The Clinton impeachment nightmare - raised from the dead. And reincarnated

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:00 AM GMT
    If the Republicans take control of the House of Representatives - brace yourself for endless investigations of Obama, and another impeachment attempt.
    Republicans are already planning a "wave of committee investigations".

    Get used to the idea of Republicans using your tax dollars to pay for purely partisan-motivated investigations of Obama.

    Get used to the idea of the House of Representatives spending it's time on partisan investigations while the economy continues to struggle and try to recover from the Bush recession.

    Get used to the fact that the Republicans have NO interest in putting "Country First".

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41506.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/opinion/30krugman.html?ref=opinion
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:15 AM GMT
    Yeah, I read it, too. A sad thing to have to predict, and particularly sad because it's so likely to prove accurate.

    But it would be a good way for the Repubs to again prove themselves, to all but the truest of true believers, incapable of doing anything positive.
  • yankeesblazer...

    Posts: 243

    Aug 30, 2010 6:17 AM GMT
    rickrick91 saidIf the Republicans take control of the House of Representatives - brace yourself for endless investigations of Obama, and another impeachment attempt.
    Republicans are already planning a "wave of committee investigations".

    Get used to the idea of Republicans using your tax dollars to pay for purely partisan-motivated investigations of Obama.

    Get used to the idea of the House of Representatives spending it's time on partisan investigations while the economy continues to struggle and try to recover from the Bush recession.

    Get used to the fact that the Republicans have NO interest in putting "Country First".

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/opinion/30krugman.html?ref=opinion

    God help us.


    C'mon, you accuse Republicans all the time of nonsensical "fear mongering." You are doing the same thing here. It borders on lunacy...I don't think that you are a loony guy at all, I'm just saying that posts like this one make you seem that way.

    To back your opinion up, you post an article from the ultra-liberal Op Ed page of the New York Times, from liberal economist Paul Krugman of all people. Krugman is very good at what he does, which is study the economy. He won a Nobel Prize for that. However, he is not qualified to offer an educated opinion on what the Republicans would or wouldn't do if they gained power.

    This isn't a fair post, rickrick91. I respect your opinions, but this really isn't a fair post. I hope you will see what I mean.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:29 AM GMT
    I'm siding with Yankeesblazer on this, if every side (party) completely polarizes opinions on here, the end result will always be a flamewar.

    Wouldn't just posting the link and then saying, "Is this possible?" more likely to get an considerate and civil topic going?

    -Doug

    PS I think all sides should tone it down a few notches.



  • yankeesblazer...

    Posts: 243

    Aug 30, 2010 6:33 AM GMT
    meninlove said I'm siding with Yankeesblazer on this, if every side (party) completely polarizes opinions on here, the end result will always be a flamewar.

    Wouldn't just posting the link and then saying, "Is this possible?" more likely to get an considerate and civil topic going?

    -Doug

    PS I think all sides should tone it down a few notches.





    Agreed, both sides definitely need to tone it down. I try my best to stay away from the personal attacks/flame stuff, but I admit I'm not always successful but I do constantly work on it.

    Good post Doug.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:33 AM GMT
    meninlove said I'm siding with Yankeesblazer on this, if every side (party) completely polarizes opinions on here, the end result will always be a flamewar.

    Wouldn't just posting the link and then saying, "Is this possible?" more likely to get an considerate and civil topic going?

    -Doug

    PS I think all sides should tone it down a few notches.






    NO.
    This story is factual and not just my opinion or Krugman's opinion.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41506.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:41 AM GMT
    Rick, the optics are very different this time.

    If your country votes in the GOP, then they get in. If they waste tax money this way in large amounts and overly persecute Obama many will likely percieve it as racism and fiscal irresponsibility.

    Besides, one glaring difference here is that the cat's out of the bag, so to speak.

    What myself and Yankees are referring to is the ongoing hysteria level in these forums.

    -Doug
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 6:57 AM GMT
    yankeesblazerscowboys said
    rickrick91 saidIf the Republicans take control of the House of Representatives - brace yourself for endless investigations of Obama, and another impeachment attempt.
    Republicans are already planning a "wave of committee investigations".

    Get used to the idea of Republicans using your tax dollars to pay for purely partisan-motivated investigations of Obama.

    Get used to the idea of the House of Representatives spending it's time on partisan investigations while the economy continues to struggle and try to recover from the Bush recession.

    Get used to the fact that the Republicans have NO interest in putting "Country First".

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/opinion/30krugman.html?ref=opinion

    God help us.


    C'mon, you accuse Republicans all the time of nonsensical "fear mongering." You are doing the same thing here. It borders on lunacy...I don't think that you are a loony guy at all, I'm just saying that posts like this one make you seem that way.

    To back your opinion up, you post an article from the ultra-liberal Op Ed page of the New York Times, from liberal economist Paul Krugman of all people. Krugman is very good at what he does, which is study the economy. He won a Nobel Prize for that. However, he is not qualified to offer an educated opinion on what the Republicans would or wouldn't do if they gained power.

    This isn't a fair post, rickrick91. I respect your opinions, but this really isn't a fair post. I hope you will see what I mean.




    Krugman isn't making up what the Republicans would do.
    Which you'd know if you'd read the article
    His article is based on legitimate facts about what REPUBLICANS have said about what they plan to do if they take control of Congress.
    It's not just an "educated opinion".

    As stated in the Politico article he references.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41506.html

    Citing what Republicans have said about what they plan to do is totally "fair".

    If you think the scenario I describe is "lunacy", the lunacy is in the heads of the Republicans who are planning all the lunacy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 7:02 AM GMT
    Rick it's not what you describe but the way you're describing it. Can't it be calmly?

    -Doug

    Really this is an SB type way to describe (omg I just said beetlejiuce!) and I think it should be only him that has a reputation for it.

  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Aug 30, 2010 7:07 AM GMT
    Am I correct that there can be no LEGAL investigations unless Attorney General Eric Holder appoints a special prosecutor to do the various investigations over which a couple of Republicans seem to be frothing at the mouth ?

    As I recall, there would have been no Clinton investigation if then Attorney General Janet Reno had not appointed bull dog Kenneth Starr and allowed him to go on a ridiculous fishing expedition.
  • yankeesblazer...

    Posts: 243

    Aug 30, 2010 8:09 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidAm I correct that there can be no LEGAL investigations unless Attorney General Eric Holder appoints a special prosecutor to do the various investigations over which a couple of Republicans seem to be frothing at the mouth ?

    As I recall, there would have been no Clinton investigation if then Attorney General Janet Reno had not appointed bull dog Kenneth Starr and allowed him to go on a ridiculous fishing expedition.


    Yeah I'm not 100% sure either...I know that Congress can subpoena people to testify under oath before them, but I am not sure if Congress, without approval from the AG, can actually begin any legal proceedings.

    Any advice from law professionals would be much appreciated here.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Aug 30, 2010 10:15 AM GMT
    yankeesblazerscowboys said
    rickrick91 saidIf the Republicans take control of the House of Representatives - brace yourself for endless investigations of Obama, and another impeachment attempt.

    To back your opinion up, you post an article from the ultra-liberal Op Ed page of the New York Times, from liberal economist Paul Krugman of all people. Krugman is very good at what he does, which is study the economy. He won a Nobel Prize for that. However, he is not qualified to offer an educated opinion on what the Republicans would or wouldn't do if they gained power.

    This isn't a fair post, rickrick91. I respect your opinions, but this really isn't a fair post. I hope you will see what I mean.


    Paul Krugman is a liberal ... Yes
    an "Ultra-liberal"? What does that mean? Other than being used as an attempt to discount what he's trying to say
    As of yet Mr Paul Krugman has been right on the money on EVERYTHING he Has said and if you disagree I would implore you to find where he Has been proven wrong

    On the other hand
    The republicans have shown you at every single turn that impeding everything that Obama does is Number one on their agenda
    So if you think that they will not fall back on their Clinton era crap
    You have a major screw loose my man
    If they do take control after Nov
    If you are counting on the republicans putting country first and not gumming up the system with an endless amount of needless investigations

    ................................ I wouldn't hold my Breath
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Aug 30, 2010 11:12 AM GMT

    Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 12:09 PM GMT
    As long as somebody finally votes to invade Canada, I don't care.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 12:41 PM GMT
    Congress has it's own subpoena power. So while it cannot necessarily indict someone for a crime, the heads of various subcommittees can hold hearings without the imprimatur of the Attorney General. What is feared (and, frankly, likely if Republicans regain control) is that instead of passing legislation the Congress will be bogged down in "investigations."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 2:36 PM GMT
    The Republican Congress did a very good job of BLOCKING Congressional investigations when Bush was in the White House. Almost nothing was investigated that might embarrass Bush/Cheney. And when Congress did make a feeble attempt to ask for information or subpoena Bush officials, the Administration dragged its heels, obstructed, and largely managed to avoid Congressional oversight. And Republican leaders just looked the other way and did nothing.

