Skip to main content

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) (C) pauses between answers to questions during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, October 10, 2013. U.S. House of Representatives Republicans are still weighing a short-term debt-limit increase, pos
"Here's what I'll give you, little lady ..."
As aides to John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi meet to discuss the upcoming Republican Clown Show on #Benghazi, it's clear that the GOP will bend over backwards to be fair and balanced:
... a senior GOP aide said Republicans are willing to concede some changes in the way the committee conducts the investigation — for example, allowing Democrats access to documents and forewarning on subpoenas.
Well, you can't get much more fair than that. Democrats will get to look at stuff. And be told who will testify. Bipartisanship rules!

Originally posted to Barbara Morrill on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:28 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  When do we raise hell about these seven traitors (11+ / 0-)

    on the Front Page of the Daily Kos?

    Ron Barber (AZ-02)
    John Barrow (GA-12)
    Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
    Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
    Collin Peterson (MN-07)
    Nick Rahall (WV-03)
    Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)

    "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

    by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:33:28 AM PDT

    •  IIRC Ron Barber (AZ-02) Gifford's replacement (4+ / 0-)

      Patrick Murphy (FL-18)  replaced Allen West

      So insanely tight race dems

      I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

      by JML9999 on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:43:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Tight race Dems? (15+ / 0-)

        To hell with them.  I can't believe that their constituents are banging down their doors demanding that they investigate Benghazi.  No one but partisan Republicans gives a good goddam about investigating Benghazi.  

        It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

        by Radiowalla on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:53:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Seriously! (7+ / 0-)

          I will never believe this either, it's just more excuse-making.

          can't believe that their constituents are banging down their doors demanding that they investigate Benghazi.

          WHERE are the sanctions? When do they get thrown off any committees they might be on? When do they get threatened with withholding of election support?

          What the fuck, people? Why isn't THAT front-paged?

          "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

          by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:58:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Shooting oneself in the foot (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            underwriter505

            is rarely wise.

            Every one of these people is light years better than the Republican who would take their seat if they lost.

            •  For the last time (0+ / 0-)

              the question is not "who would be better?"

              The question is THIS (these, actually):

              WHERE are the sanctions? When do they get thrown off any committees they might be on? When do they get threatened with withholding of election support?
              Now, if you're saying "front-paging the fact that seven Democrats need to be punished, let alone primaried because they voted like Republicans when Democrats needed them the most--again" would shoot "oneself" in the foot? Is that what you mean?

              If so, don't look now, but that says a metric fuckton more than you probably wanted to say. Shocking...

               

              "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

              by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 02:03:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Your hijacking exchange sure does say a lot about (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                CatKinNY

                both of you.  Lunachickie does not think it is important to have a moderate Dem rather than a nut case Repub.
                elmo on the other hand thinks the Dem who can be elected is better than the Repub who will be elected if the Dems run someone approved by Luna.  
                Personally I think a major problem with the Dems is illustrated by Luna who is happy to lose and screw the nation if the Dem does not agree with her.
                I bet she voted for Nader.  

                •  Ron Barber to me is a DINO (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hepette, sendtheasteroid, CatKinNY

                  He voted to delay the ACA for one year to bow down to the repubs to prevent government shutdown.
                  He voted with repubs to cut food stamps.
                  Now he votes with the repubs for endless, evermore Benghazi.
                  WTF, Ron Barber?
                  Every now and again he votes like a Democrat.
                  I guess he's sucking up to the repubs in this district.  This is AZ, after all.  
                  But what I hate is that I feel forced to vote for him.  He is running (again) against repub Martha McSally, who is worse.  If I vote for another party, or even don't vote, I might as well be voting for McSally.   Situations like this do tend to disgust me.

                  Even the smallest dog can lift its leg on the tallest building - Jim Hightower

                  by cymricmorty on Sat May 10, 2014 at 03:51:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Benghazi (0+ / 0-)

          Well put my friend.

        •  Meanwhile the conservatives mock efforts to help (0+ / 0-)

          200 plus girls kidnapped in Africa. See the Fox panel discuss it and openly LAUGH and MAKE JOKES about it.
          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
          But they are enraged about 4 dead Americans?
          Political posturing at it's worst and creepiest.

      •  This is how stuff like fraud becomes (16+ / 0-)

        institutionalized: "neutralization techniques." These are means of convincing oneself that various forms of increasingly destructive behavior are necessary, practical, unavoidable, inevitable.

        Sorry, you don't get democracy by participating in fraud. You can't.

        The Third Way has turned it into an art form in the same way baseball mainstreamed steroid use, the mortgage industry mainstreamed increasingly bad loans, the financial services industry completely defrauded the public with loan-backed securities ratings and then actually promoted and sold them to live people as good investments, and CDO swaps...

        And this is why, at its core, meritocracies become caricatures. The fraud is what becomes revered and those who do not participate are considered purists who are scorned and laughed at. That's what happened in baseball and in financial services, with Enron, with minting coin before nation states, and on and on and on.

