By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Do You think Obama's going to Be Impeached?

spaceguy on 22 June 2012
McDonaldsGuy said:
richardhutnik said:
McDonaldsGuy said:
Obama should be impeached for destroying America, that's why he should be impeached. And Romney will be no better.

GW oversaw what set this destruction in place.  Unfortunately, the constitution doesn't have a place for impeachment for destroying America.  There are other reasons for impeachment.


Yeah, America deserves to be destroyed for electing Dubya not once, but twice.

The fact that the next President will either be Romney or Obama disgusts me. This country is done. It was good while it lasted though, wasn't it?

I agree, Rocky Anderson would be a better choice but that won't happen and vote for him would be a vote for Romney. So after this election there is a big push by the greens, Progressive and many parties to tell the dems. You don't listen we will put a canidate up and sink your ass if you don't listen. So don't worry things take time. The sky is not falling. However keep up the push.



Around the Network
spaceguy on 22 June 2012
Kasz216 said:
Flanneryaug said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
I wouldn't put it past the Republicans. They tried it with Clinton, and that was only a midterm election year, having him under impeachment would be a good way to throw the election in their favor, whether or not he or Holder acted wrongly.

Whether or not he acted wrongly?  Congress demanded files from the attorney general.

He refused.

That's wrong, and it's been grounds for contempt of congress on both sides of the aisle and has been used by both sides... well the last two presidents.

Not that it amounts to anything... since you know.  the discetion to prosecute Eric Holder would fall to the Attorney General.  Seems like somebody missed a loophole on that one...

Also... impeachment hearings HELPED clinton and boosted his approval rating, not sure why you'd think this would be any different.

You need to do some research. They demanded documents from Eric Holder that he would have to break the law to give to them. Also, the documents that they want have nothing to do with the death of the agent, and are from after his death. Also, why havent they brought in the former Attorney General that actually started this program? It is clearly political.

No he wouldn't....

it's actually the exact opposite.

Congress has a right to any documents it supeonas.

Obama used exectuive priveledge to cover Holders ass after he refused to give up the information in the first place... because it'd be an embarrsing scandal that could hurt him politically.

Also.  Operation Fast and Furious began in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#2009.E2.80.932011:_Operation_Fast_and_Furious

Actually it was started by bush continued by obama. So really you are right and wrong at the same time.



spaceguy on 22 June 2012
spaceguy said:
McDonaldsGuy said:
richardhutnik said:
McDonaldsGuy said:
Obama should be impeached for destroying America, that's why he should be impeached. And Romney will be no better.

GW oversaw what set this destruction in place.  Unfortunately, the constitution doesn't have a place for impeachment for destroying America.  There are other reasons for impeachment.


Yeah, America deserves to be destroyed for electing Dubya not once, but twice.

The fact that the next President will either be Romney or Obama disgusts me. This country is done. It was good while it lasted though, wasn't it?

I agree, Rocky Anderson would be a better choice but that won't happen and vote for him would be a vote for Romney. So after this election there is a big push by the greens, Progressive and many parties to tell the dems. You don't listen we will put a canidate up and sink your ass if you don't listen. So don't worry things take time. The sky is not falling. However keep up the push.

 Here you go colbert says it best and yes it was started in 2006. So stop twisting the facts. Republicans twist, twist ,twist. This site is no different.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/415620/june-20-2012/unraveling-the--fast---furious--scandal



spaceguy on 22 June 2012

forget trying to post the video on this site.



spaceguy on 22 June 2012

 Try one more time. Most likely won't work. Well I tried.

Someone else post it if you can.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/415620/june-20-2012/unraveling-the--fast---furious--scandal

Here I will post something else that will get the conversation going, Lurkers you can just thank me in your head.

 

Moderator - Kantor. Stay on topic.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 22 June 2012
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
Flanneryaug said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
I wouldn't put it past the Republicans. They tried it with Clinton, and that was only a midterm election year, having him under impeachment would be a good way to throw the election in their favor, whether or not he or Holder acted wrongly.

Whether or not he acted wrongly?  Congress demanded files from the attorney general.

He refused.

That's wrong, and it's been grounds for contempt of congress on both sides of the aisle and has been used by both sides... well the last two presidents.

Not that it amounts to anything... since you know.  the discetion to prosecute Eric Holder would fall to the Attorney General.  Seems like somebody missed a loophole on that one...

Also... impeachment hearings HELPED clinton and boosted his approval rating, not sure why you'd think this would be any different.

You need to do some research. They demanded documents from Eric Holder that he would have to break the law to give to them. Also, the documents that they want have nothing to do with the death of the agent, and are from after his death. Also, why havent they brought in the former Attorney General that actually started this program? It is clearly political.

No he wouldn't....

it's actually the exact opposite.

Congress has a right to any documents it supeonas.

Obama used exectuive priveledge to cover Holders ass after he refused to give up the information in the first place... because it'd be an embarrsing scandal that could hurt him politically.

Also.  Operation Fast and Furious began in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#2009.E2.80.932011:_Operation_Fast_and_Furious

Actually it was started by bush continued by obama. So really you are right and wrong at the same time.

Bush was President in 2009?

That's when Fast and Furious started.


"Gunwalking" programs started under Bush.  Fast and Furious didn't.

The main issue with Fast and Furious was that the let the illegal guns float around to try and follow them back to "main people".

The plan under Bush, Wide Receiver... what would happen is the ATF would sell guns to straw sellers, and notify the Mexican police where the straw sellers were, then bust the straw sellers and buyers at the very first time they did something illegal.

 

While under Obama they started a new plan.  F&F.  Here they planned to target the whole system instead of just taking out the buyers like under Bush.   So they sold the weapons to straw sellers... then let the straw sellers sell the guns illegally, rather then having the mexican government bust the people buying the guns and making sure the guns never got in the gangs hands.  They kept the sales going, trying to get guns throught the network... as people were being killed by those very guns.

To explain the main difference between the Bush program and the Obama one... i'll qoute wikipedia.

"Their standard Project Gunrunner training was to follow the straw purchasers to the hand-off to the cartel buyers, then arrest both parties and seize the guns. They watched guns being bought illegally and stashed on a daily basis, while their supervisors, including David Voth and Hope MacAllister, prevented the agents from intervening"

Tons of people were killed by these guys... the guns being used in hundreds of crimes..and the only reason the ATF stopped the project was because a border patrol agent had been killed.

 

Unlike under Bush, where every sale was stopped the minute it was illegal.



spaceguy on 22 June 2012
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
Flanneryaug said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
I wouldn't put it past the Republicans. They tried it with Clinton, and that was only a midterm election year, having him under impeachment would be a good way to throw the election in their favor, whether or not he or Holder acted wrongly.

Whether or not he acted wrongly?  Congress demanded files from the attorney general.

He refused.

That's wrong, and it's been grounds for contempt of congress on both sides of the aisle and has been used by both sides... well the last two presidents.

Not that it amounts to anything... since you know.  the discetion to prosecute Eric Holder would fall to the Attorney General.  Seems like somebody missed a loophole on that one...

Also... impeachment hearings HELPED clinton and boosted his approval rating, not sure why you'd think this would be any different.

You need to do some research. They demanded documents from Eric Holder that he would have to break the law to give to them. Also, the documents that they want have nothing to do with the death of the agent, and are from after his death. Also, why havent they brought in the former Attorney General that actually started this program? It is clearly political.

No he wouldn't....

it's actually the exact opposite.

Congress has a right to any documents it supeonas.

Obama used exectuive priveledge to cover Holders ass after he refused to give up the information in the first place... because it'd be an embarrsing scandal that could hurt him politically.

Also.  Operation Fast and Furious began in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#2009.E2.80.932011:_Operation_Fast_and_Furious

Actually it was started by bush continued by obama. So really you are right and wrong at the same time.

Bush was President in 2009?

That's when Fast and Furious started.


"Gunwalking" programs started under Bush.  Fast and Furious didn't.

The main issue with Fast and Furious was that the let the illegal guns float around to try and follow them back to "main people".

The plan under Bush, Wide Receiver... what would happen is the ATF would sell guns to straw sellers, and notify the Mexican police where the straw sellers were, then bust the straw sellers and buyers at the very first time they did something illegal.

 

While under Obama they started a new plan.  F&F.  Here they planned to target the whole system instead of just taking out the buyers like under Bush.   So they sold the weapons to straw sellers... then let the straw sellers sell the guns illegally, rather then having the mexican government bust the people buying the guns and making sure the guns never got in the gangs hands.  They kept the sales going, trying to get guns throught the network... as people were being killed by those very guns.

To explain the main difference between the Bush program and the Obama one... i'll qoute wikipedia.