    With a new Republican House in 2011 I think it will be different. Republicans will suddenly find they have broad oversight powers. And being that Republicans vote as a unified block, not as individuals, as they have proven repeatedly since Obama took office, I have no doubt that the current crop of radical Republican leaders will get their way.

    This is not the same Congress that impeached Clinton. Though that one was certainly partisan, this one has proven to be totally polarized. The Democrats, being in power, have tried to legislate, to prove they deserve to maintain their majority by getting needed things done. The Republican objective has been to uncompromisingly obstruct, to make the government break down so they can seize power, and to undermine Obama and pave the way for a Republican President in 2012.

    The Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No. I also see them as being Party before People. They haven't wanted to participate in government, but throw monkey wrenches into it. Why would they not continue this goal in the next Congress, only this time, having taken the House, set their eyes on the White House?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 3:22 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidCongress has it's own subpoena power. So while it cannot necessarily indict someone for a crime, the heads of various subcommittees can hold hearings without the imprimatur of the Attorney General. What is feared (and, frankly, likely if Republicans regain control) is that instead of passing legislation the Congress will be bogged down in "investigations."


    Haven't we enough legislation already?

    Just asking.... icon_wink.gif


    No, there's never enough. We have to protect the people!!!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 3:32 PM GMT
    Is everybody having amnesia about last winter??? It's almost September. If we don't get this invasion rolling, those sons of bitches will sock it to us again. That's what they live for up there. For pete's sake, we only have to drive across a few bridges! What's holding things up???
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 4:27 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 4:29 PM GMT
    Caslon15000 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.


    It was the supporting of businesses that ruined the economy? uhh,...yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 4:44 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Caslon15000 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.


    It was the supporting of businesses that ruined the economy? uhh,...yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

    The term used was "blind support" which means unquestioning and under-regulated, especially of the financial sector. Which contributed to the meltdown that hurt ALL business, and the American people in general.

    And Republicans tend to only help big business; the Bush Administration and the Republican Congresses had a dismal record with small businesses. So when we say "business" we must narrow it down a bit, to mean big-money corporate business, to the exclusion of all others.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Aug 30, 2010 4:53 PM GMT
    meninlove said

    PS I think all sides should tone it down a few notches.






    I'm very confident that if we don't "tone it down", RJ is going to tone it down for us.

    icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 5:05 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    mocktwinkie said
    Caslon15000 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.


    It was the supporting of businesses that ruined the economy? uhh,...yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

    The term used was "blind support" which means unquestioning and under-regulated, especially of the financial sector. Which contributed to the meltdown that hurt ALL business, and the American people in general.

    And Republicans tend to only help big business; the Bush Administration and the Republican Congresses had a dismal record with small businesses. So when we say "business" we must narrow it down a bit, to mean big-money corporate business, to the exclusion of all others.


    But I'm not aware of what you're describing as being instigated chiefly by the Republicans. In what form did these "unquestioning" and "under-regulated" instances in the financial sector occur? Are you referring to the events leading up to the housing crisis?

    Are you saying that the Bush tax cuts are why we are in a recession?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 5:10 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Caslon15000 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.


    It was the supporting of businesses that ruined the economy? uhh,...yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

    Just stop talking
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2010 5:12 PM GMT
    Caslon15000 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Caslon15000 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Art_Deco saidThe Republicans have been rightly called the Party of No.

    As in, "No. We oppose all your massive government expansion because it will ruin the country."

    It was the Repuglicans blind support of Business that has nearly ruined the country. It was their Congress who repealed the laws that kept our financial system safe for 60 years.


    It was the supporting of businesses that ruined the economy? uhh,...yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

    Just stop talking


    I want you to tell me exactly what laws you're referring to that were repealed which "kept" our financial system safe.