        The Third Way no more recognizes the problem and the fact that it is a poison pill to democracy than it would ever intend to do anything about it. It is too enmeshed in the fraudulent system. And they will resort to the same fraudulent logic as their counterparts in the Republican Party -- from "I earned this exorbitant perk" to "I earned this sexcapade" to you name it, however self-entitled people can self-aggrandise themselves. It's a form of nihilism.

        You can no more achieve democracy or the Democratic Party platform through the Third Way than you can with neo-Republicanism. They are closed systems joined at the hip at their corrupt climax.

        I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

        Trust, but verify. - Reagan
        Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

        by Words In Action on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:19:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And the Benghazi Committee is a fraud. (5+ / 0-)

          Only corrupt D's will participate.

          I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

          Trust, but verify. - Reagan
          Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

          by Words In Action on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:29:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Easy, tiger (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            daeros

            Pelosi may appoint some Ds to watch the clown show and make sure GOP tricks are kept in check.  That doesn't make those Ds corrupt.

            •  The 7 Dems in that list are CORRUPT (4+ / 0-)

              if they voted with Republicans on this shit.

              Why are we looking forward to see if Pelosi "may appoint some Ds to watch the clown show"?? Why aren't we in the present doing something about these 7 damned traitors to our party and to our people?

              What the hell is wrong with some of you? These Ds stabbed us all in the fucking back. Shame on anyone who makes excuses, "looks forward" and defends the indefensible.
               

              "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

              by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:05:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  you make it sound like those two things are (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Againststochasticterrorism

                mutually exclusive.  If you think I was defending the 7 who voted for it, you're mistaken because I was talking about whoever Pelosi might appoint.  

                But if you think letting the teabaggers run the hearings without anybody from our side bird-dogging them and taking their allotted time to call bullshit, you're also mistaken.  Boycotting it makes a nice statement - for about 90 seconds, after which the GOTP will do what they will, but calling bullshit every day the committee sits has the potential to make news day after day as long as the circus is in town.

        •  Good post. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Words In Action, a2nite, Skyye

          This reflects the frustration I feel about my Dem senator. The only thing that will drive me to support him in Nov. is knowing his opponent supports cramming the "family fucking values" agenda of the far right down everybody's throats.

          If the GOP ever does the unthinkable and abandons it's social conservative agenda, it will be interesting to see what those pols do. Because social conservatism is pretty much the only difference I've ever noticed between a Republican and a Third Wayer.

          •  Part of the problem (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Words In Action
            The only thing that will drive me to support him in Nov. is knowing his opponent
            So your Dem will never change. He/she has no incentive to change.

            When do we learn that embracing the suck isn't the answer?
             

            "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

            by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:08:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The problem is "changing them" isn't that simple (0+ / 0-)

              It isn't that people living in those districts like to "embrace suck". It's that a lot of people in Blue Dog and Third Way districts, don't have many electable alternatives.

              For instance, in my situation here in Colorado, I can vote to re-elect Mark Udall, the Third Way incumbent in the Colorado senate race. If I do and if he wins, everything you just said is exactly right--he won't change, has no reason to.

              BUT...

              The other option people here have is not to vote for him and watch social conservative and Koch-sponsored candidate Cory Gardner win the seat in this very close year, which could also flip the whole senate to the GOP.  
              Should that happen, we will have a House and Senate passing all kinds of corporate and social conservative legislation with the only hope for liberals being Obama's veto, which given his willingness to sign the TPP, appoint a social conservative judge and the fact that he picked Wheeler, a shill for big telecom to run the FCC, I don't have a lot of faith in right now.

              So while I understand what you're saying, if you were in my shoes, would you be willing to pay the price of a Republican-controlled senate to get rid of a Third Wayer or Blue Dog? Keep in mind if the senate flips, everyone will feel the pain, no matter where you live.

              •  Yes, it is that simple. (0+ / 0-)

                When you vote for a Democrat to represent you, he/she needs to vote on legislation, etc. like a Democrat.

                When they do that, you reward them with your continued support. When they don't, I don't give a flying fuck if you put Martians in charge at this point--you are rewarding failure and that makes you part of the problem.

                Because when you do that, they have no incentive to change.

                What is difficult about this? Nothing.
                 

                "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

                by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 02:06:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  We see things differently. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Phoenix Woman

                  I grew up in Kentucky, moved to Colorado so I can honestly say I've never been represented by a "true" Democrat ever in my lifetime. The fact is, there's a lot of parts in this country where a true blue Dem just can't win. The reality of what you're talking about would be a purified Democratic minority.

                  I'm looking at the bigger picture--one where we might get or keep the majority nationally, one where the guy who I half agree with wins over the guy I can't stand, one where they're not sending social conservative legislation to the president's desk to be signed into law. Sure it isn't everything I want. But getting some of the things you want is better than nothing at all.

                  It's like what Bill Maher once said about a liberal's criticism of Obama, "A shitty friend is still better than your sworn enemy."

                  Speaking of Obama, did you vote for him in 2012? If you did, I got a feeling you understand where I'm coming from. Because after one term I believe we all could agree he isn't the ideal Democrat. But I also believe we could agree he is still way better than Mitt Romney.

