The Chris Matthews Show: Why The White House REALLY Wants McCain To Win
By Nicole Belle Saturday Jul 19, 2008 3:30pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
We've long since documented the desperate lengths that John McCain is willing to go to win the office of the Presidency, even to the point of hiring the same people responsible for those whisper campaigns in 2000 that he might be a little off his rocker from his years as a POW and that he fathered an illegitimate black baby. Chris Matthews seems a little surprised that John McCain is actually seeking to win the election. Not sure what Chris thinks McCain's been doing for the last 18 months, but it's Howard Fineman who gives the real answer to the $64,000 question. The White House wants McCain to win because they know there would be no accountability for all their criminal acts with another Republican in office.
FINEMAN: If you're in this White House, you want another Republican administration to follow. You don't want a Democratic administration coming in there while the evidence is still fresh, so to speak. To look at it the way...
MATTHEWS: With the subpoena power...
FINEMAN: With the subpoena power and looking through all the records and looking at all the decisions that were made. You want to cover over your two terms with a third term the way Ronald Reagan did with George HW Bush.
All of which is undoubtedly true, and one can only hope that there might be a depressingly rare accountability moment coming from a Democratic White House (although nothing about the current Democratic majority would lead us to believe they have the fortitude to pursue it). But the thing that chaps my hide is the tacit admission by Fineman that the Bush administration would have stuff to hide. Not that they don't...we've been saying so since the beginning of C&L, but that after years and years of having Fineman and Co. make excuses for the Bush administration and be content to regurgitate their talking points (just as Kelly O'Donnell unapologetically does in this clip), NOW Fineman admits it as if it's been common knowledge all along.
Transcripts below the fold
MATTHEWS: As we've said, President Bush and John McCain have had a chilly relationship at best. Things turned arctic after that brutal primary fight back in 2000 and while they warmed up a bit in recent years, few people believe Bush and McCain are close friends. But the president and some of his former staffers are working hard to get their former rival elected. No surprise there. Getting another Republican in there would be Bush's best hope to carry on, even bulk up his legacy. Here's Bush back in March when he made it plain that he wants McCain there to continue his foreign policy.
[video]
BUSH: John McCain will find out when he takes the oath of office his most important responsibility is to protect the American people from harm. And there's still an enemy that lurks. An enemy that wants to strike us. And this country better have somebody in that Oval Office who understands the stakes. And John McCain understands those stakes.
[end video]
MATTHEWS: So Kelly, they're not ready to turn the ball over to the other side, see how well they can play it, huh?
O'DONNELL: Well the President would certainly like to continue that idea of offense as a part of foreign diplomacy, which is something that John McCain talks about a lot. Where McCain does differ is he is more open to some of the diplomatic negotiations that you hear so much from Barack Obama. Different than Obama, but I think McCain does have a slightly different view on foreign policy than the President.
MATTHEWS: Again, Karl Rove is hovering over this campaign. Steve Schmidt, one of his former people... associates is in there running the campaign now. Now it looks to me like they want to win.
RATHER: They want to win and John McCain wants to win. Because he has bought in to the Rovian strategy for this next election and why wouldn't he? Karl Rove ran two brilliant campaigns for president. However, that could cost him on the other side, because on the one hand he's trying to say, ‘you know, what...I'm not Bush III' on the other hand, he's having Bush's operatives run the campaign for him.
O'DONNELL: Obviously top Republican operatives have worked for the Bush/Cheney era. But Schmidt would be the first to tell you he's an Arnold Schwarzenegger man. He ran his re-election campaign, helped him to win coming back from a big deficit. So even this new guy whose sort of running this organization is not as tied to President Bush and Vice President Cheney as you might think.
MATTHEWS: I'm looking at Rove here, over this whole campaign, not just Schmidt, but Rove. I wonder if the polarizing, partisan way that the Bush campaign put his whole operation together the last two terms isn't going to invade and perhaps hurt the McCain effort. ‘
TUCKER: Well, remember Rove worries about his legacy too. Just a little while ago, he was thought of one of the most brilliant political strategists of a generation. But more recently he's been looking like the guy who has diminished the Republican brand.
