31 Comments

Terminology: if the House does vote a Bill of Impeachment, the President (e.g., Clinton) is "impeached". It takes a 2/3 majority in the Senate to "convict". In Bubba's case, even five Republican Senators voted not guilty.

Expand full comment

I'm a little afraid the House may do it because it would give them a different excuse for obstructing everything,

Expand full comment

i like this line of thinking better.

Expand full comment

here is a better use of your time baggers:

repeal obamacare. again.

Expand full comment

as a friend of mine once said about extreme overreaction to a rather mundane development:

'unspeakable? this isn't even rude.'

there is just no there there and no matter how the wingnuts may wish it, eventually it will run up against that fact. you can have all the hearings you want and call pickering to testify and make darrell issa pope, but none of that is going to make this watergate.

hell this isn't even as good as gennifer flowers.

Expand full comment

Well, that explains Texas, at any rate. For everyone else, there's always bovine spungiform encephalopathy to fall back on.

Expand full comment

We will not rest untll we find the truth about Benghaz... ooooh, look, shiny object! TAXGHAZI!!!!1!

Expand full comment

Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line

Expand full comment

Benghazi is Arabic for Whitewater

Expand full comment

As usual, the Jews are behind it.

Expand full comment

Yeah, every time he comes to the UN we get traffic snarls. Oddly, this is also true when another president, such as Reagan or Bush, comes to the UN. The difference is, apparently neither of those two jamokes bothered to visit your FB Fiend's state. Possibly there's not much to do there?

Expand full comment

The Court of Public Opinion now has subpoena powers.

Expand full comment

The resemblance is uncanny. It might be her, moonika-lighting for some extra bitcoins.

Expand full comment

Embassies were attacked and people killed while Reagan was POTUS too. IMPEACH!!! <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wik..." target="_blank">" rel="nofollow noopener" title="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_e...">http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Expand full comment

If the Tea Party cared about winning they would not be the TP. Losing while staying pure is part of the goal. Otherwise they would have stayed quiet during 2008 and gotten McCain elected and then forced him to the right after he won; ditto Romney. Losing and staying pure is the goal.

The TP as a movement is all about the paranoia, like McCarthy & Father Coughlin (cf. also Robespierre, Stalin). Benghazi is a paranoid tic, and they’re stuck in it. They can’t let go of it because it’s not an issue; it’s a prompt for the paranoia. Paranoid tics go like this:

Something is going on that is being hidden from me, and it is powerful and dangerous and secret. Extensive research finds nothing. That’s because it’s secret, silly! This is proof that it is there! Start from the top.

Just why the right has gotten so paranoid is another question. Me, I think it’s cyclical. The other plausible explanation is that the UN has been putting some chemical in the drinking water in southern states since the 1950s, which is making people go bonkers.

That, or radiation from Area 51.

Expand full comment

Huh, so the Unacceptable Word turns out to be t-r-i-g-g-e-r, so I substituted "prompt," which the adminbot liked better. Go figure.

Expand full comment