Wall Street Journal Warns Republicans Are Greatest Threat To America’s Economy

Shut er down


It is fairly well known that since Republican demigod Ronald Reagan was president, the GOP have concentrated on the one and only economic agenda that has proven to fail since its inception. Oh it is true that there are several other failed economic policies Republicans embrace besides just giving outrageously generous and unfunded tax cuts to the richest one percent, but oil subsidies, spending cuts, financial deregulation, poverty wages and allowing corporations to hide their trillions of dollars in profits are secondary in the extent of harm to the economy and Americans to the absurd trickle down scam. However, over the past six years Republicans have employed a novel means of wreaking economic havoc on the nation that typically has had nothing whatsoever to do with spending, debt and deficit, or growing the economy, and this year they are using religion to slow down job creation and thwart economic growth.

The world’s economists, like all Americans, have sat back and marveled at how Republicans in Congress have deliberately and repeatedly taken the country into fiscal deadline after fiscal deadline to force Democrats to bend to their will. Now, as another deadlines looms, a majority of economists responding to a Wall Street Journal survey predicted Republicans would once again damage the economy and world financial markets because evangelicals hate Roe v. Wade, contraception, and the incomprehensible idea of women making their own reproductive health choices that are contrary to evangelical and Catholic clergy.

According to a recent survey of 62 real economists by the Wall Street Journal, it is not the instability of China’s stock market, or its move to devalue its currency, or the Greek Eurozone crisis, or the possibility of the Federal Reserve finally raising interest rates. What frightens a great majority of the nation’s leading economic experts most of all is that the Republican-controlled Congress willprecipitate another fiscal crisis this fall” when Republicans plan to either shut down the government unless Planned Parenthood is destroyed, or hold the debt ceiling hostage until Planned Parenthood is destroyed. It is important to note that the push to put an end to Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with the economy, debt and deficit, national security, jobs, or economic growth; it is about legislating and enforcing an extremist religious policy.

Continue reading here>>>

Donald Trump feuds with Rick Perry, calls him dumb

Donald Trump gestures at a press briefing where he introduced people whose families were victims of illegal immigrants on July 10, 2015 at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel in Beverly Hills, California, where some shared their stories of the loss of a loved one. The US business magnate Trump, who is running for President in the 2016 presidential elections, angered members of the Latino community with recent comments but says he will win the Latino vote. AFP PHOTO / FREDERIC J. BROWN

(Photo credit should read FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images)

Pot…meet Kettle.


Donald Trump has jumped back into the ring — this time for an all-out brawl with fellow Republican presidential contender Rick Perry.

Trump started the feud with multiple comments in recent weeks bashing Perry’s work securing the border while serving as governor of Texas.

After several measured defenses of his border policies, on Thursday Perry finally fired back with a more aggressive statement, saying, “What Mr. Trump is offering is not conservatism, it is Trump-ism — a toxic mix of demagoguery and nonsense.”

“Donald Trump continues to demonstrate his fundamental misunderstanding of border security,” said Perry.

Trump tweeted back: “.@GovernorPerry just gave a pollster quote on me. He doesn’t understand what the word demagoguery means.”

”.@GovernorPerry failed on the border. He should be forced to take an IQ test before being allowed to enter the GOP debate,” Trump added, reiterating a trope about the Texas Republican that surfaced after numerous fumbles during the primary 2012 campaign.

The Republican-on-Republican smackdown was Trump’s second of the day.

On Thursday morning, the New Yorker published an interview with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who said that Trump had “fired up the crazies” in the Republican party.

Trump responded by tweeting that McCain “should be defeated in the primaries.”

“Graduated last in his class at Annapolis — dummy!” Trump added.


