CNN - New Scandal: Cover-up alleged at State Department, Memo says workers may have hired prostitutes

This last month might have been the worst for a presidential administration in decades. It just never seems to end. It's just screw-up after screw-up after screw-up. I've never seen anything quite like it.
 
And yet, somehow, the American people don't seem to hold the President accountable. Whatever happened to "the buck stops here"?
 
The hubris that permeates BO's entire admin is amazing
Each of the depts. or agencies reactions to getting caught nearly unbelievable
Until you consider the lies BO has told and is telling, lies which he and his minions truly feel people believe and accept.

The question may be do the people he as enticed to the government teat care at all about the country long term
 
Leaving the country and misbehavin'. What would Benjamin Franklin, whose work with the French is arguably the most important diplomatic success in the history of the nation, think? Lord only knows, though students of history could probably guess.
 
Crockett can't play the "Bush did it too" card, so he goes for the "Ben Franklin did it too" card instead. Bravo, sir!

Now, would you care to give an opinion about whether you think the behavior is an appropriate one for our gov't employees to engage?
 
No, I don't think the behavior alleged (but you'll notice what is alleged is very general and with litte evidence) is appropriate or shoulld be condoned.

My points with the historical reference is not that Bush (or Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, JFK, Franklin, Roosevelt, Churchill, Admiral Nelson, Catherine the Great, etc.) did it too but rather a commentary on the human condition. Frankly, for myself, I'd prefer public officials act with the moral decency or John Wesley or, heck, even Jimmy Carter. But I wouldn't let the pursuit of moral decency supercede pursuit of the national interest..
 
Crockett, the story is the coverup, not whether people engaged in inappropriate sex.

the same thing that led to the firing of Jim Tressel and to the probation of Penn State

the same thing that led to the impeachment of Clinton and put Martha Stewart in jail
 
Do trumped up scandals count the same as real ones?

Look how you stretch to pin this on Clinton. You even bring up the frivolous impeachment of Bill Clinton as though that's some kind of precedent to be proud of. That was a political embarrassment to the country.

The "scandals" are generally incidents blown out of proportion and distorted for political gain. Benghazi is not the scandal some want it to be. The IRS looking into "charitable" organizations which are actually political action organizations is not an Obama scandal, it appears to be a scandal for someone else altogether.

Now let's call Hilary a ***** monger or accomplice to ***** mongers. Do you ever listen to yourselves? Do you ever question what you're willing to believe to support your partisan fervor?

Adrianna Huffington jumped off the train years ago because of a reflective moment regarding all the "scandals" of the Bill Clinton administration. He was being spoken of as a rapist. That was too much for her.

How far does the sophistry of scandal accusation have to go before you say "no mas?"

Obama as non-native, closet terrorist, Muslim extremist, radical Christian black revolutionary, that's how some of you started and you can't stop yourselves.

Maybe he's not a good president. Maybe he's a poor one. But why stoop to this crap of scandal manufacture and then embracing the accusation when it's been proved wrong?

I don't get it. I do deplore it.
 
Great post Roma.

An even better follow up would be to ask where are all the important legislative proposals from the GOP? I wonder if Issa has ever proposed and had a bill made into law?

I get that this was the playbook for the Clinton Administration. It does not make it right or any less distasteful now. I actually and sadly think that it might work in 2016.

This is all about a party with no ideas and no stomach for actual governance trying to get a political advantage in 2014 and 2016. The only one of these "scandals" that really is one is the IRS one. The IRS scandal however does not involve the President. The rest of them are inane.
 
paso
At first I wasn't sure to which party you were referring which you posted this
"This is all about a party with no ideas and no stomach for actual governance trying to get a political advantage in 2014 and 2016"

but I reread the part about " actual governance" considered all the crap ,lies and lack of control from the BO admin and knew you referred to the Democrats?
 
If an official were sexually abusing minors, it's a serious offense and should be investigated, condemned and punished, in my mind a much higher level of scrutiny/investigation that alleged consorting with prostitutes. But we are dealing with "allegations" here and I save my outrage for when something is discovered.

I got no sympathy for Jerry Sandusky, I have great admiration for Ben Franklin.
 
Again Crockett, most normal people think that those who engage in sex with children should be prosecuted. The scandal is the cover-up of the crime.
 
^^ You seem to think that I am jumping the gun. That isn't true. I'm simply stating that the story isn't what the official did. If that was all that happened then the story will die. On the other hand, it will grow into a huge event if the State Department covered up the activity. That is the way these things always go.
 
Thanks for the backup RV. You know, it's a funny thing about criminal investigations is that sometimes the accuser is making stuff up. Sometimes it's legit. And sometimes it turns out in the details a lot different than the initial story that leaked out. Sometimes, like in Watergate, the intial stories gave no hint as to how big a scandal would eventually be uncovered.
 
I am a little troubled by the following excerpt from the CNN article:


During a Tuesday State briefing with reporters, Psaki reiterated that the memo contains "unsubstantiated allegations" and that some cases are ongoing and some are closed. But she would not, though repeatedly pressed by reporters, specify exactly which ones were open or closed.

"As a matter of policy, I'm not going to talk" about specific cases, she said.

"We take every allegation seriously," Psaki added. "We are seeing through the process."

On Tuesday, Nicholas Merrill, a spokesman for Hillary Clinton, said Clinton was completely unaware of any of the investigations mentioned in the Office of the Inspector General's reports and memos, including the case involving her personal security detail allegedly soliciting prostitutes.

"We learned of it from the media and don't know anything beyond what's been reported," Merrill told CNN in a written statement.


Learning from the media again? I guess if it worked once it will work a thousand times.

Also, they won't talk about investigations? The president does this all the time. Why not comment on this case? I assume because it can't be used for political gain.

Finally, the gov't many times steps in and demands an investigation when it is a business being questioned. Now that it is a gov't entity being questioned, it is hush hush and let's see what pans out. What will happen is that the gov't will circle the wagons and come out with a unified story detailed by the appropriate spokesmen as well as side stories that slander the person making the allegations and framing the allegations as a political attack.
 
George Bush, Sr., who chaired the Republican National Committee, and Sen. Barry Goldwater, not exactly flaming Democrats, told Nixon it was time to go before he left office. I really think a sense of history is important and having lived through the Nixon Administration and observed scandals and lies with jaw-dropped amazement, it's really hard to see these "scandals" as anything comparable.
 
^Probably true, Crockett. I also recall Watergate and the horrors as it unraveled. I also recall that it began with some initial reports of fears and developed with further revelation of facts - maybe we'll see similar facts, maybe we won't in this case - but it's worth developing those facts before rushing to judgment. If it turns out that Obama is in the clear, so be it - at least we will know for sure that our President is not a crook. If, on the other hand...

HHD
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
To compare Watergate to any of this is laughable.

The IRS was run by a Bush appointee and it is a quasi-independent agency. This is how I know it did not reach the White House.

And Issa certainly will run an thorough investigation. Issa's involvement assures a witch hunt and not an actual investigation, but this what the party of no ideas and no governance demands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top