Trey Gowdy: 'He will be subpoenaed'
Attempting a buck-up-the-troops post in the wake of unexpected and disheartening GOP defeat, I prioritized battle cries of 'Impeach Obama over Benghazigate' and 'NO tax increases'. This seemed to be what a lot of other people were thinking too- alas, most doubted the resolve and determination of what 'leadership' we still retain in this party- and wondered
-as we always do- if anybody's even listening.
Yet lo-and-behold, here we are three days later and BOTH seem on the path to realization: to the surprise and delight of conservatives, Boehner and McConnell stepped-right-up to the mike yesterday and proclaimed 'NO new taxes'- *music* to
my ears and yours.
But the ignorance and stupidity of so many Americans that gave Obama a pass on Benghazi (+ all the rest of this lawless crew's shenanigans) has surely emboldened an already power-mad president, and with no more elections they have zero problem with screwing-over or completely destroying anybody that might nudge them in the direction of justice or any form of accountability.
But that fishy-smelling dog won't hunt for South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy: he says that if the Obama regime thinks they can keep Petraeus from answering long, long overdue questions re. Benghazi under oath, they've got another thing coming:
I hope we don't have to subpoena a 4-star Gen, a former CIA Director; I hope he'll come voluntarily. If not, he will be subpoenaed-Trey Gowdy (R- SC)
 |
| Petraeus with Broadwell |
Unsettlingly, it seems socialism and central planning are not the only elements of the Soviet system Bronco Bamma finds admirable: much as the KGB spied on their own citizens (and the Kremlin kept dirt on entire politburo/Communist Party, so as to be utilized in their political [or paranoia-driven] dismissal and/or arrest), Obama used the FBI to spy on Petraeus' personal life... does that bother anybody?
Yep, President Obama's got plenty of reason to fear David Petraeus: a principled, competent, and eminently practical man, he's likely to horror-of-horrors speak the truth about Benghazi. Perhaps Obama should have kept him at arm's length, where he had at least a modicum of control, but I do hope and pray the good general hangs Obama out to dry: just last week Petraeus appeared to be bus-chucking Obama over the Benghazi debacle/cover-up, so why would he show any more loyalty now? He's loyal to the country, law, and Constitution, not some metro-sexual Castro wannabe personally. But would Obama use Executive Privilege or attempt to classify the testimony in order to avoid impeachment?
As dismayed as patriots were at the election result and Obama's ceaseless luck-of-the-devil, there's still reason to believe justice will eventually catch up with this moral black hole, if for no other reason than the incredibly lengthy record of bad behavior. 
Be glad knowing that if the Republicans had not retained the House, this guy wouldn't even have to think about Benghazi again -the media can't forget it fast enough. BUT Republicans are still here, while our ossified leadership seem to be waking-up and have already deduced that Romney defeat =
TEA Party ascendance. It appears that they are attempting to dance to our tune- encouraging to see, that.
With the election behind us, there's still a scandal brewing that rivals Watergate: recall that Nixon also won re-election in '72, only to be brought down by his own tangled web of lies soon afterwards.
A forced resignation within 12 months would be superb, and it shouldn't take long after that before Biden's locked-away in the rubber room, safely away from the levers of power. President Boehner could then make Rubio or Michelle Bachmann VP and Paul Ryan Speaker of the House... right?
If any in the Grand Old Party care to rise to the occasion on Benghazigate, there's history to be made, boys.. call it
'David vs. Goliath':
Obama's impeachable offenses: