coldjoint
 
  -1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:14 am
@revelette2,
Quote:
For the rest, just copy and paste each of the names and type in impeachment beside it. Easy.


They don't need to impeach Obama they can appoint a special prosecutor and uncover enough on the IRS so he will resign. But they have other things to do. Like the Keystone pipeline and more drilling and jobs more energy development will bring.

Stick a fork in the incompetent bastard, he is done either way.
revelette2
 
  2  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:18 am
@coldjoint,
Good luck with the IRS thing. He can use the Veto option on all else if he thinks he should.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:20 am
@revelette2,
Quote:
He can use the Veto option on all else if he thinks he should.


Why would he veto that? Is he guilty of something? He sure is.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:22 am
@revelette2,
Issa: No where in that whole article do they quote Issa as saying lets impeach. Impeach only comes up due to the author of the article.

Burgess: Who's he? Is he a GOP big wig? This article seems like his response to a question from someone else. That is different than calling for impeachment.

Inhofe: You found one.

Chaffetz: His exact words were: “It’s not something I’m seeking, it’s not the endgame, it’s not what we’re playing for,” he said. “I was simply asked if it was within the realm of possibilities, and I’d say ‘yes.’”

Out of 4 articles, you found one with someone calling for his impeachment. That is about as weak as you can get for saying the GOP wants to impeach Obama. I can tell you this, it won't ever come up and the whole talk was started by those on MSNBC and not by the GOP. A few people does not the whole party make. Hell one person does not a party make. The heads of the GOP in the House and the Senate have already said it wasn't going to happen. If the leadership doesn't want it, it isn't going to happen.

You cry babies can drop the act now. The GOP took over the Senate gained more seats in the House and took a whole lot of Gov. positions as well. We now have 4 female GOP gov. and they were all re-elected to office. The GOP also just elected the first black Senator from the south: Tim Scott, Mia Love has also been elected as the first black female GOP member to the House.

All in all it was a historic night for the GOP. Have you heard much out of the MSM about Love or Scott? Nope. If these were Dems, it would have been one of the top stories of the night. Instead they were elected by GOP and of course that isn't a story at all is it.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:23 am
The war on women has failed. The race baiting, like connecting Tillis to Trayvon Martin, has failed. And Obamas message to the Blacks on his plantation is failing. What now?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 11:27 am
@Baldimo,
I agree; you can't conclude something from just one or a few saying something stupid.

We need to 'see' the party supporting something consistently over some period of time; not one or two people saying something stupid.

What would they impeach Obama on? (All the answers would be stupid ones.)
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 12:09 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Why would he veto that? Is he guilty of something? He sure is.


The veto option on bills the houses try to pass through. My bad, I really didn't make it clear.
revelette2
 
  2  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 12:22 pm
@Baldimo,
Forgive me, I was in a hurry, getting ready to get my grandchild on the bus. So I didn't read any of the articles.

Found something better.

Quote:
1. Darrell Issa Says Offering Joe Sestak a Job is Impeachable

In May 2010, Republican Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.) argued that offering Representative Joe Sestak (D-Penn.) a job to in the White House is an impeachable offense. Unfortunately for Rep. Issa, not only did the allegations never gain any traction with the media, but a few months later Issa was forced to rescind his statement. In October 2010 Issa said that there was "not a chance" that House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform would impeach Obama. "Look, disagreeing with the president — the president using his authority, maybe even misusing it — that's not what impeachment's for," Issa said. "Do we have disagreements? Yes. Do we want to see that the president strictly adheres to process? Yes."

2. Tom Coburn Says Obama Not Doing His Job is Impeachable

Unfortunately, not all of Issa's republican colleagues learned from his mistake. Republican Senator Tom Coburn (Okla.) had apparently missed the incident entirely, because in 2013 he made some wildly nondescript allegations against the president. According to Coburn, Obama was failing to carry out his duties as president. "I think there's some intended violation of the law in this administration but I also think there's a ton of incompetence." Coburn added, "I don't have the legal background to know if that rises to 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' but I think you're getting perilously close." Those befuddling allegations followed the claim that customs enforcement agents where being advised to ignore background checks for immigrants.

3. Herman Cain Says Gay Marriage and Obamacare is Impeachable

During the 2011 Republican presidential primary, candidate Herman Cain also contributed to growing pile of impeachment threats. Cain argues that the president must be impeached for "trying to pass a health care mandate which is unconstitutional," and for "ordering the Department of Justice to not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act." Though these were quite popular claims in 2011, the Supreme Court has voided both potential causes by upholding the individual mandate and striking down DOMA. But it should never be forgotten that people who want to impeach Obama agree with Herman Cain.

4. James Inhofe Says Benghazi is Impeachable

Following the Benghazi scandal, a chorus of republicans called for the impeachment of the president. However, Republican Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) didn't just demand impeachment. "Of all the great cover-ups in history — the Pentagon papers, Iran-Contra, Watergate, all the rest of them," Senator Inhofe proclaimed, "this ... is going to go down as most egregious cover-up in American history." While the historical consequences of Benghazi have yet to be felt, the prophesized impeachment has not materialized.