                  •   What I want? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    hepette

                    What about what's right? What about not abusing processes of government? What about bald-faced LIES?

                    getting some of the things you want is better than nothing at all.
                    Get this red herring bullshit out of here! This is not about ponies and unicorns. It's about abuse. Democrats have no fucking business enabling this SHIT.

                    "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

                    by lunachickie on Sat May 10, 2014 at 10:51:36 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The answer is obvious... (0+ / 0-)

                      The problem is simply the fact that most incumbent blue dog / Third Way candidates never see primary challengers. We need more primary challengers for these people.

                      Flipping the seat "red" just to get rid of a wishy-washy blue candidate isn't the answer. Because just as Kentucky used to be a "blue" state (albeit blue dog), once it flips to red turning it back to blue isn't as easy as you'd like to think it is.

                  •  I happen to like my Senator from CO (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    TheDudester

                    Even if you don't think he's blue enough, but then, my family has known the Udalls in politics for generations. Most of his family and mine were Republicans until the party went bat-crap. (Drove my parents nuts when I joined the Young Dems at 15)

                    I cannot stomach my State Rep Cory Gardner who wanted to secede. He plans to replace Mark and is running very closely with his many fanatical followers (Secession! Benghazi! Cliven Bundy hero!). Lukewarm or not, if Dems don't loyally work hard in this election we're going to have Paul Ryan's stupider twin for a Senator - and that takeover of the Senate is looking grim for our side right now.

                    If you teach your child only one thing, let it be kindness through example.

                    by Nodin on Sat May 10, 2014 at 02:15:35 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I didn't like how he... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JJustin

                      Stood by Obama on Chain-CPI on social security and said something along the lines of, "I'd gladly sacrifice my seat to pass chain-cpi..."

                      That stuck in my head and I'll never forget he said it because I can't believe a Dem would EVER advocate something like that.

                      BUT...

                      I also understand if Gardner gets in we could get that and so much more. So I will vote for Udall in Nov, if for no other reason than to cast my vote against Cory Gardner. Because I understand imperfect is still much better than fucking awful.

        •  Suggested for top comments, thx (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Words In Action, 88kathy

          I voted tuesday because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

          by a2nite on Fri May 09, 2014 at 09:44:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Collin Peterson is a phony. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      daeros

      I lived in his district for a number of years. He is no Democrat, for sure. He is owned by Big Farm Corporations.

      I wrote to him numerous times when I was in his district. Finally, I asked him to either run as a Republican, or do us all a favor, and quit.

      Peterson is a good example of why we need term limits.

      •  That's an example of a LOT more than that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ChuckChuckerson, buffie
        why we need term limits


        There are Democrats in leadership facilitating that vote. Those 7 traitors did this for a reason, and there is no way, no sane way, to believe that it is just about "their re-election chances".  

        So somebody? Anybody? WHEN does this website start seriously investigating this kind of shit? All the "aren't they idiots?" snark-a-thons might be big fun, but they are useless as far as a "change agent". We need firm, concrete answers and we need them PDQ.

        Because what am I supposed to tell people on the phone, when they say to me "why does it matter if people vote Democrat, when Democrats are going to vote like Republicans?"?

         

        "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

        by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:23:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This attitude will keep us a permanent minority (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elmo

      But some people would rather feel pure than have a congress that is moving in the right, rather than the wrong, direction. We have to run conservative candidates in conservative districts. I can't stand Rahall either but his district is R+14! Barrow's is R+9 and Peterson's R+5. Even if Rahall votes with us 10% of the time, that is 10% better than any Republican from that district will be.

      •  This is NOT MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION (0+ / 0-)

        This Benghazeeeeeeee thing is a fucking scam, so feel free to stow the purity crap.

        We have to run conservative candidates in conservative districts
        No, we do not

         That is a goddamn farce and it's exactly why these types of "Democrats" feel free to vote and act like Republicans once you're stupid enough to vote for them.

        "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

        by lunachickie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:12:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Best go (0+ / 0-)

          and LIVE in one of those conservative districts for a while. You will quickly get tired of trying to get someone YOU think is qualified for a congressional seat on the ballot, let alone elected.  Make all the whiny noises you want, that is the way things work in this old world.

    •  I hope someone gets lit and publishes their (0+ / 0-)

      voting record on Embassy security appropriations.

      Here's how long they have been on the job.

      Rep Jim Jordan
      assumed office 2007

      Rep Peter Roskam
      assumed office 2007

      Rep Martha Roby
      assumed office 2011

      Rep Trey Gowdy
      assumed office 2011

      Rep Susan Brooks
      assumed office January 2013

      Rep Mike Pompeo
      assumed office January 2011

      Rep Lynn Westmoreland
      assumed office January 2007

  •  Look at this amazing concession, from link: (4+ / 0-)
    Democrats have asked for changes to the rules of the committee, including a mandate that testimony can’t be taken without at least one minority member present.
    Read more: http://www.politico.com/...

    Gee, you mean that democrats will be able to ask questions too, find out if docs have been cherry picked, and make sure witnesses tell the whole story?  Wow.

