Thanks, but.

[abaris]

Nonetheless, one must give the Brits credit for at least investigating the war.  That's far more than we did.


Although we had 7 useless investigations on Benfuckinghazi.

That's because of the unpatriotic and support the troops shtick. The right is always quick with invoking patriotism and troop support, and the other side (actually don't know what to call them) has their pants full because of that. That's the main reason why there's no serious investigation of Bush and cronies. Though I still think that there are others, more at fault than Bush himself. Maybe I'm giving him too little credit in terms of intelligence or criminal energy, but I still think that you have to follow the money trail. And that ends at his vice's doorstep.

[Minimalist]

Harry Truman had a sign on his desk.  "The buck stops here."

It applies to that fuckhead Bush too, whether he liked it or not.

And I blame the democrats for not going after those fuckers.

[abaris]

And I blame the democrats for not going after those fuckers.

Again, I have to quote Hermann Goering.

the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

That's why the democrats don't go after them.

[Minimalist]

That wasn't the reason.  Obama found himself saddled with a minimum 3 more years in Iraq courtesy of the Texas Twit and was not inclined himself to get out of Afghanistan.  Once a line is crossed there is no going back.

[abaris]

That wasn't the reason.  Obama found himself saddled with a minimum 3 more years in Iraq courtesy of the Texas Twit and was not inclined himself to get out of Afghanistan.  Once a line is crossed there is no going back.

But it is the narrative on the right. Hard to go against that when there's a posse of tea party dimwits to be mobilized, eagerly going against their own interests.

[Minimalist]

Obama did not have to worry about the right.  They had just been convincingly rebuked in 2008.  His problem was the people on the left who wanted him to end both wars.  He knew he couldn't do that.

However, an investigation of the lies which led to the war would have been a useful diversion for those people.  The problem is it would set a precedent for future congresses to investigate him when his term was over.

[abaris]

The problem is it would set a precedent for future congresses to investigate him when his term was over.

Compared to his predecessor he's got no skeleton in the closet. He had two years when the Democrats actually had a majority. A republican congress won't start or sanction any investigation going against one of their own. And I'm not sure if it would be any different if the roles were reversed.

[Minimalist]

Reality has no place in the discussion.  This would be a political witch hunt.  Think Benghazi.

[account_inactive]

Nonetheless, one must give the Brits credit for at least investigating the war.  That's far more than we did.


Although we had 7 useless investigations on Benfuckinghazi.

How much money was spent on those seven investigations?

[abaris]

Reality has no place in the discussion.  This would be a political witch hunt.  Think Benghazi.

Which is kind of my point all along. Pants full of being marked whatever.