Arthur Louis's Blog

Arthur Louis

Arthur Louis
February 28
I was a writer and editor for more than forty years with four newspaper and magazine publishers. I am the author of two non-fiction books: "The Tycoons" and "Journalism and Other Atrocities," and one novel, "The Little Champ," all available on


Arthur Louis's Links
NOVEMBER 14, 2012 7:36PM

Could This Be Bye-bye Obama?

Rate: 12 Flag

Political scandals come, and political scandals go, but they all smell the same.

I am going way out on a limb here, and predicting that President Obama will be forced to resign from office before the end of his second term because of Benghazi-gate, just as one of his esteemed predecessors, Richard Nixon, did because of Watergate.  It will be the last, nasty practical joke inflicted upon our country by this ill-natured, incompetent boob of a President – because look who we will get as his successor!

I decided that Obama was bound to resign because I don’t think any presidency can survive more than four years of the fully justified drubbing that Obama already is receiving from the alternative media and the political opposition. His mishandling of our foreign affairs is exemplified by, though not limited to, his mishandling of the Benghazi tragedy.  

Being incompetent isn’t quite enough cause for impeachment, and in any event Obama would never acknowledge that he is incompetent. But when you add in the lies, the deceptions, the cover-up, and when all the gory details of this disgraceful shell game finally get disclosed, as they will, to the American public, you have a presidency that simply cannot remain viable.

I don’t know whether the worthless mainstream media, which in its more honorable days led the charge in ousting Nixon, will continue to “circle the wagons,” as Rush Limbaugh puts it, around their precious President. I still believe enough in our nation’s journalistic traditions to assume that there must be some mainstreamers out there who will break ranks and join the better cause. 

Where are all those young  idealists who enrolled at journalism schools in record numbers after Watergate? Some of them are still batting away at their keyboards, and if enough of them decide to do the right thing, it will be Hello Again, Chicago for Obama and his lovely family.

It wasn’t until today that I mustered enough certainty to publicly predict Obama’s premature departure from the Oval Office. It happened when a reporter at his news conference asked Obama to respond to the attack by Republican Senators McCain and Graham on Obama’s United Nations ambassador, Susan Rice. They said they would do whatever they could to ensure that Rice, who has been mentioned as a possible successor to Secretary of State Clinton, does not receive that promotion, because of her involvement in the Benghazi cover-up.

Rice, you no doubt recall, went on five different Sunday political talk shows one week after the Benghazi attack, to spread the administration’s propaganda – which already had been discredited – that the attack which killed our ambassador to Libya and three other Americans had been prompted by an anti-Muslim video. (The producer of the video has just begun a one-year term in a California prison, supposedly for parole violation. Yeah, right! This is just Obama’s kiss-up #546 to America’s enemies.)

Obama gallantly rode to Rice’s defense. He seems to have a bit of a thing for her. Michelle should take note.

Obama said: “…let me say specifically about Susan Rice, she has done exemplary work. She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill, and professionalism, and toughness, and grace.”

Echoes of Watergate!

Maybe you aren’t old enough to remember what went on during the Watergate drama, but I am, and I was following the events so closely at the time that every word of every participant has been etched in my mind. So, this is what I remember:

When Bob Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, two top White House staffers who had been implicated in the Watergate scandal, were forced to resign to deflect suspicion from Nixon, Nixon went on TV and called them “two of the finest public servants it has been my privilege to know.”  Neither of those fine gentlemen, who wound up serving time in prison, was by any stretch of the imagination a “public servant.” They were Nixon’s personal servants, Nixon’s myrmidons. 

Susan Rice and the rest of the lying cabal, including Obama himself, Hillary Clinton, Jay Carney and, sad to say, perhaps General Petraeus, are not public servants. They serve their own interests, exclusively.

Good riddance to the lot of them.  Better sooner than later.


Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
You wouldn't care to put that up as a wager on InTrade would you Arthur?
Cadabra, I don't even know how to start an Intrade market, but if someone else does, I probably would wager on it.
"...I probably would wager on it.

And end up extremely disappointed or shell shocked as you were on the morning of Nov. 7th. You should just let it go.
Well, Arthur,
I remember Watergate very well. There was more than one crime involved, and they were actually crimes. This election-scare holdover is going nowhere. I think you need an actual crime to impeach, so you might want to hold off until something resembling a crime comes out of all that partisan posturing and Fox News hyperventilating. Godot has the evidence of the crime. Wait for him.

Now if you were prone to critical thinking, you'd be aware that whether the attack was prompted by a video or not is almost absolutely meaningless, and it is in no way a crime to describe it either way. It's not a material fact. It was an attack, regardless of the motivation. Further, you'd need evidence it wasn't prompted by the video to even meet the non-crime standard of a whimpered "neener-neener," which is the extent of what partisan gain can be had. You need to ask the attackers what they were thinking.

So, the charge of cover-up is laughable. Watergoo-goo.

Can you explain...while maintaining a straight face...why it is a crime to offer that it was caused by the video protest? Maybe trying to figure that out will point you to the simple truth there's no crime so a cover-up would be pointless. What's being covered-up? It wasn't prompted by the vid? Who cares, as that doesn't matter. At all. Zip, zero, nil, nada.

There's no there there, Arthur. You're taking the Rwing media mania seriously, but there is no high crime or misdemeanor. There will be no high crime or misdemeanor. You're chasing the crawling ants of Rwing tabloid media delirium tremens.

The GOP will pose around this thing for awhile and then it will fall off the radar screen because they won't be any more able than you to figure out the impeachable offense.

Romney lost. Get over it. Don't let your disappointment lead you down the wingnut path of silly walks.
Paul, So nice to see you again. I figured you would still be hung over.

Some crime may emerge from the fog, but I am not counting on that. I am counting on Obama being rendered impotent -- politically, that is -- so that hanging around Pennsylvania Avenue will no longer seem worthwhile. And his "revenge" against his detractors will be that silly drunk with hair plugs.
Arthur, InTrade is menu driven so you've plenty of time to get the hang of it. And there will be so many takers that the odds will look spectacularly good to you. Though it sounds like you've etch-a-sketched just a bit in your reply to Paul.

By the way, were you advocating for Bush's impeachment on the grounds of an unnecessary war entered into under false pretenses?
A. Incompetence is more than enough to impeach someone. In fact, for Federal Justices, it's about the only way to do so (extreme misconduct which would likely lead to criminal charges prior to any impeachment, anyway).

B. One needn't be old enough to remember the Nixon Administration for this kind of crap. If one tries hard enough, I'm sure anyone old enough to ride one can remember Lewis "Scooter" Libby and his commuted sentence (after his conviction but before sentencing, if I remember correctly) for perjury in the Plame bullshit.

C. If one is old enough to remember Nixon's 1st presidential race, one might remember that JFK did the same shit Nixon did in Watergate to MLK, and forced a political endorsement out of him in the process.

D. Kill 'em all.
PJ - You claim to be an attorney, right?

You ever read this obscure legal document called The Constitution?

"The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Any elected official or Federal Justice can be impeached for whatever reason The House deems an impeachable offense (or the appropriate committee they refer the matter to does). The only case in which their impeachment would be invalidated would be in the case of Justices for anything but incompetence (like...impossible to prove, except if it's Clarance Thomas) or direct evidence of a crime (a holdover from the 1st Justice they tried to impeach).

If the Senate convicts, the impeached is removed from office and barred from holding any other elected office in their lifetime (on the federal level for sure, but I don't know how it works as you go down the ladder).

Misdemeanors cover jaywalking, so it ain't like the crime need even be real to get it started.

Regardless, Arthur was talking about resignation, not impeachment (though, obviously under a looming threat of impeachment).

Of course, none of this matters, as Pelosi stated when she was Speaker, there's basically an agreement amongst both major parties never to go through this process again, lest there be a constant stream of articles of impeachment for party X's president should they have the audacity to do their job and start the process on party Y's president, despite how blatant the offenses of Y's president may or may not be.

Basically, it's moot.

Even Nancy Pelosi didn't want to bring impeachment proceedings against Bush after she became speaker in '07.

I don't think the Iraq war was worth the candle, but I was willing to give Bush a pass, because I don't think he lied about weapons of mass destruction. He thought they were there, his sources were wrong, and when he found they weren't there he fessed up, rather than pretending that he had found them and had destroyed them. In a similar pickle, certain other Presidents would have covered up.