    Schedule permitting, PROOF WILL BE PROVIDED ON HOW I AM BEING "CONSTANTLY CALLED OUT" AND "UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED" FOR BEING BAD. Moreover, the dossier on my activities during the Bush administration will have an appendix concluding that I am Wrong.

    by Inland on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:39:14 AM PDT

  •  I'm confused... Are there jobs in Bhengazi? (14+ / 0-)

    Cuz the last I checked, the GOP took over the House on the premise that they were going to focus all legislative efforts on "jobs, jobs, jobs".

    Considering their legislative record however, it's clear that the only "jobs" Republicans are concerned with are their own.

    The Party Of No offers the American people nothing...

    No leadership.
    No solutions.
    No future.

    •  Yeah, there's one job... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jasonhouse, mchestnutjr, daeros

      A snow job.  Like every other House GOP stunt.

      “When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty—to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.” —Abraham Lincoln

      by Pragmatus on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:23:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And what does that say about (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jasonhouse

      Democrats if they play along?

      I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

      Trust, but verify. - Reagan
      Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

      by Words In Action on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:24:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  As the minority party... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        daeros

        House Dems have little choice. Reps will chase this regardless.

        At this point, I'm hoping that Obama is doing his usual trick on GOP histrionics, and will eventually come out with a substantive rebuttal that shuts this nonsense down for good.

  •  It's a trap. How can Democrats not see this? (16+ / 0-)

    If Democrats accept Republican concessions, real or imaginary, and participate in this, they're making the committee something legitimate.  I think witnesses should all take part, but Democratic legislators shouldn't.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:48:14 AM PDT

    •  I agree Rich (6+ / 0-)

      this a farce & needs to be dismissed by the Democrats.

    •  laying groundwork for impeachment (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cybersaur, Uncle Moji, Subterranean

      seriously-

      http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/...

      they tried to choose a "very serious" chairman for this very serious and totally nonpartisan committee in order to create an air of legitimacy for an eventual impeachment vote to satisfy their shithead teabagger base.
      I don't know why the Dems are giving any legitimacy to this kangaroo court.  

      •  Well, that's not bad in itself. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji, daeros, DiesIrae, charliehall2

        Impeachment in a partisan context just reinforced people's contempt for Republicans.

        It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

        by Rich in PA on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:06:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  it's always bad to me... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          daeros

          when impeachment is abused for such blatant political purposes, but more so because our already part-time reps waste even more time and money on something so pointless.
          The people who have contempt for Repubs don't need any more reinforcement, and the ones who think #Benghazi!!! is worse than Watergate/911/Pearl Harbor/Lewinsky/Black President aren't going to change their minds either.  

          I just don't see any significant upside, and think the Dems should have boycotted.

        •  Indeed, if this is the outcome, a partisan (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DiesIrae, JG in MD

          impeachment attempt, then, it proves they continue to learn nothing about government shutdowns and impeaching Democratic Presidents.

          It will have no credibility with the media and go nowhere, but the question for me is this:  What is their actual end game.  Obama isn't ever running again for President, so he can take the hits on Benghazi, even manufactured ones.  

          Is this the initial attack on Clinton?  I suspect she can handle herself in a hearing, and could use it to springboard to greater credibility by using this opportunity to demonstrate her fitness to serve.  

          Fox News is the window on what the Republican party intends to do.  They are the first line of attack - easy to sacrifice if they boo boo, too soon (Hey, Hannity, you may be out of a job, soon) because their only value is in their immediate usefulness.  They are otherwise disposable, because they are employees, not elected officials.

          I find I am a little on the fence about whether Democrats should participate, Rich, but I take your point and your caution.  It may very well be a trap.  But if you know what the trap is, sometimes you can use that set-up to your advantage.  It's how the mouse in my basement continues to elude me while getting fatter and happy eating the peanut butter out of my death trap.  I thought I was smart, but apparently there is a tiny mouse in my house who is way smarter.

          "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of these United States of America -9.75 -6.87

          by Uncle Moji on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:24:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It worked out well for them in the 90s (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            daeros

            Within two years of impeaching Clinton, the GOP controlled the White House and congress.  Gore very likely lost the election because he ran away from Clinton's legacy of peace and prosperity (bank deregulation was still under the radar back then).

            If it could get an ass clown like Dubya elected, then I'd say impeachment was a slam dunk.

            "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

            by Subterranean on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:54:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe.... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Uncle Moji, Ellamenta, Subterranean

              But, more damaging than getting W. elected is that it cheapened impeachment and thus contributed to not being impeached for lying the country into war.

            •  As I recollect W ran as "non-partisan moral man" (0+ / 0-)

              who would "bring back honor" to the White House.  

              So, Bill Clinton exercised poor judgement by cheating on his wife with a young employee.  But more stupidly, Clinton lied during his deposition about the affair.

              The Republicans seized on stupid personal "lie under oath" on adultery as the cause for impeachment, as the "high crimes and misdemeanors" threshold.

              They (including the horrible Miss Lindsey "Benghazi" Graham) attacked and attacked and attacked Clinton for "breaking the law, no one is above the law" and impeached him for it.

