Washington, D. & C. June 7, 2013.
Today, in this apparently exclusive report, an allegedly shocking revelation has finally uncovered the truthfullessness of the Republican party’s allegations of the supposedly outrageous cover-up by the alleged Obama administration of the so-called terrorism attack by militants possibly affiliated with Al-Qaeda, Planned Parenthood or the supposedly defunct ACORN.
Unfounded Rumor Reveals the Truth of the Alleged Benghazi Cover Up
This fully anonymously sourced, more or less possible non-fabrication, has politicians of both parties as well as pundits, dupes, patsies, chumps and pettifoggers up in arms for totally different reasons about the Republican’s alleged conspiracy allegations and the counter-conspiracy counter allegations.
The first person to deny the rumors which are successfully undercutting the hyperbolic echo chamber of accusations by Republican conspiracy mongers was Representative Pecksniff Montebank, R., La La Land, who first came to public notice for authoring the bill to deny federal, state, televangelist or charitable funding for the Berne Subterfuge, which is located in Basil, Switzerland.
The BS, as it is popularly known, is a Particularization Accelerator, the purpose of which is to discover the elementary elements of language by breaking them down into their basic, or in lay man’s terms. teeny tiniest, particles. These include, but are not limited to, thingies such as the Logicalon particle, the Rationalon, whose meaning is self evident and therefore needs no explanation, the Axiom, whose existence at present is classified for national security reasons, and the Common Sensical, which, ironically enough, is thought to be the rarest element in the known universe.
The ultimate purpose of studying these elementary particles contained within the sub-atomic nature of words is to determine the existence of the alleged Truth Particle. Many politicians, their speech writers and advisors believe there is no need to spend somebody else’s money to discover what they consider to be the mythical Truth Particle, since they merely need to listen to their respective think tanks, lobbyists and television pundits to learn all they need to hear and to say, or briefly, hearsay.
When it was explained to Rep. Mountebank that no Federal funding or any U.S. funding was or had ever been allocated to the Berne Subterfuge, he sponsored the Mountebank Amendment, H.B. 12, which he asked to be attached to H.B. 36, the 313rd House bill since the 2011-12 legislative session designed to repeal Obamacare, whose real title is “The Affordable Care Bill to Enrage Apoplectic Conservatives Act.” Simply put, the bill would have allocated an equal amount of federal funding to the Berne Subterfuge as was allocated to tax breaks for one billion dollar minimum profit corporations.
When the amendment came up for a vote in the Republican dominated House, Rep. Mountebank made a motion to filibuster. House Speaker John Baner, R., Existence, explained to Rep. Montebank that only authentic Senators were allowed to filibuster and they could only filibuster Senate bills and hostile Sunday cable news shows.
After Rep. Mountebank convinced Rep. Baner how important it was for Republicans to go on record against funding the Berne Subterfuge, a vote was taken and Mountebank’s amendment was defeated 433 to 0, with Grover Norquist voting Present, as usual.
So what are the Republican accusations that these fly by night rumors are so effectively refuting. Senator John McBlaim, R. Aerozonea, and his college Sen. Lindsey-Buckingham-Gram, R., South Scarolina, have been the point men for the Republican party in exposing the dangerously placeboic nature of the Obama administration’s Benghazi conspiracy and subsequent cover-up.
The initial charges and accusations as to the scope and purpose of the Benghazi conspiracy were confusing at best and illogical at face value. Accusers could reply that the fact that they have not discovered any facts that made a lick of sense, should be sufficient proof to fellow Republicans, their supporters and the Fox News writers and alleged on-line talent, that this was a highly successful and mammoth government conspiracy of epic proportions. The two Senators were satisfied that this fact proved without a doubt the very thing that they had been warning the American people about for years. That a competently led, freely elected government staffed with dedicated employees could successfully implement a variety of programs, or conspiracies, known or unknown.
Better to leave such conspiracies, according to Sen. John McBlaim and Sen. Linsey-Woolsey Gram, to the private sector. The sooner that the government stops interfering with private sector conspiracies to defraud the public, the sooner the private sector will be empowered to create jobs in, for example, but not limited to, the foreclosure industry, the auto repossession industry, the food bank industry, the gun industry, to protect citizens from roving bands desperate for survival, as well as providing guns to roving bands desperate for survival, lawyers of course, the health care and insurance industry which will pretend to care for the health needs of who ever survives, and the funeral industry, estimated to be one of the future top growth industries under the various Republican “ Plans for the Future of America’s Future.” Go on and on and on online to see the pretexts of Rep. Paul Lyan’s, (R., De Lusion) double minded budget.”
This plea by Republicans for more private sector economic conspiracies is in keeping with past and present American values, like the recent and notably successful conspiracies of the deregulated savings and loan industry, the deregulated banking industry, their so-called evil spawn, the deregulated mortgage industry, and other de-regulated industries, which thanks to further deregulation of the Criminal Codes, those businesses and their executives can never be held accountable for their costly, allegedly horrible or apparently just plain dumb mistakes under our present system of “Lazy is Fair” (That’s French!) governance.
These private sector conspiracies are superior in effect and profit than the various historical government/private conspiracies like the Valley Forge conspiracy by military contractors to increase profits by providing inadequate or inedible rations to the Continental Line, Valley Forge.dot.two which was perpetrated upon the Union Army during the Civil War, (remember the taste of hard tack?) the Tea Pot Dome Scandal during the Grant administration, and not to mention Iran Contra.
One exception to the rule was the recent and successful scandal perpetuated by a certain Vice President who ensured that the corporation that he had recently led, Halliburton, was given lucrative no-bid government contracts for the duration of his “service to the country,” coincidentally saving his former employer from the brink of bankruptcy.
Of course, one should not presume the corporation is guilty merely because that corporation fled the country and set up headquarters in a Middle Eastern nation which, one could presume, does not have an extradition treaty with the United States.
But was the corruption that happened at Valley Forge or during the Bush/Cheney’s Iraq War unique to history?
Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, (1712-1786) discusses the supply problems and scandals that he faced in the Seven Years War between Prussia and Austria and her allies. The Prussian Army had a Commissary Department with primary responsibility for providing food to the rank and file, and just as importantly, brandy. But independent contractors called sutlers were also utilized when the army was on the march. They scoured the enemy countryside for food supplies which they stole and then sold to the Prussian army. However, according to Frederick, “you must be sure that the provisions are sold at a reasonable price so that the soldier is in a position to pay for them and the sutler makes an honest profit.” (page 113)
Moreover, “…agreements are made with local entrepreneurs to provide a specific amount. It is the task of the commissariat to negotiate and sign these agreements. …Purveyors must never be employed except when absolutely necessary, because they are even more exorbitant than the j**s, [racial slur removed]: they run up the price of provisions and sell them at an extravagant profit…” (page 309)
(Jay Luvaas, Frederick the Great and the Art of War. The Free Press. New York. 1966. )
As interesting as these details are, they are mere background information for the real story, the competing unfounded rumors which are the talk of the town, at least inside the Beltway, and which are galvanizing Americans as never before or since. These revelations finally explain the truthiness of the Benghazi conspiracy and cover-up. This quasi-information is being revealed for the first time in this exclusive article.
But first, what supporting evidence is there which can be used to independently verify or support the supposititious nature of the controversial over statements of the Republican conspira-cysts.
The Republicans contend there was a lack of security at the consulate at Benghazi which led to the deaths of four Americans and then subsequently, a crime was committed, the crime of a deliberate cover-up for partisan political purposes.
If I have not accurately described the Republican conspiracy allegations in this article, it’s not for lack of trying. As soon as they decide exactly what they are accusing the President of doing, maybe they will tell us.
Before we examine the various allegations in detail, first we need to discuss some crucial background information on crime detection. One method used by detectives to discover the likely perpetrator of a crime is to judge them against a two step matrix: First, did the suspect have a motive and second, did the suspect have the opportunity to commit the crime. A suspect with no apparent motive and no opportunity to commit the crime would move to the end of the list of likely suspects, while keeping in mind that some people who commit senseless crimes are psychopaths or socio-paths.
According to Rick Nauert, PhD. Senior News Editor, Psychcentral.com,
“Are some corporate CEO’s, doctors, lawyers, politicians and scientists psychopaths? The answer could be “yes” if you use a definition which labels individuals who are often intelligent and highly charismatic, but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions. Tack on the use of violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs and the label expands.”
And,
“So who are psychopaths? Broadly speaking, they are people who use manipulation, violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs. They can be intelligent and highly charismatic, but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions.”
(Emphasis mine.)
http://psychcentral.com/...
A sociopath is merely an apprentice psychopath or psychopath in training, or in other words, a Young Republican. .