GOP's baffling Trump cowardice: A party too timid to denounce a bigoted gasbag

Scott Walker, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz (Credit: AP/Scott Bauer/Richard Drew/J. Scott Applewhite/Photo montage by Salon)


Condemning Donald Trump’s obvious racism would be the easiest thing a Republican could do, but no one’s doing it

Just about every second of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, such as it is, has been a disaster. He kicked off his campaign two weeks ago with a speech calling Mexican immigrants criminals and “rapists,” and he’s been dealing with the blowback ever since. Those comments prompted NBC – which had tolerated his bigoted nonsense for years while airing his reality show – to finally cut ties with Trump, who responded by calling NBC “weak” and “foolish.” Univision announced that it would not carry Trump’s Miss USA pageant, prompting Trump to threaten to sue the network. Mexico announced that it would not send a representative to Trump’s Miss Universe pageant because of his “racist” remarks. If there’s a positive to be found in any of this, it’s that Trump’s vanity run for president is backfiring and has helped tear down some of the other garish and pathetically self-congratulatory monuments he’s erected to himself.

But what I find curious about the reaction to Trump’s blatant racism and anti-immigrant posturing is that not one Republican has stood up and done literally the easiest, least controversial, most politically buzzy thing one could do in this situation: denounce Donald Trump.

Seriously, it’s utterly baffling. Let’s think about this for a moment. The Republican Party is painfully aware that it has a major problem appealing to voter demographics outside its core coalition of old white people and religious white people. This problem is especially acute in presidential election cycles — like the one we’re in now. Recognizing how toxic this alienation of minority groups was in the 2012 presidential race, the Republican National Committee put out a big report explicitly recommending that the party’s candidates and committees do more to reach out to and engage with Latino voters and make them feel less like the GOP actively despises them. “If Hispanic Americans perceive that a GOP nominee or candidate does not want them in the United States (i.e. self-deportation),” the report counseled, “they will not pay attention to our next sentence.”

In this light, Trump’s comments should have been a big, fat, hanging curve for an enterprising Republican 2016 candidate to swing hard at. What he said was bigoted; there’s no disagreement on that. As far as adversaries go, you could do worse than Trump – he is a semi-sentient pile of hair and sadness, he has no feelings to hurt, and by being on the opposite side of him you win the argument by default. And what he said has nothing to do with immigration policy. By weighing in on it you wouldn’t be taking any dangerous positions you’d later have to defend. And the media would eat that mess up.

All you’d have to do is just stand up and say Trump is wrong and a racist, and that undocumented immigrants are not all rapists. It would be a small step toward demonstrating that Republicans recognize the basic humanity of the people at the center of a controversial policy fight and don’t view them merely as criminals or some sort of invasive species.

But no one did that.

The most outrage the RNC could muster came from its communications director, who said on CNN that “painting Mexican Americans with that kind of a brush, I think that’s probably something that is not helpful to the cause.” And as far as I can tell, the only candidate who has responded with any sort of criticism to Trump is Jeb Bush, who offered a mild Spanish-language rebuke of The Donald:

But on Saturday, Mr. Bush did address comments Mr. Trump made in his campaign launch speech about the Mexican border, in which he said people coming to the U.S. from Mexico are “bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”

At a Saturday event in Nevada, Mr. Bush said in Spanish, “I do not agree with his words. They do not represent the values of the Republican Party and they do not represent my values,” according to a campaign aide.

As for the rest, they’ve either kept their mouths shut or, remarkably, agreed with Trump’s assessment of the immigrant community. “I like Donald Trump. I think he’s terrific, I think he’s brash, I think he speaks the truth,” Ted Cruz said on Fox Newsyesterday. I’m sure Republicans would much rather that Cruz and Trump be viewed as pariahs and extremists on this issue. By clamming up, though, they’re letting those two speak for the party. And this whole business with Trump being a flaming bigot won’t just go away. He’s Donald Trump – he doesn’t stop talking. The longer he’s out there saying racist garbage while running for the Republican nomination, the more awkward it becomes that no one is challenging him on it.

Again, I’m not saying that denouncing Trump would accomplish much of anything or solve any problems. The GOP has issues with Latino voters that go well beyond the bigotry of one rich white guy. But that’s why the silence on Trump is so strange to me. The party clearly has little intention of implementing policy changes to help broaden its appeal (border security now, border security forever!) so it would at least make some sense to go for the superficial outreach efforts. “Sure, we’re still going to deport you and your families and otherwise treat you like criminals, but hey – we don’t assume you’re rapists!” But apparently even that is too much to ask.

Republicans Voice Opposition To Subsidizing Broadband For The Poor

Jonathan Little of Thomasville, Ala., only has dial-up internet at home, and frequently uses the library to connect | Credit Meggan Haller for The New York Times

Of course they oppose it.  They are anti-poor and if they had their way, poor people would not be allowed to be educated.


Tom Wheeler, the chairperson of the Federal Communications Commission released a plan last week that would create a program that subsidizes broadband internet service for poor people. The plan calls for an expansion of the Lifeline phone subsidy program created by Ronald Reagan in 1985. In addition to expanding the program to cover internet subsidies, the plan also will work to crack down on fraudulent claims that have plagued the welfare program.

On Tuesday, a Senate subcommittee met to discuss the plan. The New York Times reports:

“Republicans pushed back on Tuesday against a plan from the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission to subsidize broadband Internet for poor Americans.

At a Senate subcommittee hearing, no one disputed that broadband can be critical to filing job applications and completing schoolwork. But many lawmakers questioned just how costly the undertaking might be.

The plan from Tom Wheeler, the chairman of the F.C.C., would extend the reach of Lifeline, the program now used to provide low-income Americans with mobile and landline phone service. But Republicans at the hearing said that the program had been mismanaged and that it made little sense to expand it before eradicating what they called excessive fraud.”

Democrats have already drafted legislation that supports the plan.

Certain Republicans have expressed criticism of the idea. Last February, Republican FCC Commissioner, Michael O’Reilly wrote in a blog post:

“There is a legitimate debate whether the Lifeline program should be abolished or significantly scaled back rather than expanding its mission. I would be open to having a thoughtful debate on the best way to address a perceived need in this communications area rather than bootstrapping the old program with new responsibilities.”

He then outlines a list of principles that he proposes should be introduced in order to remove fraud from the program. However, the principles O’Reilly proposes appear to be interested in reducing the program overall, rather than merely than weed out abuse of the program.

Wheeler and other proponents of expanding the Lifeline program cite recent safeguards against people abusing the program. A national database was created in 2012 that helps to prevent people from registering services multiple times to the same residence. Since then, the number of people who use the program has dropped by a third.

Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) expressed (legitimate) concerns that the program would not address the needs of poor rural communities that currently lack broadband infrastructure.

Fred Upton (R-MI) the Republican chairperson of the Energy and Commerce Committee, told Bloomberg in an e-mail:

“Simply expanding the program without ensuring its effectiveness or longevity is the wrong approach,” The size of the program should be capped.”

Capping the program is one of main goals of Republicans. Currently, the Lifeline program does not have any limits on spending for the program.

There is not currently any organized opposition to the plan from the Republican Party. I suspect this is largely in part due to major telecommunications companies general favoring the expansion (more money for them). The telecommunications industry has the Republican Party in their pockets, and despite Republicans general opposition towards aiding the poor, they are not going to make a move against their corporate masters. Remember they are the party that managed to convince conservative voters that reclassifying the internet as a Title II public utility equated to a full-blown government takeover of the internet.

Republicans Flip Out After Rand Paul Treats Them The Same Way They’ve Treated Obama


Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images


Getting a taste of their own medicine is not sitting well with Republicans.

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has made some powerful enemies in the Republican Party and conservatives are taking note. It was bad enough when Paul accused Republicans of emboldening ISIS and called them “lap dogs for Obama.”

The last straw came as the Republican trolled national security, leaving the nation vulnerable so that he could fundraise for his 2016 presidential campaign by pontificating from on high Smug Mountain.

Jim Geraghty writing in the conservative National Review today took Paul to task for accusing other Republicans of wanting a terrorist attack on the US so they can blame Paul:

Say the 2016 Republican presidential primary comes down to Rand Paul and… well, just about anybody else in the GOP field.

Don’t you think that a lot of Republicans will line up behind “Anybody Else”, compared to the senator who said: “People here in town think I’m making a huge mistake. Some of them, I think, secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me.”

Sigh. Rand Paul seems to believe that Republicans hate this country so much they’d love to see it blown to bits just to prove him wrong. So yeah. Republicans are a lot of things, including reckless and irresponsible and out of touch and at times ridiculous — but I don’t believe for one second that they would like the country to be blown up due to their failure to govern just so they could blame their teenage son.

That’s just crazy. Paul’s narcissism flag was in full flight.

Rand’s antics have long wearied the sanes, but now even Republicans are annoyed. How dare Paul accuse them of things they accuse Obama of every day?

Just recently Republican Lindsey Graham accused Obama of hating Christians and loving Muslims (apparently it’s bad to love Muslims). They falsely accused Obama of lying and being guilty of worse than Watergate based on flimsy, faux evidence that was later revealed to be Republican-manufactured, with the help of a willing press. Of course all of this was to be expected by the party that let their Vice Presidential candidate accuse the then Senator of “Pallin’ around with terrorists” and not loving America “like we do.”

Mind you, the above quotes come from the party that likes to accuse Obama of the “politics of division”.

Poser Senator Rand Paul is catnip for the frothing Kenya, fake birth certificate, conspiracy-obsessed conservatives, in addition to appealing to bored, sheltered, suburban types who like to imagine themselves to be highly unique and edgy-interesting. Yes, it’s so unique to see naïve people falling for a shyster who sells them a load of rhetorical crap about “independence” that somehow always involves donating to him. SO NEW. Only Rand Paul cares about liberty. (*Snicker*) Everyone else is out to get you.

Rand Paul is the Republicans’ perpetual teenager-in-rebellion. The brawl between Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the junior Senator from Kentucky continued on the Senate floor Monday with McConnell desperately blocking amendments from Paul and Paul finding petulant ways to get back at McConnell by blocking the Senate from speeding up the vote.

But somehow, teeny bits of reality penetrated the Galtian smog surrounding Paul so that he must have realized that everyone from his own party hated him. This would not do, for all of his talk about liberty, the teenager needs his parents. So he sort of walked back his latest accusation, attributing it to “hyperbole”. Because yes, hyperbole and hysteria and not watching your words and launching rhetorical grenades at people just because you disagree with them is totally leadership material. Or it is exactly how a teenager behaves when a parent explains that the garbage must be taken out or else it accumulates.

From the Hill:

“Sometimes, in the heat of battle, hyperbole can get the better of anyone, and that may be the problem there,” the Kentucky Republican said Monday on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom.”

“The point I was trying to make is, I think people do use fear to try to get us to give up our liberty.”

LOL. Rand Paul would never use fear to get a political outcome. I mean, he did, but it’s different when he does it. Because it’s for “LIBERTY”. Anyone who disagrees with him wants to kill everyone just to get even with him! Rand Paul hates haters.

Republicans opened the door to this kind of crazy “governance” with six years of conspiracy theories gone wrong. Now that they invited the vampire in, they can’t get him out. And like everyone else, they don’t like being on the receiving end of crazy.

Sarah Jones

Rand Paul Has No Billionaire, Must Scrape For Cash

Crooks & Liars

Rand Paul’s role in the 2016 Republican primary is to peel off prospective young voters and disenfranchised liberals. So today’s spate of stories about how Rand Paul is being left out in the cold by his billionaires, leaving him short on cash should be viewed for the cynical manipulations they are.

We begin with Republico Politico :

In a presidential campaign defined by billionaire sugar daddy donors, Rand Paul has a problem: He doesn’t seem to have one.

While his rivals cultivate wealthy backers who will pump millions of dollars into their candidacies, Paul has struggled to find a similar lifeline. It’s led to considerable frustration in his campaign, which, amid rising concerns that it will not be able to compete financially, finds itself leaning heavily on the network of small donors who powered his father’s insurgent White House bids.

It hasn’t been for lack of trying. In recent months, Paul has sought to woo a string of powerful Republican megadonors — from Silicon Valley executives to a Kentucky coal mogul to the billionaire Koch brothers — who, it was believed, would be philosophically aligned with his free-market views. In each case, he met disappointment.