              Clinton fought back, and the Senate redeemed itself by not finding Clinton guilty.  The Republicans spent millions and millions of dollars for nothing, except making Ken Starr briefly famous.

              And the nation was bruised and tired of the fighting.  

              The popular vote went to Gore, but W stole the election.  And the Republicans kept control of the House.

              So, what is the takeaway that is transferable here:

              1.  Is it likely that Susan Rice will be found to have lied under oath?  Or Hillary Clinton? in a legal deposition?  (or merely lied at a State of the Union address about "mushroom clouds", and on tv about "WMD")

              2.  Will any failure in providing security fall solely to Democrats or will they include traceable votes by sitting Republicans who denied funding as part of fiscal conservatism?  Is there a cable that proves Clinton was directly and specifically asked by Stevens for more security and denied it for nefarious reasons? (Bin Laden Determined to Attack within the US)

              3.  Did Hillary Clinton or Susan Rice or David Petraeus specifically delay or deny military reinforcements to Stevens that would have prevented the 4 deaths?

              If any of these questions are yes, then there might be a problem in 2016 for Clinton unless she uses any opportunity to publicly stuff it back down their throats.  Obama already won on Obamacare, they don't want to waste more time on him.  But you have actually convinced me that the Democrats should not bother being a party to these "kangaroo court" hearings.  During the Clinton era, the only way an opposing voice got any hearing on the public stage was by participating in the Congressional process.  Now, with the internet and MSNBC, the Republicans don't have the same controlling free media ride they had during Clinton's day.  The opposing public view is us.  and Rachel, Chris, Steve, Chris, Melissa, Joy, Rev Al, Tamron, etc.  We are the counterweight on the scale of traditional media (hey, David Gregory, Mark Halperin, Politico, CNN, I mean youse) kangaroo rush to judgement.  We level the playing field.

              And I don't know about you, but I intend to fight back.  I refuse to sacrifice Hillary Clinton on the altar of Republican shenanigans and media laziness.   We need to hit back simply:  

              "This is an attempt to derail the right of Americans to elect the first woman President of the United States in 2016.

              Republicans can't spend enough of our government tax money to ensure you don't have the right.  This is 2016 Presidential politics."

              Tell the Republicans to stop raising campaign money and spending American Tax Dollars on partisan 2016 electioneering.  

              Let them fight Clinton on their own dime.  Not ours.

              "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of these United States of America -9.75 -6.87

              by Uncle Moji on Fri May 09, 2014 at 11:19:50 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  This isn't very relevant: (0+ / 0-)
                The popular vote went to Gore, but W stole the election.
                The point is that it was close enough to steal, yet based on both foreign and domestic affairs, Gore should have won handily.  Had Gore not run away from Clinton (he barely even mentioned Clinton's name during the campaign), he very likely would have CRUSHED Dubya.

                "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

                by Subterranean on Fri May 09, 2014 at 04:55:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  Impeachment will happen (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, daeros, buffie

        if the GOP wins the Senate.  That's the trigger.  People have been laughing at me for saying so, but make no mistake, the GOP 'baggers fucking HATE Obama worse than Clinton, and that's all impeachment is about.

        "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

        by Subterranean on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:50:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They'd have to have 2/3's to do it. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          daeros, elmo, Subterranean

          Although, I believe you're right in that they're going to try it, especially if they win the senate. But I have my doubts that they'd be able to garner 2/3s in the senate, even if they win control. That's why Clinton stayed in office.

          To their minds, this is a win/win because there's the fantasy that they'll impeach Obama AND also hurt the believed 2016 Dem nominee (note that I said "believed" because nobody, not even Hillary, thought someone else would come out of the blue and run away with the nomination, which could happen.

    •  that was my first thought (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      daeros, hulibow, tb mare, JG in MD

      when reading headline on front page: Wait, Dems are actually GOING ALONG WITH THIS!!??!? In any way?!? Good gawd, the only appropriate response to this nonsense is repeated mockery and a refusal to even discuss it other than to call it what it is-a sham. Pelosi "sitting down" to discuss terms, good grief, she should just laugh in their faces and tell them good luck with their sideshow. Un-friggin-believable.

    •  They do it ritualistically. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      buffie, JG in MD

      And this is why the Third Way is no way to democracy.

      The Third Way is far too willing to participate in farce and fraud to ever impede, let alone reverse, the total corruption of institutional authority that is inevitable once the money becomes central to it.

      The Third Way is no way to democracy.

      I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

      Trust, but verify. - Reagan
      Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

      by Words In Action on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:27:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Except it has already been sprung... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JG in MD

      The problem is that the trap has already been sprung, and Democrats have to try to determine which choice is the least bad.

      Participate in the committee in order to be able to question witnesses see the same documents and mayeb beable to counteract Republican spin and lies in the hopes of demonstrating that the whole thing is a farce.

      Don't participate in the hopes that it delegitimizes the committee sufficiently that anything they do report shows the whole thing is a farce.  But, the presupposes that the Republicans cannot gin up something that can't be refuted without access to the same documents and witnesses.

      Either choice is risky and arguably could be a win for Republicans.  I am sure that the Dem leadership is weighing the pros and cons, but there is no obvious answer.

