Obama may go to prison and be impreached for killing our own!!! [video]

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Common Good

 

I am not recopying your whole post because that would be a form of pollution and I am steadfastly against that, along with the rest of my party which stands on the right side of history although you may not want to grant them that right now. You are aware it takes a majority in congress and the Democrats don't have it so you are wrong. Effectively they cannot change anything without cooperation of the Majority GOP. Does the fact that Bohner is the MAJORITY LEADER mean anything to you. The MAJORITY. And they decided early on to hold this country hostage so they could win this election. Yeah, I want this unethical and heartless bunch of thieving miscreants in congress again.

The right side of history? Thats laughable. extremely.
Both parties have torn this country apart.

Obama could have passed any legislation he wanted to his FIRST TWO YEARS because he had over 2/3 majority of the house and the senate.

He wasted it on that stupid healthcare bill instead of focusing on the economy that was in such "dire straights".
If he didnt do it when he had the opportunity to, then what makes you think he will be willing to do so now?

Obama wasted those two years, and now you are trying to tell me his hands are tied and its because of the other guys. Take some responsibility for your parties downfalls- cause when you dont- it makes you look really pathetic- or just naive.

As much blame as you like to point to the other guy- you sure are willing to let this guy get away with murder-Literally. Then sit there and try to preach to us how he and his party is on the right side of history.

What a joke.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Im voting- but it will be for "none of the above"

Cause I am not a party whore.

Originally posted by Vitruvian
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

Actually what doomed this thread to the bone yard wasn't a lack of substance and truthfulness as pertains the excellently presented Glen Beck video - there is plenty of that to spare. What made it a dead thread is the fact of so many interlopers and nay-saying zealously protective shills attempting to prop up a dead administration - i.e., the totally corrupted BHO regime.

The confusing title didn't help things either "Obama may go to prison and be impreached for killing our own!!! [video]]

It maybe should have read "Obama could be impeached and face a prison sentence for assisting in the murder of four Americans" And the possibility of BHO's impeachment is not merely a politically motivated right wing fantasy, or even an empty "wishful thought." After all - Clinton committed far less of a crime than that - and Nixon merely lied.

Yep, I thought as much. The kitchen is getting too hot for you, so you want to shut it down. Boo f'n hoo, it doesn't work that way. You post some propaganda and make extraordinary claims, and people are going to all you out.

So I and my fellow travelers of fact and reason are naysayers and interlopers, huh? You righties JUST LOVE your echo chamber, don't you? And you still have yet to address our points, such as what impeachable offense did Obama do? Nor have you addressed the fact that your source for this supposed story is the imbecilic nut job Glen Beck, who is a serial ranter and raver of crazy conspiracies and conjectures.

As for Nixon, he wasn't about to be impeached just for perjury. He was involved in illegal political slush funds used for criminal activities, he obstructed justice by firing his own Attorney General as well as others in the DoJ, and he illegally conducted the secret bombing of Laos and Cambodia during the latter years of the Viet Nam War.

Come on guys do you honestly think Obama will go to prison for this?
Not even remotely likely.

Beck is doing what Beck does and that is stirring up his hornet nest of followers right before an election. That's his job. Just like it was his job to promote all things Bush during his presidency.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter who the President is. These operations will continue to happen. Some will go more smoothly than others but none of them will end with a President in jail. A Republican congress will never impeach, and certainly not imprison, a Democratic president over an issue that they know their own Republican president may very well face in the future. And visa versa. On these issues, and on more than you probably care to know, there is no separation between R and D.

But enjoy the Glenn Beck show!

Originally posted by Taiyed
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Glen Beck did your work for you already - like I said above - Watch the video if you want to be informed as to what's happening in this thread.

I watched the video.

But I want YOU to say in your own words what Obama did that merits impeachment.

I am directly asking you or others that think Obama should be impeached, because I honestly don't think you have a clue what that may be. I think you watched a hyped up Glenn Beck, and he tricked you (like he does with his viewers) into thinking he made some grand point. But then you walk away from that video, and you really have no idea why you agree with him or what you beleive.

So please, tell me in your own words why you think Obama deserves to be impeached and sent to prison.

I'm still waiting.

It seems that people are having a hard time putting the propaganda they fall for into an articulate and logical thought.

Instead, they just say "watch the video", and yet they can't even express why they believe the video or what the impeachable act is that Obama committed.

Telling someone to watch the video when asked what you personally believes just shows that you really don't have a clue what you believe and you are just allowing others to think for you.

Originally posted by Common Good

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Common Good

 

I am not recopying your whole post because that would be a form of pollution and I am steadfastly against that, along with the rest of my party which stands on the right side of history although you may not want to grant them that right now. You are aware it takes a majority in congress and the Democrats don't have it so you are wrong. Effectively they cannot change anything without cooperation of the Majority GOP. Does the fact that Bohner is the MAJORITY LEADER mean anything to you. The MAJORITY. And they decided early on to hold this country hostage so they could win this election. Yeah, I want this unethical and heartless bunch of thieving miscreants in congress again.

The right side of history? Thats laughable. extremely.
Both parties have torn this country apart.

Obama could have passed any legislation he wanted to his FIRST TWO YEARS because he had over 2/3 majority of the house and the senate.

He wasted it on that stupid healthcare bill instead of focusing on the economy that was in such "dire straights".
If he didnt do it when he had the opportunity to, then what makes you think he will be willing to do so now?

Obama wasted those two years, and now you are trying to tell me his hands are tied and its because of the other guys. Take some responsibility for your parties downfalls- cause when you dont- it makes you look really pathetic- or just naive.

As much blame as you like to point to the other guy- you sure are willing to let this guy get away with murder-Literally. Then sit there and try to preach to us how he and his party is on the right side of history.

What a joke.

Are you touched in the head?

Obama Signs Overhaul of Financial System
www.nytimes.com...

Economic Stimulus Act of 2008
en.wikipedia.org...

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
en.wikipedia.org...

Hey look what Forbes has to say:

It might have something to do with the first year of the Obama presidency where the federal budget increased a whopping 17.9% —going from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. I’ll bet you think that this is the result of the Obama sponsored stimulus plan that is so frequently vilified by the conservatives…but you would be wrong.

The first year of any incoming president term is saddled—for better or for worse—with the budget set by the president whom immediately precedes the new occupant of the White House. Indeed, not only was the 2009 budget the property of George W. Bush—and passed by the 2008 Congress—it was in effect four months before Barack Obama took the oath of office.

Accordingly, the first budget that can be blamed on our current president began in 2010 with the budgets running through and including including fiscal year 2013 standing as charges on the Obama account, even if a President Willard M. Romney takes over the office on January 20, 2013.

So, how do the actual Obama annual budgets look?

Courtesy of Marketwatch-

In fiscal 2010 (the first Obama budget) spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.
In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.
In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.
Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.

www.forbes.com...

Of COURSE Glenn Beck says

"Beck claims Obama has outspent even Franklin Roosevelt as a percent of GDP"

But contrary to the chart Beck showed viewers, Roosevelt served in the White House until his death in 1945. And the figures for 1942 to 1945 pose a problem for Beck's theory that Obama is spending more, proportionately, than Roosevelt did.

www.politifact.com...

Glenn Beck and his zoo crew have been manipulating idiots for years now, shame idiots are the last people to catch on to manipulation.

Originally posted by Common Good

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Common Good

 

I am not recopying your whole post because that would be a form of pollution and I am steadfastly against that, along with the rest of my party which stands on the right side of history although you may not want to grant them that right now. You are aware it takes a majority in congress and the Democrats don't have it so you are wrong. Effectively they cannot change anything without cooperation of the Majority GOP. Does the fact that Bohner is the MAJORITY LEADER mean anything to you. The MAJORITY. And they decided early on to hold this country hostage so they could win this election. Yeah, I want this unethical and heartless bunch of thieving miscreants in congress again.

The right side of history? Thats laughable. extremely.
Both parties have torn this country apart.

Obama could have passed any legislation he wanted to his FIRST TWO YEARS because he had over 2/3 majority of the house and the senate.

He wasted it on that stupid healthcare bill instead of focusing on the economy that was in such "dire straights".
If he didnt do it when he had the opportunity to, then what makes you think he will be willing to do so now?

Obama wasted those two years, and now you are trying to tell me his hands are tied and its because of the other guys. Take some responsibility for your parties downfalls- cause when you dont- it makes you look really pathetic- or just naive.

As much blame as you like to point to the other guy- you sure are willing to let this guy get away with murder-Literally. Then sit there and try to preach to us how he and his party is on the right side of history.

What a joke.

You're not quite right actually, although I agree with you that Obama squandered all his political capital on the craptastic health care bill. He didn't, however, have a two-thirds majority in the Senate and the GOP senators used the filibuster continuously. It took about six months or more for Al Franken to get seated in the senate because of the court battle his opponent waged over the election results, and by the time he got seated, Ted Kennedy died and then Teabaggin' Scott Brown won the special election, thereby still keeping the Dems from having a super majority in the Senate.

I'm also the first to state that a lot of Obama's policies and actions have been not so good, but if you think a Mitt Romney presidency and GOP control of congress will be about the same or better, you are terribly mistaken. Remember the last GOP Prez and congress? And you are aware of the Paul Ryan budget, and the GOP view of women and health care? Then there's that "drill, baby, drill!" slogan and the fact that we are now recovering from yet another climate-change induced superstorm. It's definitely a matter of the lesser of two evils, but Obama and most of the Democrats are like Nyarlathotep, whereas Mitt Romney and the GOP are like Cthulhu -- to use a Lovecraftian analogy/simile.

Originally posted by Common Good

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Common Good

 

I am not recopying your whole post because that would be a form of pollution and I am steadfastly against that, along with the rest of my party which stands on the right side of history although you may not want to grant them that right now. You are aware it takes a majority in congress and the Democrats don't have it so you are wrong. Effectively they cannot change anything without cooperation of the Majority GOP. Does the fact that Bohner is the MAJORITY LEADER mean anything to you. The MAJORITY. And they decided early on to hold this country hostage so they could win this election. Yeah, I want this unethical and heartless bunch of thieving miscreants in congress again.

The right side of history? Thats laughable. extremely.
Both parties have torn this country apart.

Obama could have passed any legislation he wanted to his FIRST TWO YEARS because he had over 2/3 majority of the house and the senate.

He wasted it on that stupid healthcare bill instead of focusing on the economy that was in such "dire straights".
If he didnt do it when he had the opportunity to, then what makes you think he will be willing to do so now?

Obama wasted those two years, and now you are trying to tell me his hands are tied and its because of the other guys. Take some responsibility for your parties downfalls- cause when you dont- it makes you look really pathetic- or just naive.

As much blame as you like to point to the other guy- you sure are willing to let this guy get away with murder-Literally. Then sit there and try to preach to us how he and his party is on the right side of history.

What a joke.

Do you know what stimulating the economy means? This is providing the economy enough gas to sort of kick start it into gear again. The Republican fought against any kind of stimulus to help this country and the number was reduced to less than half of what economists Democrat and Republican felt was needed to jump start the economy. It was presented to GOP and reduced 3X!!! It was a drop in the bucket but it forestalled the worst case scenarios we were faced with at the time and that was total collapse of a number of institutions who employed millions and were associated with thousands more in a domino effect. You saw the economy on the brink. I don't think they were making up those numbers near the end of Bush's term. He wasn't even out of office before his house of cards began to crumble. Thats a lot of truckin cars to pick up.

Yes denouncing US Imperialism is on the right side of history. Abolishing torture and ending the war...on the right side of history. Defending gay rights, equal pay for women, a path to citizenship for immigrants, all on the right side of history.
Spearheading an effort to gather all the world loose nuclear material in one place so it can be contained, on the right side of history.
Protecting the environment - ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY, EVOLUTION AND SURVIVAL OF THE SPECIES.

Try to keep up.

I agree with the Bush being a criminal.