Even after more than a year of digesting the Iraq war and its faulty foundation, the American people gave Bush more votes in '04 than they did in '00. Go figure. To you that is probably as strange as the result of this year's election was to me.
I have never claimed to be an attorney. Impeachment is a very political process, and that implies some level of support for doing it. The issue-less issue of the attack being video-motivated or the latest Rwing media senseless-sation of Petraeus being blackmailed by Obama in order to...I forget, as it's not worthy of my not going to excite anyone. The General wetting his worm will, though. Impeach Petraeus!

It's a sort of political IQ test. People like Arthur and Gordon get all plumped-up with visions of the Rwing media being a serious source of news and analyses, and so land down-slope on the left end of the Bell Curve. People such as yourself, and even others who are knowledgeable and less inappropriately condescending, make broad generic statements about impeachment as if that represents insight. However, it adds nothing to the subject at hand, nor does it elevate the pseudo-pedant's credibility.

Yes, they can impeach for any number of contrived reasons. Big deal.

Benghazi-gate is going nowhere, even though it will occupy several news cycles on the way to obscurity. The Rwing media will use it to sell Metamucil and Depends, and to bulk-up their e-mail listing of people who might buy into slippery investment schemes.

News cycle-wise, General Dickdunk and Ben-gauzy-gait will trot over the Fiscal Cliff fairly soon.
Paul, You seem to be saying that Benghazi-gate will blow over because the non-lamestream media don't have enough heft. I'm not sure that is true, but what a thing to say.

You are tacitly acknowledging that the lamestreams play favorites, and they cast the deciding vote in our political differences. If most of the media favored Romney in the late election, you would be squealing like a... well, whatever. My little essay includes a prayer for the return of objectivity in the media.
Arthur, you are not doing yourself any favors with posts like this.

Take the loss like a man...and plan for the next election. Fact is, you can even start planning for the mid-term election where the Democratic senators up for election are much greater than the Republicans.

But to cry the way you are here is unseemly.

Get it together.
Frank, I didn't cry either literally or figuratively over the election result. I recognized it as a strong possibility, and was prepared for it. But Nixon was forced to resign 19 months into his second term, and he deserved it. The same may happen to Obama for parallel reasons. I would think that a reasonable fellow like you would be having second thoughts about this guy as the Benghazi story unfolds.
If you feel you need...and apparently you do...need a politics with very conservative policies assured after every vote or so-called vote, you may find a cozy home in North Korea.
Your Pal,

I am disappointed in you. I always used to cringe when right wingers told left wingers "If you don't like it here, go to (pick your favorite Soviet bloc nation)."

I guess the right wingers said it often enough that they were bound to find an echo among the off-the-wall lefties.
Arthur, you are still actually lobbying for the demise of President Obama? Ask yourself: What possible good will come from such an eventuality? Why are you so willing to believe the President is involved in a cover-up, when you are so willing to give President GW Bush a pass? They both have said they acted upon the intelligence they were given. As recently as yesterday, President Obama stated in his press conference that what happened in Benghazi is still under investigation. Won't you at least give our current President the courtesy of waiting for the results of the investigation before you start writing these acidic posts?

Made it this far Arthur--

"His mishandling of our foreign affairs is exemplified by, though not limited to, his mishandling of the Benghazi tragedy."

Wondered how you would compare this "Benghazigate" to Bush's "weapons of mass destruction" excuse to invade and topple a sovereign nation, resulting in the deaths and maiming of thousands of American kids, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians... and leading to the financial collapse of this country?
Please do respond.. thanks

Obama repeatedly uses "under investigation" to dodge questions. The evidence so far indicates a multi-faceted cover-up. I wouldn't trust anyone to investigate his own actions, least of all Obama.

It is true that Obama's resignation would make Biden president, and that would not be good either. I think the nation is in a bad place with the current leadership. It's too bad that Romney didn't force the Benghazi issue.

It was much the same in 1972. Watergate happened before the election, but wasn't enough of an issue in the campaign, and Nixon won by a huge margin. Later it caught up with him. So it has happened before and may happen again.
oh those of narrow vision
the kool-aid looks the same
but taste?
no pie for you!
tr ig,

I already said, in response to a comment above, that I th0ught the Iraq war was a mistake. But really, what does Bush have to do with Benghazi-gate? Why is it that every time someone knocks Obama, one of his supporters drags Bush out of the mortuary vault?

Here's a lesson that you and others ought to learn: "You're one too!" is never a satisfactory response to criticism.
I'm not saying the MSM plays favorites. The New York Times, for example, doesn't use the right-wing media stories for the same, exact reason they don't use National Enquirer "Iowa Farmer: Space Aliens at my Tractor" stories for their headlines.

The "conservative" media is pure junk. Titillation for titheads.
You brought George W. Bush up yourself, Art. And if I remember correctly, it was Colin Powell who finally forced the admission from 43 that there were no WMDs. I understand how you feel. I felt the same way when the GOP managed to snatch the 2004 election from the jaws of victory for Gore. But at some point, you and I (figuratively) will have to stop throwing shit-grenades and start figuring out how to get this government under some semblance of order. I was taught to be a gracious loser; to get behind the winner, whomever it is. That's why things used to get done in DC. Remember?

You're dreaming dude... from your perspective a nice dream no doubt.
Enjoy it. Seen Gordon Osmond around here lately?
@Arthur Louis

It certainly could be the end of President Obama. Of course it could be when he comes for your guns and declares martial law. Or he could drop the pretense and reveal that he was really born in Kenya and this is an African takeover of the U.S.A. Just as likely, he will introduce us to our new Martian overlords and make us slaves to an intergalactic cartel.
I suspect that as a parting gift to the nation Speaker Boehner will lead his merry band of cuckoos over to Senate chambers to bring impeachment charges. The Senate will then tell them to go fly a kite and both parties will use that incident to flog their midterm campaigns. President Obama not finishing his second term? Highly unlikely.
Oh fer cryin' out loud.

Benghazi, the last hope of the RWing after finding out just over half the nation is fed up with their fantasies.

If GWB wasn't impeached over the torture scandal at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo, or for failing to take timely action before 9/11
OR for lying to the world to start a war we didn't need over weapons he damn well knew were not there...Which incidentally lead to the deaths and severe injury of THOUSANDS of Americans

Barack Obama is NOT going to be impeached over Benghazi. And while you're at it, ask GOP Congress members, including Paul Ryan, why they cut the security budget for embassies abroad.

It's one thing to be angry and bitter over losing an election.
It's another thing entirely to be delusional.
Really hate to encourage the usual circle jerk, but hell, we're all leaving this site anyway


I believe Blackmail for political gain probably IS a high crime or misdemeanor....... Just sayin'

And how delicious if Hillary set him up........

Malcom X on "the Southern Strategy"
PJ -

I don't know...I think I offered a little insight about Samuel Chase and the near impossibility of impeaching Federal Justices (precisely because, until recently, the bench has been a place which was meant to be free of blatant political affiliation, even if the leanings of a judge were somewhat easy to spot).

I'd be happy to learn you about the specifics of impeachment as it applies to any other branch of the US Government. All ya gotta do is ask. Sheesh.
yr precious geezer. thanks for the laugh. are u takin' yr meds?
Ben Sen,

Kendinizi sikeyim! Lutfen.
No, we'll be stuck with him for 4 (or more) years. The American public has been duped. BO will get away with every last thing, Oh, that's right, he has done no wrong. Everything's fine. Feel like having a Coke or maybe some popcorn?
Thanks, Jeana,
Hard to imagine that they can repeal the two-term amendment, but Obama is very creative with Executive Orders. He may find a way.
"myrmidons"? holy cow I gotta go read the dictionary and get back to ya, man. you say there was a coverup of benghazi attack-- what exactly was being covered up, dude?
what was covered up was the origin of the attack. it was a terrorist strike. obama, mrs. clinton, susan rice and jay carney kept insisting that it was a spontaneous reaction to an odious anti-Muslim video. They were saying this long after they knew better. The idea was to lay the blame off on someone else, because their own lax vigilance allowed it to happen. the ambassador had begged for more protection from the state dept.

This was in the heat of the election campaign, and obama, who had claimed that he had virtually destroyed al-qaeda, was afraid this incident would hurt his election chances if the truth were told.

hope that helps.