promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted

Is this not enough to impeach Obama then what is ?

Scandal-wise the Obama administration has been a group of very busy beavers!

People watching and listening to the news for the first time today might be inclined to think that IRSgate, the Benghazi murders and the apparent violation of the First Amendment rights at AP and Fox are the only taints on the Obama administration’s record.

That of course would be untrue as scandal has been rife throughout these five years that Barack Obama has been in office (and during his campaign leading into his 1st-term as well).

The difference now is that the mainstream media is finally beginning to do its job and report it!

Compiled by White House Dossier, these are the first ten of his Top Twenty Obama administration scandals list with a link to read the second ten.

1. IRS targets Obama’s enemies: The IRS targeted conservative and pro-Israel groups prior to the 2012 election. Questions are being raised about why this occurred, who ordered it, whether there was any White House involvement and whether there was an initial effort to hide who knew about the targeting and when.

2. Benghazi: This is actually three scandals in one:

The failure of administration to protect the Benghazi mission.

The changes made to the talking points in order to suggest the attack was motivated by an anti-Muslim video

The refusal of the White House to say what President Obama did the night of the attack

3. Watching the AP: The Justice Department performed a massive cull of Associated Press reporters’ phone records as part of a leak investigation.

4. Rosengate: The Justice Department suggested that Fox News reporter James Rosen is a criminal for reporting about classified information and subsequently monitored his phones and emails.

5. Potential Holder perjury I: Attorney General Eric Holder told Congress he had never been associated with “potential prosecution” of a journalist for perjury when in fact he signed the affidavit that termed Rosen a potential criminal.

6. The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme: Allowed weapons from the U.S. to “walk” across the border into the hands of Mexican drug dealers. The ATF lost track of hundreds of firearms, many of which were used in crimes, including the December 2010 killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

7. Potential Holder Perjury II: Holder told Congress in May 2011 that he had just recently heard about the Fast and Furious gun walking scheme when there is evidence he may have known much earlier.

8. Sebelius demands payment: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius solicited donations from companies HHS might regulate. The money would be used to help her sign up uninsured Americans for ObamaCare.

9. The Pigford scandal: An Agriculture Department effort that started as an attempt to compensate black farmers who had been discriminated against by the agency but evolved into a gravy train delivering several billion dollars in cash to thousands of additional minority and female farmers who probably didn’t face discrimination.

10. GSA gone wild: The General Services Administration in 2010 held an $823,000 training conference in Las Vegas, featuring a clown and a mind readers. Resulted in the resignation of the GSA administrator.

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 7 years ago
    Favourite answer

    No. You need actual evidence of wrongdoing by the president to justify an impeachment, not just allegations of wrongdoing. Rushing to impeachment will only discredit those calling for impeachment. The dishonest claims of biased conservative media personalities is not the same thing as proof.

    Seriously, this is like saying "Fahrenheit 9/11" was enough to impeach President Bush.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Mark F
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    A lot of that is a whole lot of nothing. For example:

    There were 54 attacks on American diplomatic missions between 2001-2008 which killed 13 American diplomats. Did you even know that? Why not? Maybe because those attacks did not occur 6 weeks before a tight election?

    And what about Susan Rice? What did she do but report, just 5 days after an event about which little solid was know make some vague remarks that perfectly jived with what even Fox News was reporting from their own sources. It was only months later that you a__holes started claiming she "lied" when in fact the initial conclusions she was given were merely incorrect. There is a difference.

    The IRS "scandal" also turns out to be a lot less than meets the eye. It turns out a lot of progressive and liberal groups were singled out for scrutiny too, they just didn't whine about it. In fact, Tea Party affiliated groups were only half as likely to be set aside for extra scrutiny than other types of organizatoins. And why did all of this happen in the first place? Because Republican's changed the rules on who could qualify for tax-exempt status but didn't provide the resources to handle the influx of new applications, so the IRS had to improvise some shortcuts on the fly to help deal with the load.

    What the DOJ did with regards to the AP was in fact 100% legal, it merely violated a sort of gentlemans agreement that has existed for a long time between DOJ and the media. Maybe that is why that story has had so little legs.

    The NSA "revelations" are nothing really new either. There were worse "scandals" under the last administration. I think very few people were geniunely surprised. And again please remember that this was all started because of the Patriot Act, championed and passed by a Republican administration and congress a decade ago.

    While by no means old, I have been around long enough to see some real scandals and I don't have selective memory or tunnel vision when it comes to them. When you look at the details most of this current stuff is just sky-high partisan hyperbole and the smart money knows that ideology is the Chimpanzee part of the brain at work and nobody looks good flinging poop.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Xarmin
    Lv 4
    7 years ago

    Gosh people if you don't understand how government works please don't post answers. Yes Obama does have more than sufficient evidence to be impeached. The problem is while it may pass through congress, the senate would never let it go through. While you may be outraged by these things as are a lot of people the country is now in the hands of uneducated twits who believe printing money makes it valuable.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 4 years ago

    With no trouble put no this is not ample .. However i see it as part of the one world govt movement .. How will we americans love it when a govt crew from another country on the earth is surroundings legal guidelines for americans to abide by means of? Get up the usa they're selling us out by way of the day and no i don't consider it .. This has been going on a very long time and used to be recounted through Reagan and Clinton and Bush when they had been president .. Think about it

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    Although these are done under his administration they have not been committed by him.

    In order for the President of this country to be impeached the crime must have been committed by him not one in his administration.

    Also the House must vote for impeachment and the Senate must convict him of the crime that the House voted on.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 7 years ago

    Except ... Obama has to commit a crime. There's no questioning that all of this reflects poorly on Obama, we agree there, but until you can articulate a reason to impeach Obama other than "I don't like/agree with him" we won't get anywhere. Obama may lack oversight (but, wait, isn't less oversight what Republicans want??) but he hasn't really been implicated in anything.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Grizz
    Lv 6
    7 years ago

    You wrote that entire manifesto but never looked up what the law says about impeachment.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • IceT
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No because so far nothing has been tied to him. Unfortunately incompetence is not an impeachable offense!

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 7 years ago

    Sounds rather tame when compared to invading the wrong country just to steal their oil.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • John
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No reason to impeach because people on the right hate him.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.