Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Watergate Did Not Have A Body Count

Alternative Title: "Can We Impeach Him, NOW?"

In 2009, the Department of Justice began a drug running operation called "Fast and Furious," which- whatever its aims- funneled guns to the Mexican Drug Cartels which were then used to murder over 300 Mexican civilians and two American Citizens; one of those was Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

In 2010, a DoJ Whistle-blower went to Congress about the operation.  Since then, anyone paying attention has been horrified at what happened.  They've been just as horrified at the lengths to which Eric Holder and his Department of Justice have gone to avoid oversight.  Whistle-blowers have been retaliated against, Congress has been stonewalled, and- today- Barack Obama invoked Executive Privilege.

Wait- Did I just say Barack Obama?  Yes, yes I did.  Did he invoke Executive Privilege?  Yes, yes he did.  Does that mean that he was aware of this operation, and it proceeded under his authority?  Yes.  Yes it does.

Barack Obama has just accepted responsibility for the operation which weakened the government of a foreign power (we call that "an act of war,").  Moreover, that foreign power is a putative ally.  He just accepted responsibility for an operation that murdered hundreds of foreign nationals and two American citizens.  He just accepted responsibility for hampering Congress in pursuit of its duty to oversee the government and hold the Executive Branch accountable.

Barack Obama just admitted to crimes far in excess of any previous president.  Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace over Watergate.  Watergate did not have a body count. 

I'll say that again:  Watergate.  Did.  Not.  Have.  A.  Body.  Count.

It is time to hold Barack Obama responsible.  He must be impeached.

Watergate did not have a body count.


  1. I have no doubt that Obama would have thrown Holder under the bus if he could have. The question is why he didn't. Either he's been up to his neck in it himself, or Holder told him he's take him down with him. It's so nice to see them getting a little scrutiny.

    1. Someone at the HQ (don't remember who) pointed out that Holder's letter to Obama contained several references to US v Nixon.

      I submit that such references were a not so veiled threat: "You protect me, or I take you down."

    2. There is a comment on Weasel Zippers about that. I think they reference US v Nixon to support the use of Executive Privilege. That's rich since it's the same socialists or their intellectual and ideological heirs that took down Nixon who are covering this up.

    3. That is what they're doing. But Nixon lost that case. What led to his resignation was the fact he was going to have to turn over those documents.

      You don't reference a case where the side supporting your argument lost.

  2. I know, as Alexthedude pointed out on the yahoo chat room, when the left has to cite Nixon, they've lost.