As to the first matrix, did the Obama administration have a motive for ignoring the risk of a possible terrorist attack against an American consulate in Benghazi, or at any other American facility overseas. Did the Obana administration, for partisan political reasons, display no concern for the life of American citizens and diplomats? The answer is no.
Even the most rabid Obama hater would not espouse such a malicious and clear falsehood except behind closed doors or on Fox News. However, this particular untruth may or may not be the exact crime which the Republicans are accusing the President of committing. Still, it is important to raise the question, as that is the question which the possibly spurious rumors suggest might lead to a totally different answer.
The second matrix used by law enforcement is: did the suspect have an opportunity to commit the crime? Do the authorities have witnesses that will testify under oath that the suspect was either at the scene of the crime or in some other place at the time the crime was committed?
One of the crimes that the Republicans are accusing the President of committing is basically one of omission, neglect of security, and the other is one of commission, covering up the neglect for partisan political purposes. The question is, did President Obama or his administration have an opportunity to prevent the Benghazi attack? The US has very few personnel on the ground in Libya, by mutual agreement between both political parties and the Libyan government, and there seems to have been no substantive prior warning. Still, the buck always stops at the top. Especially in Republican Presidencies, in so far as those bucks are coming out of the vaults at Fort Knox and filling the pockets of Republicans officials and campaign contributors.
Still, it is safe to conclude that while the President’s administration could have done more, yet, when the administration and State Department asked for more resources for embassy security, Republicans in Congress refused. It will be more apparent why this is important as we investigate the events leading up to this incident, and the true culprits are revealed by their own words and deeds.
Another accusation that the Republicans make against President Obama is that the administration abandoned the ambassador and his companions by failing to send timely assistance. These Republicans seem to have watched too many Hollywood action movies, wherein a handful of brave Americans who are immune from bullets take on and defeat hundreds or more AK-47 wielding enemies who, thanks to the screenwriters, have unbelievably poor marksmanship skills.
Frederick the Great may be consulted again for insight on the issue of a hastily improvised rescue mission. He has listed some general maxims or rules for strategy “according to the situation in which one finds Himself.”
[Clarifications in brackets provided by me]
1. Whoever wants to undertake a war [or a battle] must procure accurate knowledge of the strength of the enemy that he is about to fight and of the assistance that the enemy can draw from his allies, in order to compare the enemy’s forces to his own and to judge which side is superior.
2. It is necessary to have an accurate knowledge of the country [or town] where one wants to wage war [or fight a battle] in order to arrange the details of the intended expedition [or rescue mission] accordingly.
3. You must pay the greatest attention to the provisions [and weapons and ammo] you will need for this campaign [or rescue mission] and must not limit your activities to collecting them, but must think beforehand of means to facilitate their transport. [example, a secure and safe LZ, or landing zone]
Also,
1. Your strategy must pursue an important objective. Undertake only what is possible and reject whatever is chimerical. …Give battle only when you have reason to hope that your success will be decisive…
2. Never deceive yourself, but picture skillfully all the measures that the enemy will take to oppose your plans, in order never to be caught by surprise. Then, having foreseen everything in advance, you will already have remedies prepared for any eventuality.
3. Know the mind of the opposing generals [or terrorist leaders] in order better to divine their actions….
4. Consider all the mischief that the enemy can do to you and prevent it by your prudence.
5. Leave as little to fortune as possible by your foresight- chance will still have too much influence in military operations.
(Luvaas, Frederick the Great. Pages 334-335)
[Author’s note. The following information was written earlier in May and consisted of my best estimate of the options at that time. I have since learned more accurate information concerning the possibility of a successful Rescue Force being sent to Benghazi, but I am only updating obvious errors, within brackets, to demonstrate how the fog of war can persist in all of us over time.]
Republicans fault the President and his administration for not mounting the rescue mission that some in Tripoli and in Washington after the fact had proposed. Many of the details concerning the possibilities of the proposed rescue mission as well as the strength of the terrorists are still enveloped in the fog of war.
There are conflicting reports about the number of terrorists, with estimates of from 20 to 40 to as many as 100. The proposed rescue force consisted of 4 special forces soldiers from Tripoli. [Actually 6] US Special Forces soldiers are the best in the world, but they are not make believe Hollywood actor super soldiers.
