Social Question

mazingerz88's avatar

Would Republican politicians continue costly Benghazi probes if they fail to bring Clinton down and there's consequence for them?

Asked by mazingerz88 (25284points) October 24th, 2015 from iPhone

And the consequence is they get anal probes?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

20 Answers

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Most REp/cons feel they are always right never wrong, so yes probably.
Look how far Star pushed it with the Monica L thing saying ,how horrible it was that he lied to the country.
That was a costly thing that nevershould have happened.

filmfann's avatar

Just the picture of Hillary behind a microphone answering questions is damaging, they hope.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

I don’t’ think anyone is trying to bring damage. I think they are trying to sift out a candidate that is already proven to possess character traits that would not be worthy to hold office. Moral turpitude is pretty important for a leader. Honesty, loyalty, and other moral traits should be adhered to. Clinton’s husband has proven to be morally unfit.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The Benghazi hearings are just the latest in the line of partisan attempts to invent a scandal out of nothing. There isn’t even a pretense of objectivity around what amounts to a microscopic inspection of Hillary Clinton. The ceaseless and laughable “when did you stop beating your wife?” questions are supposed to fluster Clinton into behaving stupidly through frustrations engendered by subjection to an eternity of inane and mindless twaddle. The plan backfired, as well it should have. She’s a smooth combat tested hard nosed politician and stood up well to the efforts to provoke a girlie fit. The hearings in effect gave Clinton the opportunity to act “presidential” and she pulled it off beautifully. She just sat there calmly replying to the silliness, and let the few democrats included in front of her do the work of calling their fellow committee members villains and fools.

filmfann's avatar

@Littlemisslinny. We all fall short.
It didn’t help that several Republicans admitted that the entire point of the investigation was to lower Hillary’s numbers.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

Well, you got that right. Brilliant, as the British say! She did act, in fact, she did a lot of acting. In reference to the term , “She acted like a President.”

mazingerz88's avatar

I truly think not just a few Republican politicians would be willing to stick their tongues in a goat’s butt if they think they could extract damning Benghazi evidence against Clinton….

jerv's avatar

I’m sure they would. Fanatics generally have little/no regard for self-preservation, collateral damage, or anything like that. The only things that will stop them are success or extinction, and I don’t think this particular band of fanatics is bad enough to justify genocide.

@Littlemisslinny “Morally unfit” by whose standards? If you use Bill Clinton’s infidelity, what of all the Republicans caught with mistresses and gay prostitutes? If it’s about corruption, then we should look at “campaign contributions” on both sides instead of blocking any reforms that may reduce corruption. I cannot think of a single reason related to morality or ethics that would justify investigating Clinton more thoroughly than the combined total of investigations of worse things under Republican control; worse things like 9/11, the USS Cole, other embassy attacks with far higher death tolls, and the like.

You’re entitled to your opinion, but I must vehemently disagree. I’m thinking that if it truly were an earnest attempt to sift out the unworthy, they would start by getting their own house in order. For instance, considering that we have over a dozen other candidates for the GOP nomination, I’m thinking that they need to weed a few people out, and Trump’s multiple divorces and the fact that he previously ran as a Democrat are reason enough to toss him even if he is pulling good poll numbers.

rojo's avatar

@Littlemisslinny

While I do not disagree with you about her acting and I don’t think she is the best candidate for the office; the sad thing is that even with all her faults and her ineptitude, she is still a far better candidate for the office than any of the (what is it, eight?) Republicans that we have been presented with.

And, @mazingerz88 they would.

Pachy's avatar

Republicans will continue to go after Hillary, probably even more furiously if she’s elected President. They hate her. If/when they tire of the Benghazi and email investigations, they’ll find something else to try to hurt her with. Just look how House Republicans have tried to kill Obamacare years after it became law—56 attempts to repeal it!

jerv's avatar

@Pachy There’ have been signs of them starting to turn on their own though. we all saw what happened to Boehner, and there are some trying to do the same to Paul Ryan since his reluctant willingness to become Speaker marks him as a RINO lapdog to Obama and his Socialist Muslim cabal while others are realizing that the fanatics they’ve allowed into their midst are completely fucking batshit.