  •  Wish they'd just ignore it (12+ / 0-)

    Let republicans have their kangaroo court.  It doesn't deserve any attention.

    At most, Democrats should say, "Please proceed" and go about doing important things.

    •  exactly! Thank you! They (we) should do nothing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      red rabbit, cybersaur, daeros

      that legitimizes this farce, and just let them waste money time and themselves.  As the weeks pass, they will look as stupid as they have looked with the obamacare bullshit, which they have all but dropped now.

      Please know I am not rude. I cannot rec anything from this browser. When I rec or post diaries I am a guest at some exotic locale's computer. Ayn is the bane!

      by Floyd Blue on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:54:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm tired of hearing about it BUT... (0+ / 0-)

      I see you point about the potential for this to turn into a political asset, especially around election time.

      As America needs leadership and has so many problems that we need to address, what does the GOP give us? Bullshit Benghazi.

    •  In case you hadn't noticed (0+ / 0-)

      The House of Representatives isn't doing anything important or unimportant. Republicans have effectively shut it down.

  •  Sounds familiar (13+ / 0-)

    I'm a criminal defense attorney, and this sounds awfully familiar. Discovery right to access certain documents, knowledge of witness lists... these are rights you give a criminal defendant. The GOP is setting this up as an adversarial process where the Democratic Party itself is on trial for Benghazi, that's all this is.

    But I guess we already knew that.

  •  Republicans won't seek to... (4+ / 0-)

    pay for the hearings by cutting food stamps.

    Instead, they'll cut embassy security further.

  •  Boycott the Republican (fundraiser) committee. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, cybersaur, varii, daeros, red rabbit

    This should be at least as good as the ACA hearing with the insurance CEOs.

  •  Dems should see this for what it is... (5+ / 0-)

    ...and let the Repubs go all Lewinsky on this "scandal".  It may take weeks or months, but they will eventually face what buffoons they truly are, as they have down with the anti-Obamacare bullshit.

    Please know I am not rude. I cannot rec anything from this browser. When I rec or post diaries I am a guest at some exotic locale's computer. Ayn is the bane!

    by Floyd Blue on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:55:21 AM PDT

  •  Pragmatic centrists swoon (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action, daeros

    at the bipartisan comity of Republicans reaching out across the aisle.  Things will get done!

    Pay no attention to the upward redistribution of wealth!

    by ActivistGuy on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:55:37 AM PDT

  •  I recall a past whitch hunt (17+ / 0-)

    The Waco tragedy back in '93. Janet Reno ordered federal agents to raid the compound and scores of people died. Republicans saw a great opportunity to force Reno's resignation and put egg on Clinton's face prior to his reelection.

    A special committee was formed to investigate. Rs and Ds gathered for the typical horse trading. Rs had the majority by then and they had decided that only 20 witnesses would be called. Would the Rs get 13 witnesses or 12 or even 11. By giving up witnesses, they could win political concessions.

    The Dems said they only wanted to call one witness. The Repubs were overjoyed with the prospect of beating Reno over the head with 19 witnesses. There was one caveat, the Dems witness had to go first. "Fine" the Repubs said.

    That first witness was a 14 year old girl who told of the  systematic rape and incest of all young girls that went on regularly inside the compound. It made the other 19 witnesses complicit in defending a serial child molester. Took the wind right out of the Repub's sails.

    Janet Reno went on to become one of the longest serving AGs in American history.


    Every time my iPhone battery gets down to 47%, I think of Mitt Romney.

    by bobinson on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:55:42 AM PDT

    •  Holder is no Janet Reno. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Subterranean

      Obama (for all his time in Chicago is no Chicago politician) is no Bill Clinton.

      The Dems should go about the business on Congress and then when the GOPrs are not present or obstruct vote for other priorities point a very, very large finger.

      Holder has however done a fine job for his base: the banksters of Wall Street.

      Somewhat off topic so has Gen. Alexander done a fine job, for which he will now be richly rewarded with security contracts. The fox getting paid by the farmer to point out the holes in the fence. Here is a guy who had access to everything and is now setting up an office in the space provided by a consulting firm??

    •  How about Acorn? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JG in MD

      D's gladly lined up to demonize it and toss it under the bus. An organization entirely instrumental to democracy, to the voting franchise. Tossed over like a bag of rags for  the opportunity to appear bipartisan and statesman-ly.

      They're poseurs. And they have no business leading a Party that promotes democracy. None.

      I've never left a blank space on a ballot... but I will not vote for someone [who vows] to spy on me. I will not do it. - dclawyer06

      Trust, but verify. - Reagan
      Vote, but Occupy. - commonmass

      by Words In Action on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:22:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I thought that they were going to concede that... (0+ / 0-)

    A: This is a partisan witch hunt and B:that they are colossal dicks.

    "Well Clarice, have the lambs stopped screaming?"

    by buffie on Fri May 09, 2014 at 07:57:38 AM PDT

  •  They Will Agree To Normal Rules Of Discovery (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobinson

    Bending over backwards there Trey.

  •  This is really about what a criminal defendant (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    red rabbit

    gets in the state I live in, which isn't much when the weight of the state's resources land on you.

    •  trial/kangaroo court (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GrindtheHills

      but one thing it's not is a nonpartisan factfinding committee, which would also be pointless because we already know everything about it.  
      But even criminal defendants get to subpoena and call their own witnesses, and it's not clear that both parties have that power here.  And if they did, the Dems should call people to testify regarding Congressional cuts to diplomatic security, and the many prior terrorist attacks against U.S. personnel overseas.  

  •  stupid fucking Dems (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ivorybill, Subterranean, buffie

    AGAIN.  The Repub chairman already described the totally nonpartisan/bipartisan hearings as a trial.  They already gave away their real intentions here, but the fucking idiot Dems go along with it.  
    There is nothing to be gained here that we don't already know from the endless Car Thief hearings.  

  •  Considering the simple fact that the Republicans (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    red rabbit

    have wasted Congressional time, effort, and energy some 50+ times now, trying to "repeal/replace" the ACA, it does make one wonder just how many equal wastes of time they are going to have, holding "investigations into Benghazi"?

    But then again, useless, worthless, good for nothing wastes of time ARE the only "important things" they have to do.  The sad part about that is, simply, as long as the Teabaghead/Republican Party controls the House, and provides the Speaker, etc., the truly "important things" of government will never get done.

    It all brings to mind a passage from the Scripture the Right-wingnut, reactionary, regressive, racist Republican Party loves to use for such as "proof-texting" and other mis-quotation:  "Let the dead bury the dead."

    And, of course, one may assist them along the way, by going to the polls and getting rid of them; by the simple process of VOTING THEM OUT!

    It's really your own choice, folks!

  •  Democrats made a profound error (0+ / 0-)

    in not boycotting the committee. If it were staffed entirely by Republicans, it would be revealed for what it is, but Democratic Representatives just can't seem to resist the siren call of "My point, and I do have one."

    Voting is the means by which the public is distracted from the realities of power and its exercise.

    by Anne Elk on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:20:17 AM PDT

  •  What the GOP can give us? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JG in MD

    Public hearings on US torture policy, with subpoena power by the minority.

    Give us that... and sure, we can participate in #benghazi.

    Anything else is a joke.  

    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

    by ivorybill on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:22:51 AM PDT

  •  I don't know (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DiesIrae, buffie, JG in MD

    which is the greater danger for Dems--adding a tincture of legitimacy and bipartisanship by participating in this spurious exercise, or allowing a Swift-Boat situation to occur by forgoing the opportunity to question witnesses, bring out all the facts,  and put things in context. I tend to trust Pelosi's political instincts, so I'd be inclined to support whatever she decides on this.

  •  In the immortal words of Nancy Reagan: Just... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    say "no" (to the committee, that is).

    “My soul is from elsewhere, I'm sure of that, and I intend to end up there." - Rumi

    by LamontCranston on Fri May 09, 2014 at 08:36:30 AM PDT

  •  Democrats Should Form There Own Commitee (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buffie

    to investigate corruption in the GOP Benghazi hearings.

  •  Abused Dem Syndrome (0+ / 0-)

    The Democratic party suffers from Abused Dem Syndrome. They know in their hearts that Republicans will take this opportunity to bash them ("it's for your own good") but Democrats will keep coming back for more.

    Obi Ben Ghazi to House Republicans: "Use the Farce."

    by edg on Fri May 09, 2014 at 12:06:05 PM PDT

  •  Maybe not participating (0+ / 0-)

    in this sham of an investigation is the best thing to do. When you start with the "rule" that says half the investigation team is neutered from the start there's not much point to it. Why work to make a bad committee look good?

  •  I am Pissed (0+ / 0-)

    That these reubs or ANY politicians are not also very disturbed and wanting to get to the bottom of two wars, one started on a lie, while dropping the other more legit looking on in afgan..

    Tell ME where is the outrage and investigations, committees, because a ton of our men and women DIED, Lost the ability to maintain self sufficiency, to move forward and move up in the world, they STILL suffer. THEY ARE Americans TOO

    Who will investigate this crime and lies... who will investigate the shredding of documents by cheney and bushy crew? Who, Where is justice?

    i'm riled, forgive me, I now back out..

    But just saying, it is TRUE, these are American People too!

    Work In Progress...Laser Focus on Concepts of Evolving, Expanding Awareness.

    by Skyye on Fri May 09, 2014 at 01:20:55 PM PDT

    •  100% agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      enufenuf

      with you Skyye, just started reading Al Frankens' book The Truth, and I'm so angry all over again about EVERYTHING about those years. Why have there not been at least 7 panels to investigate the lies that led to the war in Iraq? Or about how 9/11 COULD have been prevented if Bush had been at all paying attention? Why didn't news reporters make the point from the very beginning, well it was the biggest terrorist act ever in the US and it WAS on your watch. Why are the dems and THE MEDIA not up in arms over this esp with all this Benghazi BS. All these special committees for 4 lives lost (tho I'm not negating the sadness of that fact) but really people, where is the outrage of 3000+ lives lost that also could have been prevented !!!?? While Georgie-boy does his stupid little paintings, when he should be out there every day for the rest of his sorry life, visiting and comforting and paying for the damage he's done to our military men who've lost arms, legs, peace of mind, or their families dealing with their loss of life or any sense of normalcy ever again.  IF  The Dems had any spine they would not take part in this farce. It is SO obviously a political ploy to keep Benghazi going as long as possible. and I for one am angry not only because it's a stupid waste of time and our taxpayer money, but these idiots are not even attempting to do the jobs they're getting paid for. Which is running this country and creating jobs. Instead we're on the 8th special committee  on Benghazi and what, like 50 attempts to repeal Obamacare. What is wrong with this country????