Blame blame blame. I blame YOU posters and your ilk that run around with blinders on, whoring for your Gods.. the donkey or the elephant. YOU people, you ones on your knees to your lords, are the ones perpetuating the unforgivable crimes on this country and we the people. Youre not included in "we the people" because YOU are doing exactly what our founders tried to prevent from happening. Go colonize an island somewhere.. PLEASE go.. make your liberal insanity or teaparty nuttiness utopia. Nothing will ever change either.. with your type still around. I still cant figure out what youre doing on ATS. I mean you only hear or see or understand what you want to.. youre addicted to ear ticking concerning your already concrete opinions.

Hopefully soon youll be slapped in your never taking a breath chops with a hard dose of reality... or grow up.. or something.

BAH!

Originally posted by Propulsion

Originally posted by PunchingBag80
I'd like to see what comes of this...

If it’s true and the ambassador was selling arms that are being used against us, this opens up a whole new can of worms!

There is at least one precident I know of personally (one where I saw the waybills, know the people in the meeting and where the meeting took place to "ink" the sale) for this kind of "behavior" where a US ambassador was selling or organizing arms sales and that was Saddam in Iraq in 1988, for the invasion of Kuwait. The whole thing was set up by the US state department. This was initially setup in the Clinton days (democrat) and then carried forward by Bush Sr., so continuity between parties exists and that means neither president was actually in control, it was someone higher.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by MrInquisitive


Im not voting for Romney or Obama. Let me be real clear on that.

I am voting-picking none of the above.Because I will no longer help prop up scumbags to the highest office of the land,

Im such a bad person for not buying their BS.


I picked the lesser of two evils last election, and it got me nowhere, Wont happen again.

IMO- both parties have this nation in a chokehold.

Why prop them up? If Obama wins- i know what the result will be(4 more horrible years of Obama BS,

No thanks, He has done enough damage.

Both parties are not to be trusted, especially with yahoos like this in charge.

I cannot get behind their agenda- sorry/ I see no reason to justify another 4 years of Obama.

-Thanks for being civil and clear headed in your response.

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

Im not voting for Romney or Obama. Let me be real clear on that.

I am voting-picking none of the above.Because I will no longer help prop up scumbags to the highest office of the land,

Im such a bad person for not buying their BS.


I picked the lesser of two evils last election, and it got me nowhere, Wont happen again.

IMO- both parties have this nation in a chokehold.

Why prop them up? If Obama wins- i know what the result will be(4 more horrible years of Obama BS,

No thanks, He has done enough damage.

Both parties are not to be trusted, especially with yahoos like this in charge.

I cannot get behind their agenda- sorry/ I see no reason to justify another 4 years of Obama.

-Thanks for being civil and clear headed in your response.

You realise by voting third party you're essentially voting for the winner in your area....

so... good luck with that strategy...

if you want real reform, you're gonna need to change the way American democracy works, and take all the money out of it... and make it properly proportional... good luck with that...

And still, not one person can articulate in their own words what impeachable offense Obama has committed. 16 pages and no one can answer a very simple question about the topic of the thread, all they can do is say "watch the video".

It's sad that so many can be mislead so easy. They don't even know what they believe or why they believe it, but it backs up their hatred of a man, so they will grasp onto it like it is the word of God.


My question still stands, can someone in their own words please articulate what Obama's impeachable offense is?

Originally posted by Advantage
Blame blame blame. I blame YOU posters and your ilk that run around with blinders on, whoring for your Gods.. the donkey or the elephant. YOU people, you ones on your knees to your lords, are the ones perpetuating the unforgivable crimes on this country and we the people. Youre not included in "we the people" because YOU are doing exactly what our founders tried to prevent from happening. Go colonize an island somewhere.. PLEASE go.. make your liberal insanity or teaparty nuttiness utopia. Nothing will ever change either.. with your type still around. I still cant figure out what youre doing on ATS. I mean you only hear or see or understand what you want to.. youre addicted to ear ticking concerning your already concrete opinions.

Hopefully soon youll be slapped in your never taking a breath chops with a hard dose of reality... or grow up.. or something.

BAH!

And just who or what are you for, and what are you doing about, Chief?