5. Blake Farenthold Says Obama's Birth Certificate is Impeachable

But the number one most impressive call for Obama's impeachment was made by Congressman Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) in August 2013. In front of a town hall meeting, the congressman called for the impeachment of the president due to issues with Obama's birth certificate. Despite the fact that the White House had released President Obama's birth certificate from the state of Hawaii in 2011, Congressman Farenthold continued to argue the importance of the "whole birth certificate issue."



source

Click on the links embedded in source and it will take you to the original statements. Here is Inhofe calling for Impeachment over Benghazi

Quote:
When Humphries suggested that the Democratic-controlled Senate would not impeach the president, Inhofe said that was true. He said that Benghazi would "endure" and impeachment could come after the 2014 midterm elections, when Republicans hope to retake control of the upper chamber.

Anyway, I don't want nick pick words, I hope you are right and no one seriously starts setting up committees for an impeachment process.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 12:46 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

Links? Impeachment talk started on MSNBC and other Dems. It wasn't a GOP talking point.

The people who call the shots in the party won't do impeachment. It's that simple. Other GOP'ers can talk about it all they want but the leadership won't let it happen.


Put each man's name into Google...and you will see an impeachment statement or advocacy or demand.

Stop with the nonsense. The GOP has talked impeachment...and plenty of it.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 12:58 pm
@Frank Apisa,
It's a weak argument Frank. The party leadership wants nothing to do with it. If you think it will help your buddies on the left feel better about themselves then so be it.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 01:10 pm
@revelette2,
I wrote,
Quote:
What would they impeach Obama on? (All the answers would be stupid ones.)


Although I would enjoy the repeat of the Clinton impeachment by the GOP.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 01:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Although I would enjoy the repeat of the Clinton impeachment by the GOP.


Then you better get in the oval office and give Obama a BJ.http://www.alien-earth.org/images/smileys/mapeqodg.gif Leave your teeth at home and wear a nice dress.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 01:48 pm
@Baldimo,
Actually I hope I you are right and there is no serious calls for impeachment.

Personally, I don't think anything much at all is going to happen with congress, in other words, business as usual. At least that is best case scenario.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 01:59 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

It's a weak argument Frank.


It is not even an argument, Baldimo...let alone a weak one.

It is simply a recitation of some facts.

Those people have all strongly advocated for impeaching Barack Obama.




Quote:
The party leadership wants nothing to do with it.


The "party leadership" can barely herd the savages in their caucus. The true "party leadership" is in the hands of mad men!


Quote:

If you think it will help your buddies on the left feel better about themselves then so be it.


Not sure of your point here...but...okay. Wink
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 04:12 pm
Hillary Clinton is still the favourite to win the next election with odds of 5/4 on. Basically there's not much point putting money on at those odds, stake of £4 just to get £5 back if she wins. 2nd favourite is Jeb Bush 10/1 against, if they can afford to offer odds like that they don't think he's got a cat in Hell's chance, they are businessmen after all.

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

Nb. Americans aren't allowed to bet, something to do with being freer than us.
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 08:13 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
Hillary Clinton is still the favourite to win the next election with odds of 5/4 on. Basically there's not much point putting money on at those odds, stake of £4 just to get £5 back if she wins. 2nd favourite is Jeb Bush 10/1 against, if they can afford to offer odds like that they don't think he's got a cat in Hell's chance, they are businessmen after all.

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

Nb. Americans aren't allowed to bet, something to do with being freer than us.

Gambling laws vary from state to state. How are you doing on freedom of the press?
coldjoint
 
  0  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 08:16 pm
Quote:
How are you doing on freedom of the press?


http://www.alien-earth.org/images/smileys/s374.gif
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Wed 5 Nov, 2014 08:26 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Hillary Clinton is still the favourite to win the next election with odds of 5/4 on. Basically there's not much point putting money on at those odds, stake of £4 just to get £5 back if she wins. 2nd favourite is Jeb Bush 10/1 against, if they can afford to offer odds like that they don't think he's got a cat in Hell's chance, they are businessmen after all.


I am going with Clinton/Walker, and Walker takes it. But it is early.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Thu 6 Nov, 2014 02:30 am
@Brandon9000,
Fine, that's why Snowden used the Guardian.. Our broadcasters aren't allowed to lie, yours do, that's not press freedom. Ours can be relied on.

Regardless of what state you live in you're not allowed to bet on presidential elections.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Thu 6 Nov, 2014 06:36 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Fine, that's why Snowden used the Guardian.. Our broadcasters aren't allowed to lie, yours do, that's not press freedom. Ours can be relied on.

Regardless of what state you live in you're not allowed to bet on presidential elections.

Well, for example, UK authorities raided "The Guardian" office in London to destroy hard drives in an effort to stop future publications of leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/19/u-k-government-thought-destroying-guardian-hard-drives-would-stop-snowden-stories/
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 11:25:20