  •  That photo of Boehner proves (0+ / 0-)

    that he's a Slytherin Serpent-Tongue.  

    I would rather spend my life searching for truth than live a single day within the comfort of a lie. ~ John Victor Ramses

    by KayCeSF on Fri May 09, 2014 at 02:08:20 PM PDT

  •  Ah (0+ / 0-)

    One can only hope the Dems take control of the house after the midterm elections, and hopefully keep the senate. Then it will be payback time. I hope the Dems crucify, draw and quarter every F'ing Rethuglican in sight. Boner, Cantor, Ryan, I'm an Issa hole. The whole lot. But, I think the Dems will give those F'ing co(%suckers a pass. Bullshit. Treat the Rethuglicans how they treated Obama and the Dems. Send the bastards home shaking in there boots.

  •  We are in a position where we may have to (0+ / 0-)

    participate in this kangaroo court: If we do not, the only voices to be heard will be that of Teabaggers screaming to impeach. You can count on their voices to be amplified by Fox and the Blaze.
    What we need is any Dem on this court to do double duty: Attend and participate as best they can, then go on the Ed show, the Rachel Maddow show, any show that will have them and comment at length on the crazy arguments the other side is putting forth.
    If their microphone is cut off, if they are not allowed to ask questions, if witnesses are pressured or have to answer leading questions, all that needs to be recorded so the people see that it IS a kangaroo court. Yes, it is a lot of work, but the sanity of this country is at this price.
    Inevitably, there are questions that they know the witnesses cannot answer since a lot is classified, and that is what Republicans count on to make us look deceitful. There is nothing wrong with stating that the Republicans on the committee have been briefed and only pretend to not know what the answer is.
    If that fails, declassify the stuff on the spot by making it public. "You were told such and such at the briefing, so don't pretend that this question has not been answered".
    As far as these 7 volunteers, they should be warned that all funds will be withdrawn, all Democratic support will be withheld for their re- election: Since they are voting like Republicans, they are Republicans. (If you look like a duck and quack like a duck, you are a F*cking duck)
    We have had in Wisconsin some Republicans pretending to be Democrats, running as Democrats. We found them out in time, but still: false flag operations are a Republican thing, and we should not accept anybody who only say they are Democrats. A better vetting procedure is what is called for here, IMHO.

  •  Wasting taxer payer money and time. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Mitt Romney's October Surprize.... Bengazi. (0+ / 0-)

    It is interesting that the video Innocence of the Muslims was financed by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula a Coptic Christian with a criminal background.  The spokes person for the production Steve Klein of Hemet, Calif. a Tea Party Republican and critic of Mitt Romney, who calls himself a spy.  He is on record saying that the video would cause a lot of trouble when it was released.  The video was broadcast in Egypt and the internet during the lead up to 09/11, 2012.  The result was riots and scores killed.   The video was an attempt by supporters of Mitt Romney to create an, "October Surprise."  

    On Sept 11th the CIA station in Bengazi was attacked with heavy weapons and burned.  The attackers seemed to have intelligence on the layout and security measures of the station.  In the lead up to Election Day, right wing media outlets featured mercenaries that came forward with false accusations that they were told to "stand down."  These mercenaries were later proven to be lying.  The intention was to disrupt the foreign policy of President Obama and damage Secretary Hillary Clinton's political legacy.  

    My question for the panel is: Were the attackers directed by unseen operatives with a partisan agenda and did the attackers receive tactical advice and intelligence.  Were the attackers Libyans or paid mercenaries or both?   Were the mercenaries that lied on FOX News involved in the attack?

  •  These DINOS... (0+ / 0-)

    Ron Barber (AZ-02)
    John Barrow (GA-12)
    Mike McIntyre (NC-07)
    Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
    Collin Peterson (MN-07)
    Nick Rahall (WV-03)
    Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)

    All won elections in conservative leaning districts or states. And many of them are conservative districts because of republican gerrymandering. Eliminate the gerrymandering and then it would be easy to primary these turds out of office.

  •  I'm losing track is this Bengazi investigation.. (0+ / 0-)

    number 7 or 8.  I guess the previous GOP investigations were so incompetent they couldn't find any relevant facts.

  •  How about the Daily KOS do a stroy on the costs (0+ / 0-)

    of ALL the Benghazi investigations so far to date? What was there seven? Better yet maybe get as many people they can to contact Boner and make him provide it under the Freedom of Information act.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site