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
TUCKER: So he wants McCain to win not just for Bush's sake, but for Rove's sake as well.
MATTHEWS: Yeah, he's was five feet ahead of the Special Prosecuter, let's not forget that, in the leak case.
FINEMAN: Yeah. That's part of it too. First of all, belief matters here. Bush and McCain agree on Iraq...
MATTHEWS: Right.
FINEMAN: ...Which is a big deal. One of the biggest, most consequential decisions any president ever made. So there's belief. There's also fear. If you're in this White House, you want another Republican administration to follow. You don't want a Democratic administration coming in there while the evidence is still fresh, so to speak. To look at it the way...
MATTHEWS: With the subpoena power...
FINEMAN: With the subpoena power and looking through all the records and looking at all the decisions that were made. You want to cover over your two terms with a third term the way Ronald Reagan did with George HW Bush.
MATTHEWS: Yeah...
Login or Register to post comments.
This is why Obama needs to pick Hillary as his VP, we MUST WIN THIS ELECTION. She is vetted. Doesn't matter about the details, she means votes and wee need them desperately.
Look out Iran.
The Democrats are covering Bush/Cheney's crimes just fine thank-you-very-much. And Fineman is a self-important windbag.
we already got the stinking subpoena power and no one in the White House could give a shit.
fineman nailed it in the end........bush doesn't want further exposure.....to me that's the primary reason
for bush to support mccain there is a lot of secrecy to expose
I think this is exactly right. There will be no way to cover up everything. They do need McCain in there to sweep the place clean before any dem ever holds that office again.
Of course the dems will use that feeble excuse about it seeming like revenge or it will be bad for the country bullshit and won't do anything anyway.
"Cover Over.."..riiiight. You mean Cover Up. You mean bury. You mean look the other way.
If I had a garbage disposal, I'd flush all these guys.
I wonder if all the "O"'s will be missing from the computer keyboards in January 09?
I pray Obama wins, if not the world will think we are the biggest assholes. They were stunned when Bush was reelected. I'm tired of the world thinking were jack-asses.
It really doesn't matter, they plan to steal the election again anyway.
I call shenanigans. The won't be accountability from a Dem president. The only accountability will come if a whistleblower shows up with unquestionable damning evidence that would cause investigations and trial regardless of who is president.
I feel based on the group of candidate the repubs fielded in the primaries its clear they are not concerned with winning the Whitehouse. They know whoever is the next president is going to have to deal with the consequences of Bush's presidency and if that president is a democrat, great. If he's black, even better. I mean look who ran: Giuliani/Romney, both NE pointed headed liberals who basically had to campaign against their former selves. Ron Paul is a nut job, and McCain is old enough that he risks nothing if he loses and he's so incredibly flawed as a candidate. McCain is the repubs' sacrifice to the election.
Yes, this country has been run by a criminal enterpise for the last 8 years.
No, they will not be brought to justice for their many crimes. Especially, with a Dem sweep. (Sad but true).
Reagan sold us the destruction of the American experiment. The nine words...
Look the other way, this government of you and for you is a piece of shit.
We need a truth and reconciliation movement. Heads should roll.
Of course if the McCains have any money dodging taxes with UBS, John will have his own desperate need for the seat of power.
Walrus @13
You speak wisely.
Except that this country has been run by a criminal enterprise since at least 1959.
JFK won in the primaries in West Virginia because of mafia control of labor unions.
JFK won in the GE because of specious voting in Illinois (under the control of Richard J. Daley).
It's been all downhill since then.
If the House just *starts* Impeachment proceedings, Bush CAN'T pardon anyone. That alone is a very very very Urgent reason to begin impeachment.
Color me a "glass half empty". . . but I think there will be no accountability no matter who is in office.
Accountability doesn't poll well and they will all be talking about how we all need to "come together in healing" rather than "divide ourselves with witch hunts." We will need to "put it all behind us" and "get over it" and "bridge the bitter divides."