I think it possible that the Republicans will be too busy going at each other to really go after Hillary too much… or govern.. or get re-elected.

Pachy's avatar

Yes, maybe. Let’s hope you’re right.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

All the Republicans caught with mistresses and gay prostitutes are not running for President. Or are they? I would like to recommend a book for reading. I’m not sure about the exact wording of the title but I remember it had emperor and either clothes or new clothes in the title.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

Why can’t we just have two presidents? I think we could work that out. Let’s think outside the presidential box.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

Ever read the remarks and notice how they escalate? Someone starts simple, then they get angry, you can tell by the words they use, then they want their opinion to be the only one that counts. Next, they start using curse words.

rojo's avatar

no. never noticed that. Are you perhaps reading more into it than there actually is?

Littlemisslinny's avatar

jerv above states: There’ have been signs of them starting to turn on their own though. we all saw what happened to Boehner, and there are some trying to do the same to Paul Ryan since his reluctant willingness to become Speaker marks him as a RINO lapdog to Obama and his Socialist Muslim cabal while others are realizing that the fanatics they’ve allowed into their midst are completely fucking batshit. Soooooooo do you think I am reading more into it than there actually is?

rojo's avatar

WTF would we want two presidents for? Why don’t we just divide the country in half and then we can have two full governments. We could split it at the Mason/Dixon line.

Still haven’t noticed any politicians cussing.

Littlemisslinny's avatar

Proved my earlier point. Had the cursing in there too! Are you sure you are not reading more into it than there actually is? Never implied politicians. I said, “Ever read the remarks”. I’m impressed. Most wouldn’t know about the history reference.

jerv's avatar

@Littlemisslinny You’re new here, so you aren’t familiar with some of the personalities here. You may think that my casual swearing is a sign of anger, but once you get to know me, you’ll see that that’s bullshit. While I try to avoid being gratuitous in my use of expletives, I regard words that others may consider shocking as just words, usually ones of greater magnitude than “clean” pronouns/adjectives convey. I think it, I say it; no pasteurization, filtering, no sugar-coating. So if you want to gauge my mood, thoughts, or intent then pay more attention to what I say than how I say it, especially if you have issues with cynicism, snark, or dry humour.

Enough of that, back to the discussion…

I’ve been watching the world in general for about 35 years now, and much of that has watching the Republicans do all the wrong things, then when called on their failures they double-down and get even more outlandish. They are why I predicted back in grade school that our nation would undergo a massive upheaval (coup, revolution, possibly even a civil war) by the time I became worm food.

Flash forward to present day and we have Christian Jihadists shouting about “Second Amendment solutions” to having a Muslim Kenyan put in the White House, and not all of them are voters; some are the people that got elected! (Usually only at the county or state level, but still…) They bully the sort of people that uphold traditional Conservative values and belittle them for not being conservative enough. Many are racist and/or misogynistic, most either support violence or are themselves violent. In other words, we have something that could arguably be considered a terrorist organization. There are plenty of people abroad that actually do consider them terrorists. That doesn’t even get into the hypocrisy, like seeking to overturn Roe v. Wade then turning around and asking their mistress to get an abortion.

Their rise to power has disenfranchised many a traditional Conservative in addition to all of the other shit they’ve done. But now, it looks like some of the disenfranchised Conservatives are beginning to realize that they fucked up by creating, aiding, and abetting these monsters. They’ve started to take their party back, and rest assured that the Batshit Brigade won’t go down without a fight.

I stand by my original answer; fanatics have less than zero shits to give about consequences. And yes, they are trying to do damage. Of course, being fanatics, they won’t see it that way; their Holy Crusade is righteous and just enough that no cost is too great… especially not when someone else is paying. They will keep on going until they literally cannot go any more. Things like losing elections, being fined or imprisoned, and other such things that would deter rational people won’t stop this circus.

@rojo I see that as one possible endgame; the South either seceding or being jettisoned, hopefully in an attempt to prevent armed conflict as opposed to the aftermath of one. It really is convenient that the region where a lot of these radicals and their supporters are is pretty clearly marked on maps from the early/mid-1860s. However, since that would leave them with control of less than 98% of the universe, I doubt that they would go along with that.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther