Skip to main content

View Diary: So what is Benghazi all about? (170 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thug trivializing Watergate is what pisses me off (3+ / 0-)

    most here.

    Watergate was not about the burlgary.  It was not about 'getting political opponents'.  It was not about 'lying to the public'.  Heck, it was not even about the 'cover up', unless by that you mean using certain means.

    Watergate was a fatal threat to the American Republic in the same way that killed the Roman Republic.  Nixon ordered the military via CIA to usurp authority to him that the Constitution and acts of Congress expressly reserved for civilian domestic law enforcement, the FBI.  His acts were of a kind with Ceaser bringing his army into Rome, thereby forever making the ultimate authority of the nation the military and thus its Commander-in-Cheif.

    That is what Nixon was doing.

    BC 'when the President does it' with the military, 'its legal' by Nixon's view of the Constitution.

    That in a nutshell is what Thugs since Nixon have and still see the Constitution as, as long as POTUS is Thug (and of course they truely believe only Thug Presidents are legitimate).  That is the common thread that runs from Watergate thru Iran-Contra (it wasn't about the hostages, it was about 'heroic Reaganauts' making RightWing war in Central America ala Kissenger's coup in Allende's Chile in direct violation and flagrant defiance of the law) through the Clinton 'scandals' (their CinC hero Bush1 was defeated by an illegitimate-by-definition Democrat so they spent years ginning up 'scandals' until they caught him on a trumped up charge* on which to impeach him - a true attempted coup, albeit by ostensibly legal means - with the delicious irony that he was at the time of same legitimately executing his CinC power at a real enemy, Bin Ladin, and thus 'restored' their 'True Dynastic Line' via Bush2 and DarthCheney).

    Understanding this, I understand completely why Benghazi both does not matter (and likely will backfire on Thugs) but they simply can not let it go.

    *'Trumped up' bc technically Clinton did not lie under oath.  The perjury-trap question in the deposition was botched by the conspirators, so Clinton's answer was not technically false and so their could not be perjury (tho it likely was sufficient for disbarment under the lower ethics standard).

    •  Thanks for remembering for those who have... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...forgotten or never knew.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Thu May 09, 2013 at 12:45:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is it really so difficult to teach this in school (0+ / 0-)

        ?  I mean, its only true.

        Granted its not Jesus riding dinos, but still.... oh, never mind.
        Hail (Thug) Ceaser!

      •  Ditto! Watergate was 'obstruction of (0+ / 0-)

        justice' and Iran-Contra (and, though it was never charged, Operation Shocking and Awful) was 'fraud on the people of the United States'.

        I have yet to hear one single thing alleged about Benghazi that even remotely rises (or sinks) that standard of malfeasance.

        It's misogyny, wrapped in a McCartyite smear, in the guise of 'fact-finding.' Abso-fucking-lutely disgusting.

        I don't support Hillary but misogyny needs to be called out anytime it rears its ugly head and no matter what guise it comes wrapped in.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site