Basically, we will need to give the aggressors in government, and their followers, what they want in the name of "getting along."
Again. . .
Confused about "subpoena power"
A Democratic administration wouldn't just have subpoena power, they would have custody of the most damning evidence. The new president will decide what information from the previous administration has executive privilege claimed for it, what remains classified, and not only what subpoenas from other sources, such as Congress, are resisted, but what evidence that might not be directly in their hands that the new federal prosecutors will go after.
Folks who despair of BushCo ever being held accountable haven't processed how completely the ground will change 1/20/09. This will be true even if, as we might expect, the new administration isn't too keen on prosecutions. To keep the lid on other people seeking accountability, it wouldn't suffice that they simply hold back the new US Attys. The Obama administration would have to resist subpoenas dealing with the Bush administratioin's activities, invoking executive privilege and security classification with the same vigor and lack of regard for the truth that the current administration applies to stone-walling.
VietVet8666 @ 8:
Maybe you could flush them into the new "bush sewerage treatment plant" in San Francisco.
;^)
Which explains why Bush is going to bat for McCain in major ways right now:
I think if someone were to investigate the relationship between McCain talking points on the psychology of gas prices, Bush's executive order repealing the ban on offshore drilling, and the supposed effect it had on oil prices.
The GOP line is that the oil companies were so scared by Bush's order, that the prices went down immediately... Even though it was only a symbolic gesture.
Now, does anyone think the oil companies fear the Republicans? Or, are they willing to take it on the chin for a couple of weeks to get McCain into office?
Another reason to clean house this fall: a chance for accountability and to de-bunk the whole 'history will vindicate' claptrap.
So the boy Bush needs the old man McCain to win so that there is a Republican in the White House to cover the boy Bush's ass after he leaves. That makes perfect sense.
Plisko @ 18:
with pundits.
and afterdowningstreet.org has a post about polls on the question of impeachment (http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/polling). looks like the majority, if not all, polls reflect people believe impeachment is the thing to do.
VietVet8666 @ 16:
The "specious voting" in Illinois had nothing to do with JFK. The locals were trying to get Dem politicians elected. You are the victim of an urban myth.
VietVet8666 @ 16:
Elections have been stolen by both parties. I sometimes think that the American voter admires organized criminals, and looks on the ability to run the best criminal enterprise as a qualification for running government. (Serisously.) Hence, our fascination with The Godfather and The Sopranos.
So, I'm not entirely convinced that everybody WANTS honest and fair elections. People only object to the crooked ones when their side loses, but not when it wins. So, maybe we don't deserve an honest government? But if anybody is sincerely interested in cleaning up the presidential elections, it would be easy.
1. Amend the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College on the grounds that it violates the one person one vote principle. Even the Supreme Court we have now couldn't rule against that.
2. Have the Treasury Department print up paper ballots with two (or more) names on them with serial numbers and distribute them to every polling station in the country. (Ballots are supplied as books, so that individual ballots are torn out of the book and handed to the voter in the same order as they are numbered.) People show up at any polling station in the country, show proof of citizenship, get handed a numbered ballot torn out of a book, mark with an X, dip their finger in ink, and that's the end of it. There is no fuss about whether or not people are at the right polling station because it doesn't matter. The president is elected by popular vote, not winner-take-all in particular districts. Ballots are counted by hand by multiple volunteers from both parties, as well as Inds., in plain sight. Ballot serial numbers are checked with the serial numbers that were torn out of the book to confirm that none are missing, and unused ballots (not torn out of the book) are returned to the Treasury for verification.
If you don't think these modifications would pass, I'd like to see who'd vote AGAINST the principle of one person one vote. They wouldn't dare to vote against it, it's just a question of somebody having the courage to introduce it.
"..although nothing about the current Democratic majority would lead us to believe they have the fortitude to pursue it".
I submit a more apt phrasing would read "..the integrity to pursue it".
Remember that box thing under Bushes jacket? I think they have one on McCain now. They're just smaller.