And if you were to do a survey of the politically oriented threads here, you would find that there are Obama-hating ones by the dozen, often duplicate threads. And most are based on specious "news" stories at best, most of it from very dubious and partisan sources. So sensible people are countering this propaganda. Then there are a few anti-Romney ones too. The difference is they are based on facts reported by credible news sources. The difference is stunning between the two types of posts and the responses of commenters.

Now you and your they're-all-bad/evil fellow travelers may claim that I am making a biased assessment, and certainly the right-wing echo chamber orchestra will claim this, but take the time and effort to check my assertions. Even more importantly, look at the differences between the policies of the two main presidential candidates and look at the level of deceit, prevarication, mendacity and flip-floppiness on one side compared to the other. There is no comparison. There truly isn't. Mitt Romney is a horrible candidate who has shown over and over that he'll say anything and that he is entirely devoid of character.

Obama has his faults and his administration has had its pitfalls, but given that one of these two guys is going to be president and wield some power and exert some political leadership -- including during crises like this hurricane -- Obama is the safer/better/less-evil bet.

We suffered through a horrible eight years with one of the worst presidents in US history -- George W. Bush -- and we do not need another such horrible chief executive while we're still cleaning up the mess from the last one.

And I got news for you: one of these two guys is going to win and the House and Senate will likely be similarly aligned (the House not so much), and it will affect your life and those you care about, so you really ought to take a good look at the two of them and vote for the one you're most comfortable with, if you live in a swing state, where your vote will truly count.

Just saying "hey, they're both just as bad and you're fooling yourself if you think one will work out better than the other" just doesn't cut it. Anyone who has watched politics for some time (I'm talking decades) in this country will tell you otherwise. Your attitude is plain intellectual laziness, apathetic and facilely cynical -- not to mention defeatist.

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

Originally posted by Propulsion

Originally posted by PunchingBag80
I'd like to see what comes of this...

If it’s true and the ambassador was selling arms that are being used against us, this opens up a whole new can of worms!

There is at least one precident I know of personally (one where I saw the waybills, know the people in the meeting and where the meeting took place to "ink" the sale) for this kind of "behavior" where a US ambassador was selling or organizing arms sales and that was Saddam in Iraq in 1988, for the invasion of Kuwait. The whole thing was set up by the US state department. This was initially setup in the Clinton days (democrat) and then carried forward by Bush Sr., so continuity between parties exists and that means neither president was actually in control, it was someone higher.

Cheers - Dave

Thanks for making it patently clear that you don't know what you are talking about. Bush Sr. was president from 1988-1992, and Clinton from 1992-2000. So Clinton didn't start arming Sadam and Iraq, and then have it followed up by Bush Sr.

Originally posted by apokalupsis33vital
It's amazing that Beck is still on the air, im really surprised that he hasn't had an " unfortunate accident."

Exactly, If he was a "real" problem he would be found one day in his underwear with a bottle of gin @ his feet and a note ranting how he can't go on any longer and had to end it all...Every one would think to themselves " I knew he would start drinking again."... And that goes for Rush as well,..We would be reading stories about how he was just a relapsing pill popper junkie who couldn't get a hold of his addiction... They are just distractions to keep us preoccupied, distracted and entertained...

In a few days Americas Next Top President will be over and the US will have it's new spokes model in office... Benghazi was allowed to happen, probably planned..

reply to post by MrInquisitive



You just made a rant toward me based on a whole bunch of assumptions.. Mr Inquisitive. Rather, Mr knows it all and just made an ass out of himself. Youve spent this whole thread being judgmental and hashing on people like you KNOW whats in their heart and mind. Youre apparently really getting something out of it as you ve spent hours doing it. Another hubris afflicted ATSer who cant see past his own ego. Form what you said to me, I dont think you read the post or have poor reading comprehension or really think you do know it all. WIpe the froth off of your mouth and maybe reread it.. slowly.. and without your patently wrong assumptions.. one being that I was aiming my post at YOU.

Actually, he may get re-elected and we will all be forced to see the propaganda Obama threads for another four years.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

For some reason, I am reminded of this video. I don't even know why.