"Their standard Project Gunrunner training was to follow the straw purchasers to the hand-off to the cartel buyers, then arrest both parties and seize the guns. They watched guns being bought illegally and stashed on a daily basis, while their supervisors, including David Voth and Hope MacAllister, prevented the agents from intervening"

Dude you are so hell bent on republicans value's it's S--k.  I've told you what I thought of it in the past and it still stands.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/415620/june-20-2012/unraveling-the--fast---furious--scandal

Here you go this will help explain it to you, Cause I'm not going to engage anymore with you. PEACE!!!

 



Kasz216 on 22 June 2012
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
Flanneryaug said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
I wouldn't put it past the Republicans. They tried it with Clinton, and that was only a midterm election year, having him under impeachment would be a good way to throw the election in their favor, whether or not he or Holder acted wrongly.

Whether or not he acted wrongly?  Congress demanded files from the attorney general.

He refused.

That's wrong, and it's been grounds for contempt of congress on both sides of the aisle and has been used by both sides... well the last two presidents.

Not that it amounts to anything... since you know.  the discetion to prosecute Eric Holder would fall to the Attorney General.  Seems like somebody missed a loophole on that one...

Also... impeachment hearings HELPED clinton and boosted his approval rating, not sure why you'd think this would be any different.

You need to do some research. They demanded documents from Eric Holder that he would have to break the law to give to them. Also, the documents that they want have nothing to do with the death of the agent, and are from after his death. Also, why havent they brought in the former Attorney General that actually started this program? It is clearly political.

No he wouldn't....

it's actually the exact opposite.

Congress has a right to any documents it supeonas.

Obama used exectuive priveledge to cover Holders ass after he refused to give up the information in the first place... because it'd be an embarrsing scandal that could hurt him politically.

Also.  Operation Fast and Furious began in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#2009.E2.80.932011:_Operation_Fast_and_Furious

Actually it was started by bush continued by obama. So really you are right and wrong at the same time.

Bush was President in 2009?

That's when Fast and Furious started.


"Gunwalking" programs started under Bush.  Fast and Furious didn't.

The main issue with Fast and Furious was that the let the illegal guns float around to try and follow them back to "main people".

The plan under Bush, Wide Receiver... what would happen is the ATF would sell guns to straw sellers, and notify the Mexican police where the straw sellers were, then bust the straw sellers and buyers at the very first time they did something illegal.

 

While under Obama they started a new plan.  F&F.  Here they planned to target the whole system instead of just taking out the buyers like under Bush.   So they sold the weapons to straw sellers... then let the straw sellers sell the guns illegally, rather then having the mexican government bust the people buying the guns and making sure the guns never got in the gangs hands.  They kept the sales going, trying to get guns throught the network... as people were being killed by those very guns.

To explain the main difference between the Bush program and the Obama one... i'll qoute wikipedia.

"Their standard Project Gunrunner training was to follow the straw purchasers to the hand-off to the cartel buyers, then arrest both parties and seize the guns. They watched guns being bought illegally and stashed on a daily basis, while their supervisors, including David Voth and Hope MacAllister, prevented the agents from intervening"

Dude you are so hell bent on republicans value's it's S--k.  I've told you what I thought of it in the past and it still stands.


Dude, don't get made because you were wrong AGAIN and have no factual basis for backing up "your side" outside of claiming some fictional bias.  ( I mean, trying to defelect things to an economic discussion about... Ireland? seriously?)


I'd say if anything i'd say the Obama administrations exceution of it was MORE republican.  It doesn't change the fact that this shit was all on them.

Which is my biggest problem with obama.  It's clear he doesn't give a fuck and will kill Americans at will, violate other countries soverignty and violate peoples human rights.  It's the same issues i had with Bush.  Except for the first one.   He never (to my knowledge) approved the direct assassnation of a US citizen without trial.

Your blind if you can't see the difference between...

"Working with the mexicans and busting people criminals as soon as they buy guns."

versus

"Don't tell the mexicans, and let the guns circulate and be used in crimes to kill people so we can eventually bust up the entire network.



easyrider on 22 June 2012
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:

Dude you are so hell bent on republicans value's it's S--k.  I've told you what I thought of it in the past and it still stands.


Dude, don't get made because you were wrong AGAIN and have no factual basis for backing up "your side" outside of claiming some fictional bias.  ( I mean, trying to defelect things to an economic discussion about... Ireland? seriously?)


I'd say if anything i'd say the Obama administrations exceution of it was MORE republican.  It doesn't change the fact that this shit was all on them.

Which is my biggest problem with obama.  It's clear he doesn't give a fuck and will kill Americans at will, violate other countries soverignty and violate peoples human rights.  It's the same issues i had with Bush.  Except for the first one.   He never (to my knowledge) approved the direct assassnation of a US citizen without trial.

Your blind if you can't see the difference between...

"Working with the mexicans and busting people criminals as soon as they buy guns."

versus

"Don't tell the mexicans, and let the guns circulate and be used in crimes to kill people so we can eventually bust up the entire network.


kasz the fact that you are even making a point abou this shows your a f-cking idiot. You are always wrong yet you call out someone else. I don't care if they ban me, Someone has to say it. YOUR A FUCKING IDIOT.


This post has been moderated ~Barozi



spaceguy on 22 June 2012
easyrider said:
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
spaceguy said:
Kasz216 said:
Flanneryaug said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
I wouldn't put it past the Republicans. They tried it with Clinton, and that was only a midterm election year, having him under impeachment would be a good way to throw the election in their favor, whether or not he or Holder acted wrongly.

Whether or not he acted wrongly?  Congress demanded files from the attorney general.

He refused.

That's wrong, and it's been grounds for contempt of congress on both sides of the aisle and has been used by both sides... well the last two presidents.

Not that it amounts to anything... since you know.  the discetion to prosecute Eric Holder would fall to the Attorney General.  Seems like somebody missed a loophole on that one...

Also... impeachment hearings HELPED clinton and boosted his approval rating, not sure why you'd think this would be any different.

You need to do some research. They demanded documents from Eric Holder that he would have to break the law to give to them. Also, the documents that they want have nothing to do with the death of the agent, and are from after his death. Also, why havent they brought in the former Attorney General that actually started this program? It is clearly political.

No he wouldn't....

it's actually the exact opposite.

Congress has a right to any documents it supeonas.

Obama used exectuive priveledge to cover Holders ass after he refused to give up the information in the first place... because it'd be an embarrsing scandal that could hurt him politically.

Also.  Operation Fast and Furious began in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal#2009.E2.80.932011:_Operation_Fast_and_Furious

Actually it was started by bush continued by obama. So really you are right and wrong at the same time.

Bush was President in 2009?

That's when Fast and Furious started.


"Gunwalking" programs started under Bush.  Fast and Furious didn't.

The main issue with Fast and Furious was that the let the illegal guns float around to try and follow them back to "main people".

The plan under Bush, Wide Receiver... what would happen is the ATF would sell guns to straw sellers, and notify the Mexican police where the straw sellers were, then bust the straw sellers and buyers at the very first time they did something illegal.

 

While under Obama they started a new plan.  F&F.  Here they planned to target the whole system instead of just taking out the buyers like under Bush.   So they sold the weapons to straw sellers... then let the straw sellers sell the guns illegally, rather then having the mexican government bust the people buying the guns and making sure the guns never got in the gangs hands.  They kept the sales going, trying to get guns throught the network... as people were being killed by those very guns.

To explain the main difference between the Bush program and the Obama one... i'll qoute wikipedia.

"Their standard Project Gunrunner training was to follow the straw purchasers to the hand-off to the cartel buyers, then arrest both parties and seize the guns. They watched guns being bought illegally and stashed on a daily basis, while their supervisors, including David Voth and Hope MacAllister, prevented the agents from intervening"

Dude you are so hell bent on republicans value's it's S--k.  I've told you what I thought of it in the past and it still stands.


Dude, don't get made because you were wrong AGAIN and have no factual basis for backing up "your side" outside of claiming some fictional bias.  ( I mean, trying to defelect things to an economic discussion about... Ireland? seriously?)


I'd say if anything i'd say the Obama administrations exceution of it was MORE republican.  It doesn't change the fact that this shit was all on them.

Which is my biggest problem with obama.  It's clear he doesn't give a fuck and will kill Americans at will, violate other countries soverignty and violate peoples human rights.  It's the same issues i had with Bush.  Except for the first one.   He never (to my knowledge) approved the direct assassnation of a US citizen without trial.

Your blind if you can't see the difference between...

"Working with the mexicans and busting people criminals as soon as they buy guns."

versus

"Don't tell the mexicans, and let the guns circulate and be used in crimes to kill people so we can eventually bust up the entire network.


kasz the fact that you are even making a point abou this shows your a f-cking idiot. You are always wrong yet you call out someone else. I don't care if they ban me, Someone has to say it. YOUR A FUCKING IDIOT.

WOW!!! Thats extreme. however i'm not mad. I will agree that things have changed the program still started in 2006, weather you like it or not. You are usually wrong. so I will give you the little little credit you deserve. 100,000 everyone else and you 1. now like i said I'm done with you. you are extreme and you know it.