I think the criticism of Fineman is a bit over the top. He's OK. Much better that most. Now, if we want to pick on a right-wing pundit passing as a legitimate journalist, Andrea Mitchell is at the top of my list.
VietVet8666 @ 16:
Huh? I guess we could go all the way back to the beginning. Remember the slaughter of the Indians? Pretty nasty stuff. That has little to do with the egregious stripping away of our constitutional rights and blatant lawlessness that has taken place under this current administration.
Anyway, JFK was assassinated so, uh..that would make it a bit difficult to hold him accountable. I don't get your point.
Plisko @ 18:
I guess my glass must be half empty as well because I agree entirely. Holding the Bush administration accountable will still be "off the table."
I saw this when it aired this morning in this market... and I thought immediately that it was a RARE moment of un-guarded political commentary.
We don't get it this raw and honest very often.
Wow, what a bunch of Eeyores.
I'm not saying that Obama will make Bush accountability project #1, but there's a much bigger likelihood that we'll learn a lot more about what Bush/Cheney did.
Not saying they'll go to jail, but their legacy will be shot to hell, and historians can chronicle a much more accurate and detailed story.
Che's, Walrus, and Pericles,
You guys are good.
Study the JFK assassination. Then come back.
Fineman = Media whore for a paycheck, clear and simple. He's nothing but a tired, on-the-take "hack" whose days of relevancy are well behind him.
He just slit his own throat with this admission whether he realizes it or not.
He's "toast" as they say in the business.
This country needs a democratic president, that can't be argued, but to think that Obama will go after the Bush Administration is bullshit. Obama will do the same thing Ford did; you all know that Obama will give a pointless speech (in which the word unity will be repeated many times over) about why this country needs to move forward, and so not to launch or cancel any investigation on Bush.
Just to be clear, I know that Obama is the best way for the nation.
Why does everybody here just automatically assume that a Democratic president WOULD NOT appoint an honest A.G.? THAT's where the shit will eventually hit the fan. Just ONE appointment. ONE MAN who will be willing to call TORTURE TORTURE. Just ONE MAN who would be willing to prosecute KKKarl Rove for Contempt of Congress. Just ONE MAN who would be willing to adhere to the tenants of THE LAW.
Cats r Flyfishn @ 23:
And there is no way in hell that McCain can win legitimately unless the evil Repukes rig another election like they did in both 2000 and 2004. If this happens, the people will react and overthrow a government which has run amok.
"All of which is undoubtedly true, and one can only hope that there might be a depressingly rare accountability moment coming from a Democratic White House (although nothing about the current Democratic majority would lead us to believe they have the fortitude to pursue it)."
As Camus said, "Hope is the neurosis of modern man"; It' s like the FISA bill; when has ANY President forsaken powers inherent in the Office upon assuming the Office?
Kathy @ 17:
Thanks for this bit of info. This means the the press for impeachment must become accelerated now. Rove is banking on being pardoned by his lord and master, the Chimp so as they say "time is of the essence".
Rather: "Rove ran 2 brilliant campaigns, 2 successful presidential campaigns" Huh, Bush lost both elections, he got to the Oval Office by cheating both times and Rove (together with GOP corruption and governing incompetence) cost his party both houses of congress in the last election. Rather still peddling that "Rove's a genius" crap? When did Rather start drinking right wing Kool-Aid?
Chimp: "There's still an enemy out there!! There's an enemy that wants to strike us!!!" Be afraid, be very afraid! Translation: Elect McSame to continue my legacy of debt, death and destruction and to cover up for my crimes the way my daddy covered up for Reagan's crimes. Bottom line, no foreign enemy can do more damage to this nation than the Bush regime has done.
Howard Fineman nailed it, "Bush wants to cover for his 2 terms with McSame the way Bush senior followed and covered for Reagan". This is the reason Bush is scared shitless Obama will win, that' why it's "terror, terror, terror!! Enemies wanna kill us!!! Terror! Terror!! Terror!!. We just need to make sure this election is not close enough for the anti-democratic reich wing court to throw it again. The wingers will stop at nothing to keep Obama out of the Oval Office. Absolutely. Nothing.