The author goes on to name Peter Thiel, Sean Parker and Larry Ellison as three billionaires Rand was counting on for financial help. Alas, Larry Ellison fell in love with Marco Rubio, Thiel is staying out of things for unknown reasons, and Parker is leaning toward Hillary Clinton.

I don’t buy the schtick. Mainstream Republicans wouldn’t let Rand Paul close to the nomination ever, because he doesn’t support the war machine. Given that, they really just want to use him to peel off those younger voters and liberal libertarians. This is why they’re tolerating his “the GOP sucks” nonsense and pretending it’s perfectly all right for him to play Democrat running in the Republican primaries.

Moving on to CNN, whose headline is “Rand Paul: The GOP’s Punching Bag.” This story is also framed for its intended purpose — to appeal to the less-mainstream types in the Republican party and independent category.

Rand Paul has a “kick me” sign on his back — and he put it there himself.

The Kentucky senator and Republican presidential candidate is thrilling his libertarian-leaning base with a campaign against the NSA and stinging criticism of his party’s history of Middle East meddling. But the moves are enraging other Republicans eyeing the White House with his opponents zeroing in on Paul’s comments this week that “ISIS exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party.”

Are we feeling sorry for that poor sad-sack politician yet? Piling on that way, shame on them.

And of course, the Patriot Act reauthorization plays into things here too.

The Paul-hating could come to a head this weekend when the Senate convenes for a rare Sunday session in a last-ditch attempt to prevent key NSA surveillance tactics from lapsing at midnight — something both President Barack Obama and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill have sought to avoid.

Paul hasn’t hesitated to deploy every procedural tool available to thwart Senate action, leaving him with no friends on the issue among GOP presidential contenders.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is emerging as Paul’s top antagonist on the NSA and said such a strategy could result in “dangerous and severe consequences.”

On Twitter, the governor slammed “misguided ideologues who have no real world experience in fighting terrorism.”

This is what happens when you’re a hardcore Republican and you pretend you’re not. Yes, the libertarian piece is real, and it’s possible to applaud Rand Paul’s stance on that without actually supporting a guy who has no problem with big government sticking their probes in women’s vaginas.

Finally, we come to Fox News, who actually cut Paul out of their poll graphic even though he ranked higher than the bottom five shown.

HYPOCRISY ALERT: Republicans Want The Pope To Stop Inserting Religion Into Politics

File:Pope Francis at Varginha (2).jpg | Wikimedia Commons


Republicans love to pretend that they are the party of Jesus. They work tirelessly at pandering to the Christian-right vote. They believe we should be a nation of laws based upon Christian principles. However, there’s just one thing missing — the Christian principles.

If we, as a nation, were to abide by the teachings of Jesus from the Christian Bible, we would have health care for all, no death penalty, the wealthy would help pay for the poor, and everyone would love their neighbor as themselves. Pretty much everything Republicans adamantly stand against.

So when a Republican like Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina comes out and says:

“It’s interesting how the Vatican has gotten so political when ultimately the Vatican ought to be working to lead people to Jesus Christ and salvation, and that’s what the Church is supposed to do.”

This is of course in reference to Pope Francis recently coming out in favor of Palestine becoming its own state. And heaven forbid, anyone, especially the Pope come out in favor of something that may actually work, let alone something that isn’t just pro-Israel all the time. Republicans pretty much consider Israel the 51st state of the Union. The Vatican’s statement wasn’t even anti-Israel, it was pro-peace — you know, another Christian principle, so of course Republicans are against it.

The biggest foes to the teachings of Jesus in the United States are Republicans. They boast his name, but know nothing of his teachings. For them, it’s pretty much just a means to get votes and try to make excuses as to why they are discriminatory bigots.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) said of the Pope’s views:

“He’s a religious figure and he has every right to have his political viewpoint, but someone of that profile should have strong scriptural foundation for whatever positions he takes that are extensively representing the head of the Catholic Church. I think this is probably one he should not have expressed.”

So wait, someone with strong religious principles should keep their opinions to themselves regarding politics? Let me make sure to write that one down for later the next time a Republican tries to say that the United States is a Christian nation. Maybe they should just keep those opinions to themselves — which, might I add, actually is the correct thing to do.

The Pope however, is more than just someone with strong religious principles, he is, in fact, a world leader. One who can promote change where change can seem impossible. So was it correct for the Pontiff to insert himself into this matter? Perhaps so. He could have a direct impact on the region and potentially help broker long-awaited change.

However, Republicans are not wrong in asserting that religious opinions should stay out of politics.

Now, if only they could realize this about themselves.


Jeb’s secret Jersey mission

NASHUA, NH – APRIL 17: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush speaks at the First in the Nation Republican Leadership Summit April 17, 2015 in Nashua, New Hampshire. The Summit brought together local and national Republicans and was attended by all the Republicans candidates as well as those eyeing a run for the nomination. (Photo by Darren McCollester/Getty Images)


The Bush campaign goes behind enemy lines to pick off Chris Christie’s supporters.

Jeb Bush is quietly waging a behind-the-scenes offensive to pick off disillusioned home-state supporters of Chris Christie, the New Jersey governor whose presidential prospects have dimmed in recent months.

Bush’s effort to undermine Christie’s network of donors, power-brokers, and political players is conducted mainly through emails and phone conversations — and he tracks the progress closely.

At a get-together with donors in Miami last weekend, Bush sat down for a private conversation with Lawrence Bathgate, a prominent New Jersey attorney and former Christie donor who is now behind the Florida Republican. During the talk, Bathgate, a former Republican National Committee finance chairman, outlined to Bush a plan to have a majority of the state’s 16 Republican state senators endorse him.

Bush responded with a question. How soon, he wanted to know, would the endorsements start to roll in? And could some of them be announced sooner rather than later?

The former Florida governor is said to court Christie boosters with frequent emails and makes himself accessible to them. “He’s a great emailer,” said Hersh Kozlov, a major Republican Party fundraiser in New Jersey and former Christie supporter who’s now with the former Florida governor.

The attempts to crack the Christie network — both are in competition for the same group of moderate and establishment Republicans — dates back at least to January, not long after Bush launched his presidential exploratory committee. At the time, Bush met with around a dozen New Jersey Republicans for dinner at New York City’s Union Club. He started out the meeting in a surprising way, telling those gathered that they should feel free to ask him anything — no holds barred. One person took him up on the challenge, posing a question to him about his daughter’s struggle with drug addiction.

For months, Bush and his finance chief, Heather Larrison, have been reaching out to New Jersey donors. Once a financial commitment is secured, they typically ask that person for names of friends or associates in the state who might also want to give.

As Christie’s fortunes have seemed to fade amid his sagging polling numbers, fiscal problems at home and fallout from the Bridgegate scandal — on Friday a former political ally of the governor pleaded guilty and two other former officials were indicted for their alleged roles in the affair — Bush’s efforts have ramped up.

Last month, Bush landed his biggest catch yet: Joe Kyrillos, a longtime state senator who chaired Christie’s 2009 campaign. When Kyrillos, a former New Jersey Republican Party chairman, appeared at a Bush donor event in Miami last week, he was greeted with a hero’s welcome. At a private dinner, which was attended by around 350 of the former governor’s biggest benefactors, the senator was rewarded with a round of applause and a seat at Bush’s table.

Continue reading here…

GOP Delays Benghazi Report Until 2016 Proving It’s All About Politics, Not Those Who Died

Addicting Info

If only the GOP was this adamant about getting to the bottom of the tragedy on 9/11/01, but wait… that was under Republican leadership, and Bush was instead made a hero. It’s always about politicizing tragedies to their favor. Always.

Republicans have no shame. None whatsoever. When the September 11 attacks happened, on American soil mind you, we were told that we were attacked… because we just were, and Republicans didn’t blame President Bush and his administration – even though they did ignore intelligence that said attacks were imminent.

