the Obama administration you're not paying attention

Inga said...

EMD, I've taken more heat here than any of you conservatives could on any liberal blog. I have more intestinal fortitude than the majority of you. I'll continue to tell you all what cowards you are when warranted.

Lionheart said...

Inga, you are a scold. Sometimes correctly, most times not. In either case, no one likes being around a scold.

betamax3000 said...

Benghaziquidddick: everyone gets to swim free except the poor bastard underwater in the embassy waiting for help to arrive...

Inga said...

Lionheart, oh well, too bad. Just consider it a learning experience. .

garage mahal said...

Still flogging this Benghazi nonsense I see. I wonder how many conservatives truly think it's a real controversy. Most I would guess.

Inga said...

It's a damn shame that I a liberal, need to scold you adult conservatives. It's a lesson in human decency.

betamax3000 said...

I took Human Decency in college back in the day. Main thing I remember: if you throw a Baby Ruth in the swimming pool you are obliged to announce that it is, specifically, a Baby Ruth.

EMD said...

It's a damn shame that I a liberal, need to scold you adult conservatives. It's a lesson in human decency.

I don't pretend to think I'm better than anyone here on this blog, including you.

Inga said...

When I throw something in this cesspool even if it's a Baby Ruth, it wouldn't be recognized.

EMD said...

EMD, I've taken more heat here than any of you conservatives could on any liberal blog. I have more intestinal fortitude than the majority of you. I'll continue to tell you all what cowards you are when warranted.

It must be hard being so much damn better than everyone around you. Such a burden to bear.

Inga said...

EMD, I AM better than those who stand by and watch abuse happen before their eyes, yes I hold myself in higher regard than cowards and bullies, and if you are not a coward or a bully, so should you. Should we sink to the lowest common denominator or try to rise above it?

Inga said...

No burden at all EMD.

EMD said...

I've been disgusted many times by the behavior of some commenters here, but what is truly more disgusting and disturbing is the way most of you stand by when someone is being attacked viciously and personally here, it's cowardly, low.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but internet comments will never hurt me.

betamax3000 said...

The level of the lowest common denominator has the advantage in center of balance. Jazz hands kill.

chickelit said...

Impeach Obama

Entirely premature. I'd be happy if the Tapper-type Press Corpses asked him a question once in a while. Yes, I blame them for creating the arrogant monster by giving him too much deference. Only they are in a position to undo what they did.

Inga said...

Too bad, my scolding was for your own good. Oh well, continue on your lowly path, or grow a set of morals.

EMD said...

EMD, I AM better than those who stand by and watch abuse happen before their eyes

I stopped trying to control the actions of other people long ago ... and I became a much happier and contented person.



EMD said...

or grow a set of morals.

Inga, the Righteous Theocrat.

Inga said...

EMD, I couldn't live with myself standing by watching abuse by bullies. I'm a nurse, it's in my nature to not stand by.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
EMD said...

EMD, I couldn't live with myself standing by watching abuse by bullies. I'm a nurse, it's in my nature to not stand by.

Thanks for reminding me you're a nurse. We all had no clue. ; )

Inga said...

I hope you EMD, are not in the medical field.

EMD said...

I hope you EMD, are not in the medical field

Why?

betamax3000 said...

Didn't we learn in a previous thread that Tawana Brawley was now a nurse?

Inga said...

EMD, If you stood by as someone was being attacked because you felt you could not control another person's actions, that would make me wonder if you were empathetic enough to be in a healing profession.

chickelit said...

A Nurse's Oath:

With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my art. I will not cut a person who: is suffering with a stone, but will leave this to be done by practitioners of this work. Into whatever houses I enter I will go into them for the benefit of the sick and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief and corruption; and further from the seduction of females or males, bound or free.

EMD said...

EMD, If you stood by as someone was being attacked because you felt you could not control another person's actions, that would make me wonder if you were empathetic enough to be in a healing profession.

You are hilariously conflating an internet comment section with reality.

When I talk about "controlling others actions" i mean manipulating their behaviors to suit my needs, comfort and happiness.

Inga said...

Oky Doky, just spanked y'all for your own good, you'll thank me one day ;) .

betamax3000 said...

I not only thank those who spank me but also give a generous tip.

Inga said...

Oh and by the way, my four very real grown children turned out to be great caring responsible decent human beings, because I didn't mince words with them either.

betamax3000 said...

My imaginary children are pretty cool, too. The one with three arms will knit your socks on.

Inga said...

Betamax, the apple didn't fall far from the tree?

betamax3000 said...

The apple fell very close indeed, but it wasn't an apple tree in proximity so there are fruit-management issues.

Matt said...

"Senate Republicans refuse to confirm Kerry until Hillary testifies about Benghazi."

So, in other words, Republicans are again blocking anything and everything Democrats do? Great. No wonder nothing gets done in Washington. How about approve of Kerry and then ask Hillary to come back to testify? Is that too much to ask?

Btw, this apparent Benghazi cover-up is about a 2 on a scale of 10 with Reagan's Iran-Contra being a 10.

chickelit said...

How about approve of Kerry and then ask Hillary to come back to testify?

Is HRC under the same obligation to disclose while a sitting SoS vs. a former one? I believe these questions came up in the context of Petraeus.

chickelit said...

I mean Matt, just because you're hyperpartisan and all doesn't mean you get to impute stupidity upon your opponents. It makes you look stupid to do so.

chickelit said...

Inga said...
Oh and by the way, my four very real grown children turned out to be great caring responsible decent human beings, because I didn't mince words with them either.

Can we suppose that Lincoln's mom (and Obama's mom for that matter) took the same measure of credit?

Inga said...

Yes I take credit for raising my children right. They deserve credit for learning my motherly lessons well, which enabled them to not fuck up royally.

Inga said...

And make something of themselves.

EMD said...

Yes I take credit for raising my children right. They deserve credit for learning my motherly lessons well, which enabled them to not fuck up royally.

You are like, the best person, ever!

chickelit said...

If Inga's head gets any bigger Althouse will notice the encroachment.

Inga said...

EMD, why yes, yes I just might be the bestest of the best on Althouse. You are lucky to be in my presence, learn little ones and one day you too shall be a grownup.

Patting you on your sweet noggins and whiping your nose. Don't cry anymore, mommy still loves you and spanked you for your own good. Now run along and be good conservative children, don't bully and be brave.

Lydia said...

It’s a great temptation for a mother with fine adult children to take the credit for them being so.

I’ve done my best to resist that, though, with regard to my adult daughter. A lot goes into making good people, much of it a mystery.

And a generous helping of good luck doesn’t hurt.

Inga said...

"You didn't build that!"

Tim said...

All these typed words from Inga...did any of it make any sense?

Anyone?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 225   Newer› Newest»