The rescue force would have traveled to Benghazi in helicopters. [Actually they took a plane, probably a CIA corporate jet, seating about 20 passengers] Choppers are audible from dozens of miles away, especially in a desert environment. To have any hope of surprise, which would be necessary when facing overwhelming odds, the rescue force would have to land miles outside of town, and walk in, arriving at dawn at best. By the time the rescue force arrived, the terrorists, who need the cover of night for protection, would probably be long gone. [The Rescue Force landed at the airport and hitched a ride to the compound with a local militia]
A prudent commander would not land the Rescue Force on the compound lawn with all guns blazing. The commanding officer would assume that the terrorists had anticipated some sort of US response, and that the terrorists would have laid a trap for any US response force. Since the terrorist’s goal is not to capture and hold real estate, but to kill Americans, it is likely that the rescue force would have been ambushed and some possibly killed, ala Black Hawk Down. [The ambush more or less happened]
Naturally, if such a sad scenario took place, the Republicans would blame the Obama administration for recklessly risking the lives of the American soldiers in the rescue force, as many of these same type of Republicans did to President Clinton and President Carter. [They did. Republicans said the four men died because of lack of security, but the two fatalities of the mortar attack happened after the Tripoli Rescue Force arrived]
Of course, the US Armed Services has standard operating procedures for dealing with most all possibilities and most situations. At several points in time, the US military did offer the Ambassador extra security, which he declined.
The Army has divided the world into various Service Commands, whose commanding officer is responsible for various military and political affairs within their jurisdiction. Military affairs in Libya and the rest of Africa are the responsibility of the Commander of United States Army Africa (USARAF) located in Vicenza, Italy.
According to the web site of United States Army Africa, which is the Army Service Component Command for U.S. Africa Command, it “enables full-spectrum operations while conducting sustained security engagement with African land forces to promote security, stability and peace. As directed, deploys a contingency headquarters in support of crisis response.”
Today, there are multiple venues for communicating information, for example, State Department operatives in the field can have practically instantaneous communications to Washington, D.C., but the State Department does not have their own army. A military response requires the State and Defense Departments to communicate with each other and figure out what military operations would be feasible as a response.
In the military chain of command, incidents in Africa such as Benghazi would be reported first to the USARAF headquarters whose commander would have the responsibility for gathering intelligence and making recommendations as to possible actions. Not the President or even the Secretary of Defense.
According to former Defense Secretary Gates, USARAF does not have a Ready Response Force or fully armed jet fighters idling on the runway ready to take off at a moment’s notice. Moreover, most sovereign nations request that even friendly nations request permission before entering their airspace, since to do so without asking permission is considered an act of war.
Thus we see that there was no feasible or possible way for the US to mount a rescue operation in Benghazi as I have described above and as the Republicans insist should have been done.
Except, there was one.
According to new information, new to me at least, both the distinguished news gathering operation CBS News and Fox News published Benghazi time-lines in the months after the attack. Both time-lines show that a Rescue Force was dispatched from Tripoli by plane. After a delay at the airport while transportation and safe escort were arranged, the convoy arrived at the compound at approximately 3 a.m. The fighting had died down at approximately midnight. The Rescue Force was accompanied by “dozens” of Libyan vehicles, some mounting 50 caliber machine guns. Up to that time, only the Ambassador and one aide had been killed.
The presence of the Rescue Force almost certainly induced the mortar attack at 4 a.m. that killed former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty and seriously wounded two others.
Both time-lines are discussed in full in a separate article.
Now, back to the conspiracy mongers.
Another technique frequently used by detectives who are trying to identify a murder suspect is to attend the funeral of the victim. Detectives closely watch the faces of relatives and friends of the deceased to see if anyone seems satisfied or happy at the guest of honor’s untimely demise. The relevance of this will be obvious later in this article.
All that being said, it is time to finally reveal the rumors which so many Republicans are trying to suppress, and which possibly reveal the dark truth about Benghazi.
These rumors are based on verifiable facts. It’s true that the facts point to several possible answers, but when the facts do not implicate President Obama, then the answer, which these rumors all point to, leave only one possible explanation. According to Arthur Conan Doyle, Sr. “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
These apparently true rumors state plainly, “Yes, there is a conspiracy, but it is a Republican conspiracy, not an Obama conspiracy.” This rumored conspiracy is long standing and includes well known politicians, pundits and shadowy power brokers operating so far behind the scenes that it is impossible to know if they even exist. Yet, they do.
But first, which Republicans are the ringmasters and who are the rodeo clown followers of this diabolical conspiracy, Many readers are saying “Aha! I know who the ringleaders are.” If you’re thinking Sen. John McBlame and Sen. Lindsey-Lohan-Gram, you are wrong. Of course, they are playing an important part, they are out front in their criticism and accusations, but their role is an unwitting one, they are mere patsys. Every mocked-up conspiracy worth its weight in hogwash has to have fall guys ready to take the heat when the conspiracy is exposed. The leaders of the Republicans conspiracy never liked those two anyway.
Some experts will say that the conspiracy began the week of President Obama’s election. While jubilant Democrats were celebrating by dancing the night, and the Bush administration, away, Republican political leaders met in smoke free rooms to plan their masterful agenda to make President Obama a one term president. Of course, there’s nothing nefarious about that, that’s politics as usual.
However, when the Republicans use unheard of obstructionist tactics and out right sabotage of the political process (over 300 filibusters in the Senate in less than four years) that’s not politics as usual anymore. It’s a conspiracy to wreck a popular and legitimately elected administration and the perps don’t care that American citizens and the U.S. government ends up as collateral damage.
The Benghazi aspect of the Republican conspiracy began when the Republicans in Congress refused to allocate the funds that the administration and State Department sought for upgraded embassy security. Of course, the Republicans did not know that the facility in Benghazi was going to be specifically hit by terrorists. But they knew from past experience that at least one U.S. facility around the world was sure to be hit sooner or later. (Over a dozen U.S. facilities were attacked during the Bush administration, with over two dozen casualties) Especially so since the Republicans had irresponsibly denied the administration the money to protect those facilities. They knew it was only a matter of time. And once an attack occurred, then, they would gleefully pounce with their impeachment ploy.
Strangely, Republicans ignored all of the terrorists attacks during the Bush administration. Could it be that all these Republicans care about is having the key to Fort Knox in Republican hands, and are ready to do and say anything to get their hands on the loot?
If the blame for this terrorist attack can be laid at the feet of these Republicans, and it can, then who are the Republican men and women behind this conspiracy? One would think they would try to keep a low profile, but they are so full of hate and anger that they cannot restrain themselves. To identify these Republicans it is only necessary to see who is foaming at the mouth and spitting out the “I” word.
The following suspects are listed in alphabetical order, not in order of importance.
[Comments in brackets are supplied by me]
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)
In 2011, Republican presidential hopeful Bachmann said
she is “ready to make a “determination” on impeachment.
According to the Huffington Post, Rep. Michele Bachmann recently told a tea party rally that she's asked every weekend why Congress isn't working to impeach President Barack Obama.
"I will tell you, as I have been home in my district, in the sixth district of Minnesota, there isn't a weekend that hasn't gone by that someone says to me, 'Michelle, what in the world are you all waiting for in Congress? Why aren't you impeaching the president? He's been making unconstitutional actions since he came into office,'"
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)
Chaffetz, quoted in the Salt Lake Tribune, said “he won’t take the possibility of impeachment off the table because he didn’t know what other details related to Benghazi will emerge.”
[Oops. So far, the further details which have emerged have exonerated the administration]
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)
In January 2013, Gohmert said that President Obama had “already abused the law enough times that it’s just been staggering.” According to Newsmax, Gohmer said “…using an executive order to implement gun laws would be sufficient grounds to impeach Obama.”
Sen James Inhofe, (R. OK)
Sen. Inhofe called Benghazi the “most egregious cover-up in history,” He said that impeachment was “no longer a taboo subject.”
Sen. Darrell Issa, R. (CA)
Article by: Willie Carlisle May 12, 2013
http://www.examiner.com/...
Rep. Steve King (R-IA)
On Twitter, King declared that defaulting on the nation’s debt would lead to Obama’s impeachment.
[Since the debt limit default was also an integral part of the Republican conspiracy, shouldn’t the Republican officials who threatened to do it also be impeached.]
Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL)
When the White House lobbied for gun control, the first term Republican said in January 2013 that “all options should be on the table.” Radel said that “Congress needs to hold the President accountable for the decisions that he’s making right now.”
Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC)
In mid 2011 at a Tea Party event, former Representatives, now-Sen. Tim Scott said Obama risked impeachment if he raised the debt limit without Congressional approval. Scott said “This president is looking to usurp congressional oversight to find a way to get it done without us. My position is that it is an impeachable act.”
Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX)
In January, when the White House proposed to implement gun control through executive action. Stockman issued a statement threatening to stop the White House “by any means necessary” — including impeachment.”
Also, Alex Seitz-Wald on Salon.com documented the numerous Republican conspiracies through the last few years to subvert the legitimately elected President of the United States.
1. Fast and Furious: Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner told Attorney General Eric Holder: “If we don’t get to the bottom of this — and that requires your assistance on that — there is only one alternative that Congress has, and it is called impeachment.” He was referring to both Atty. Gen. Holder and President Obama.
2. Boston Bombing: A Washington Times columnist called for impeaching President Obama because he didn’t seem to know that “we are in a clash of civilizations between radical Islam and the West.”
4. Joe Sestak: Dick Morris, advice columnist to the frustrated Republican elite who pine for the comfy confines of the White House and the keys to the vaults at Fort Knox, and Sean Hannity, habitual liar, said it was a “de facto bribe” and “an impeachable offense” when the White House “allegedly pushed” or on the other hand, reasoned with Joe Sestak to drop out the Democratic primary as a favor to Arlen Spector.
5. Balanced Budget: In January, Rep. Mo Brooks proposed a constitutional amendment that would make failing to balance the nation’s budget an impeachable offense.
[Would this apply to Congress, too?]
6. Immigration: Sen. Jon Kyl, the No. 2 Republican senator at that time, told radio host and habitual gambler Bill Bennett that “impeachment is always a possibility” in responding to President Obama’s proposed deferred action immigration policy. “Especially if there are “shenanigans involved.”
Rush Limbaugh joined in, of course, as well as the anti-immigration group AILPAC, which has a website petition where true believers can sign up to show their support for impeaching the duly elected president.
7. DOMA: Newt Gingrich (who has ample experience with both impeachment and marriage) suggested that President Obama be impeached because he decided not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act.
Herman Cain said it was near-treason. Conservative Rep. Trent Franks also threatened impeachment over DOMA as well.
8. Bush Tax Cuts: Un-indicted co-conspirator in the Jack Abramoff scandal Grover Norquist said “Republicans will have enough votes in the Senate in 2014 to impeach” if President Obama has the gall to not extend the Bush tax cuts.
9. Recess appointments: Fox News’ shyster in chief Neil Cavuto was all excited because he thought President Obama could be impeached for making recess appointments. Unfortunately for Neil, an surprisingly honest Fox legal expert said sorry, no.
10. Libya: Bruce Fein, a lawyer and serial impeachment junkie has authored articles of impeachment directed at the first President Clinton, the second President George Bush and the worst ever Vice-President, Dick Cheney. When President Obama barely intervened in Libya in 2011, Fein wrote him up also. He insisted that only Congress can declare war under the Constitution, which Fein probably should point out to Congress.
11. Birth Certificate: In 2010, a former GOP congressman running again for office suggested impeaching President Obama over his failure to release his birth certificate, again and again..
12. Just Existing: A person told Rep. Michele Bachmann that President Obama should be impeached just “because,” Bachmann replied, “Well, I’ll tell you, I’ll tell you, I agree, I agree.”
In 2011, Texas Republican Michael Burgess told a Tea Party group President Obama should be impeached for being a liberal. A reporter asked him why, and Burgess replied he wasn’t sure. He concluded, “it needs to happen” though, because then Republicans can “deny President Obama’s legislative agenda.”
[It boggles the mind that Republicans like Rep. Burgess feel they must do their best to deny the President’s legislative agenda when the President was elected and then re-elected by a clear majority of the American people, who by their vote demonstrate that they approve of the Presidents “legislative agenda.” If the Republicans don’t work for the majority of the American people’s interest, who are they working for?]
http://www.salon.com/...
While this article was inspired by unfounded rumors circulating on the internet, plenty of evidence exists that proves these rumors have a basis in fact and reality. It is safe to conclude that the aforementioned Republicans are the public face of the Republican conspiracy to subvert the American Democratic system. You can see the twisted joy in their hearts and on their faces when they think they have the goods on President Obama.
The Republicans had the motive and they had the opportunity, especially House Republicans, who only work 3 days a week, and two days in August, not a week, that’s the total for the whole month. Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop, which has never been so true as now in the Republican Party.
There are undoubtedly other Republican elected officials and conservative business interests who are also members of this conspiracy who prefer to remain anonymous and behind the scenes.
Isn’t it time to impeach or at least, defeat at the polls, these Republicans conspirators for their high crimes and misdemeanors against the American people and move the country forward again.
Jim McMeans