However, when the attacks on an American embassy in Benghazi, Libya, occurred on 9/11/12, well that was obviously the fault of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. And godammit! Republicans are going to make sure they drag out and politicize the deaths of four Americans as long as they can in an effort to derail Clinton’s attempt at becoming the next President of the United States.

They don’t give a rat’s ass that the father of United States ambassador Christopher Stephens, who perished in the attack in Benghazi, asked that his son’s death not be politicized. Or the fact that 20 committee events and hearings have been held regarding the events on that fateful day, even committees run by House Republicans, debunking theories that there was any wrongdoing on the part of the Obama administration. They will not let the matter rest until they can use it to keep Clinton out of the Oval Office. At least that’s their hope.

Now, the new House Benghazi committee is delaying their supposed “new” report until 2016 — months before the presidential election where Clinton will undoubtedly be the Democratic nominee. And who are they blaming for this delay?? The White House, of course.

The committee spokesman, Jamal Ware, told Bloomberg News in a statement:

“Factors beyond the committee’s control, including witness availability, compliance with documents requests, the granting of security clearances and accreditations—all of which are controlled by the Executive branch—could continue to impact the timing of the inquiry’s conclusion.”

Mmmhmm, yeah. That’s it. Never mind the countless other hearings and investigations that have already happened. This dead horse hasn’t only been kicked, but it’s been sent to the glue factory and is now being used to hold together the last semblance of an argument the Republicans have. It’s pathetic… and it’s continuing to prevent the families of the dead to grieve properly.

Of course, chairman of the U.S. House Select Committee on Benghazi, Representative Trey Gowdy (R-SC), denies that this delay has anything to do with the upcoming election, saying:

“Secretary Clinton’s decision to seek the presidency of the United States does not and will not impact the work of the committee.”

Hahahahaha (hold on, need to breathe) hahahahaha! Did he say that with a straight face?

I’m sure it’s just happenstance that the release of the report will magically coincide with the presidential election. Totally.

What will likely happen, because it’s happened with every other Benghazi report, is that the Obama administration will be cleared of any wrongdoing, and this entire charade of an investigation to bury the former Secretary of State will be able to be used to her advantage.

These Republicans are pathetic and morally bankrupt when it comes to politicizing tragedy. It’s clear they don’t care about getting to the bottom of what happened, because that’s already occurred. And if they did, they’d be more focused on going after the people who attacked us, just like with 9/11/01. They only care about hurting Clinton’s chance at the presidency, and that is the God’s honest truth.


Obama Ribs GOP: Obamacare Didn’t Bring ‘Death Panels, Doom’


AP Photo / Jacquelyn Martin


“I mean we have been promised a lot of things these past five years that didn’t turn out to be the case —death panels, doom, a serious alternative from Republicans in Congress,” Obama said, smirking during a speech highlighting the fifth anniversary of his signature healthcare law. “The budget they introduced last week would literally double the number of uninsured in America.”

Obama’s comments came a week after Republicans introduced a new House budget that gutted most of Obamacare but did not offer an alternative. Obama conceded part of the reasons Republicans hadn’t yet offered an alternative plan was because healthcare policy isn’t easy.

“And in their defense, there are two reasons why coming up with an alternative has proven to be difficult,” Obama said. “First, it’s because the Affordable Care Act pretty much was their plan before I adopted it!”

Obamacare, Obama said, was “based on conservative market based principles developed by the Heritage Foundation and supported by Republicans in Congress. And deployed by a man named Mitt Romney in Massachusetts to great effect. If they want to take credit for this law, they can. I’m happy to share it.”

There have been many efforts, Obama added, to reform the country’s healthcare system.

“And second, because health reform is really hard and people here who are in the trenches know that. Good people from both parties have tried and failed to get it done for a hundred years,” Obama said. “Because every public policy has some tradeoffs, especially when it affects one sixth of American economy and applies to the very personal needs of every individual American. Now we’ve made our share of mistakes since we passed this law. But we also know beyond a shred of a doubt that the policy has worked. Coverage is up, cost growth is at a historic low, deficits have been slashed, lives have been saved.”

Obama also said in the speech that he was ready to sign a major overhaul of Medicare negotiated by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).