We haven't had an honest AG since Bush took office. This guy Mukasey is an old, tired goat who is of the Pappy Bush genre (owed favors from way back). He knows that he can personally be responsible for bringing down the House of Bush right now or "aiding and abetting criminals" so he's hedging his bets. Once Bushitco is out of office, then the fur can fly and it will also fly in Mukasey's direction. He'll be subpoenaed and forced to testify honestly - or maybe he'd rather find himself in prison for the rest of his life? He's got a choice between a rock and a hard place right now. He's damned by Bush if he suddenly becomes honest and damned by the people if he doesn't. Either way, this man will never have any personal peace for the rest of his life - just like Grandpappy Bush and his Bad Seed.
Kathy @ 17:
I think Pelosi and friends are counting on Chimpy pardoning them also, would explain the lack of impeachment progress in Congress , and the stalling and obstruction by the DLC wing of the Democratic party.
Ruthless People @ 40:
Fineman's comment is extremely provocative, isn't it - as it relates to perhaps the kingpin in the Bush Crime family. We know where Pappy was the day Kennedy was shot (head of the CIA) and in what city?? (of course, he swears he was not present - yeah, right.....). I've always said the the "dots" in this puzzle weave themselves back to the power monger days of Bush 41 and his worthless offspring who perpetuated it.
We can thank the Bush Regime for the descent of this country. This one family has wrought more decimation on this democracy than all of the presidents combined. Their family name will be mud by the time this fool leaves office.
Follow the dots......Kennedy's Death/Head of CIA, WTC and the Carlysle Group (in Washington on 911 for a gathering).....hmmm....all those Saudis being flown out of town when air space was ostensibly "closed to ALL air traffic"....very provocative.
It would seem that Fineman is providing a critical clue in the puzzle to all of us right now. Bush's entire family can of worms needs further investigation now that Fineman has brought it front and center by implying that Reagan covered 41's illicit tracks.
Bruce Sims @ 38:
Good luck, they have claymore type devices protecting the Whitehouse in DC.
Some of the young uns at work were talking about some of the cool stuff they had watched on Future Weapons, this WMD device being one of them.
sorry that reply was directed at Osiris :37 not Bruce at 38
Maybe Fineman can enlighten us as to what he meant when he said that Reagan came in and covered for 41?? Covered what exactly?? Plenty, I'm sure. This man even looks like evil personified.
In 2004, the GOP's "Katherine Harris" was a man by the name of Kenneth G. Blackwell, Ohio Supervisor of Elections and Head of Bush/Cheney 04. Wonder who and where the next Katherine Harris will rear her ugly head?? No doubt they're prepping some other ugly hag for the job as we type. Face it: Their lives depend on a Republican president. They know that many Congressmen and insiders in this administration will be heading to jail for their criminal actions if a Democrat takes the white house. It's "cryin' time" for tons of Repukes.
P.S. Dennis Kucinich in his 38 articles of impeachment named Kenneth Blackwell specifically as the individual responsible for the hacking of the 2004 election. He'll be in prison before 2010.
I'm sorry, was that meant to imply that the Democrats are going to hold this administration accountable? Because that's laugh out loud funny. Unless we're not talking about the same Democratic Party, of course; I refer to the spineless appeasers currently stinking up Congress. This other, accountability-driven Democratic party intrigues me; I am curious to learn more about this new, confusingly named party.
Rigging elections is child's play for the reichers - they've done it on two subsequent times. The sophistication of the hardware and the ignorance of the brain-dead people whose ego simply will not permit them to have enough real insight to see that they're indulging in faux patriotism makes it an easy score for these evil, twisted traitors to our democracy.
You can count on it. However, by the time November rolls around, there will not be a Republican around whose seat is safe and who will not find themselves on unemployment lines very soon.
There is NO WAY for them to do this unless the polls are neck in neck. We know that the pre and exit polls in 2004 were bogus. DO NOT believe any of the polls. I think we all can see how desperately we need Obama as President in order to save this country from Bush destruction. His campaign and support is double that of McCain. So, if his popularity continues to increase leaving no doubt as to whom should be elected president, the people will not tolerate it and they will revolt.
I'd say it's safe to say that "if McSame is elected President, this country will be no more". We're already 3/4 of the way there with everything going down the tubes - we're broke, our banks are failing, no one is watching the store (tainted food - the ones we know about) and the list goes on. We're severely BROKEN as a country right now. We will reach a new nadir if we don't do "the next right thing" and bring these criminals within to the justice they deserve. We will have absolutely no support or respect internationally if we permit McCrazy into the white house.
osiris @ 43:
Yup. The same Bush 41 that sabotaged the Carter's negotiated hostage release knowing if the hostages were released before the election Reagan was toast. http://www.geocities.com/thereaganyears/1980election.htm
The Bush Crime Family are criminal thugs from way back who will stop at nothing to thwart the American democratic process if given the opportunity. Somebody better be watching them closely this year.
Jeon Ji-Yung @ 49:
You must be referring to the Bush Democrats, aka "The Blue Dogs"?? Yes, they are wolves in sheep's clothing and will be removed from office as well. None of their seats are safe either.
If Obama wins, he'll be helping the Bush thugs carry their loot out to the getaway car. Then it'll be nothing but "get over it," "let's move on," and "focus on the future" from the gutless Democrats.
Ruthless People @ 51:
Since we're on the topic of Bush thuggery, did you know that Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker (Barbara's pappy) were aiding and abetting Hitler? Google the two of them and it's all there. They were actually caught and stopped under the "trading with the enemies" act. Nazis?? Perhaps. So the offspring of this unfortunate coupling (George Sr. and Barbara) never had a chance of being anything but bad seeds. Chimpy is as close to Herr Hitler as anyone can get. Any wonder why?
Then, of course, we go to his selection of a mate - Laura. Laura was involved in a vehicular homicide of her ex-boyfriend in 1964 or 65. Of course, it was expunged from her record. Two peas in a pod??
And if you google the offspring of Chimpy's other siblings, the family dossier is full of arrests, from Jeb's wife caught stealing to one of his daughters or sons caught in sex acts in a vehicle in the daylight....ick! The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, does it?
Of course, there's also Neal Bush. Wasn't he the one whose company had the "Security contract" on the WTC right up to 911? I believe so.
I think people should press Fineman to explain what he was implying about the corruption of the Bush administration for starters and then the can of worms will be opened publicly. He implied high crimes and misdemeanors being covered up by Reagan, the GOP's "God". If so, then Reagan isn't worth an ounce of respect either. I always thought Reagan was someone's "puppet" just as I've had the same feeling about Baby Bush - now we know who the "little man at Oz behind the curtain is" and it's time for the people to get to the bottom of that man's charades.
kali yuga @ 53:
And the alternative is????? Electing an impotent, addle-brained old codger who can't remember what he said yesterday and withstanding another 4 years of a monkey in the white house?
What's your suggestion then?
Besides, Kali yuga, what you may not know is that the spineless ones calling themselves Democrats are really in disguise. They're the ones who have been corrupted by Bush's illegal spying. The "Blue Dogs" in Congress are being blackmailed and are susceptible by their own skeletons to being muted.
VietVet8666 @ 16:
Links & verification please.
Larry Larsen @ 28:
That's Mrs. Alan Greenspan to you.
The most telling statement/comment was during the 1st minute of the vid , with Chimpy the Wonder Monkey giving another unforgettable view into that dim-witted mind of his.
The stupid grinning braying jackass has been in office for almost 8 years , and he still doesn't realize what his job truly is.
The president's #1 responsibility IS NOT to protect the American people ; it is to serve and protect the Constitution.
No wonder the stupid looking fucker is the worst president in US history...........
MCMetal @ 61:
Close, but off somewhat:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
And I might add that there is no requirement to swear on a Bible or to say "so help me God".
FOX is State Sponsored TV @ 3:
Fineman was the only person on that panel with any brain cells(including that dildo Matthews). The other three goofs were the typical "journalists" we've had the past eight years contributing zero meaningful and useful information to the public and in fact aiding and abetting these criminal warmongers. Why do you imbeciles constantly come here with baseless bullshit trying to blame the Democrats after the fact for these many years of obvious Republican war crimes?
It's good to see so many of the historical roots being traced here. It does matter that we pull together all the threads to this whole mess. If you don't get where and how it started, and how it has grown and metastasized, it's hard to comprehend how truly all-encompassing and awful it is.
Yeah, grandpa Bush thought dealing with Hitler was "crisis opportunity" at it's finest. He was willing to make money off the Nazis and if it helped them take over Europe and commit genocide, so what?
And Bush I has been a party leader and CIA insider since before Kennedy beat Nixon.
Rove was working for the Republicans during Watergate, he was one of Donald Seggreti's "rat fuckers", going around the country disrupting campaigns and committing crimes to throw the election for Nixon, which they did. They were funded by the cash that came through CREEP, the committee to reelect the president, that was laundered through Mexico. Bush I was part of CREEP, and it was run by Bob Dole.
Dick Cheney was part of Nixon's staff and has always said he believed Nixon would have gotten away with Watergate if he had only had a stronger presidency, exactly what he has set up for Bush II.
Reagan pulled all the same criminals around him, so did Bush I & II. And the only real relief from endless war and terrorism during all that time has been parts of Clinton's terms.
Those times during Clinton's terms when there were terrorist attacks, they always had the fingerprints of Reagan, Bush I, Rumsfeld & Cheney all over them.
None of this has happened in a vacuum, it has happened because for almost half a century we have been letting the same bunch of murderous criminals get away with the same crimes.
If we had thrown everyone involved in Watergate in prison and thrown away the key, we wouldn't have had Iran Contra, the Hostage Crisis, the first Iraq War, the second Iraq War, the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon. Saddam wouldn't have run Iraq. Osama Bin Laden would never have been funded and trained by the CIA, the Talliban never would have gained power. Every one of these instances were either paid for by the US, or we were directly involved in creating the situations.
And it can all be traced back to war-profiteering, criminal Republicans and their financiers.
And, no, the Democrats have not been as bad or as criminal. This is decades of criminal war-profiteering by a very select few with tremendous resources and power and no accountibility.
"You want to cover over your two terms with a third term the way Ronald Reagan did with George HW Bush."
Face facts, people...HW was the de facto Prez from DAY ONE...
the Gipper was the original Quayle...a useful meat puppet, nothing more
Wow! I'm not gay but I really want to give Fineman a big tongue kiss!
Not only is he willing to say that Bush wants someone to help cover up his crimes but he pointed out that Reagan also needed someone to cover up his crimes! - This guy needs his own show!
My God, people, hasn't it occurred to anyone hat the reason the Dems in Congress don't want to pursue impeachment is that they know full well that Cheney et al are in position for a complete coup d'etat? If it hasn't already happened, that is. I'd say that the reason Bush and Cheney still smirk in public is that this fix is already in . . .
If voting made any difference, would the people responsible for Iraq let us do it?
A song was dedicated to Chris ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HO77EDn9K4
There is zero chance that an Obama presidency will mean accountability for Bush/Cheney.
It doesn't matter if you have subpoena power when Mukasey, the AG, has declared that he will not enforce them. The Congress is having to find a different route than what the normal legal remedy is. This is not black and white when you have a crime family that tried to cover all their tracks and stack the deck to cover all their crimes. Congress is trying but without the Justice Department, it is difficult.
If McCain wins there will be no revolt.
Bad economic times are coming. And with 4 years of McCain it will get pretty ugly.
I think it will take that long for people to really get outraged. And then I fear the vice will have tightened so much that no revolt will be possible.
VietVet8666 @ 16:
You mean 1876, don't you?
General_Rennenkampf @ 75:
Back further, 1492.