Hi Pen;

I can see a lot of problems facing the investigators, and they are large enough to require extreme caution. If they go too far, and uncover the wrong things in the process (which I feel they should no matter what), they could upset the balance of power on the planet. Now while I believe that may simply be a consequence of our lack of diligence, I also think we should stop to consider the consequences should America be removed from that power balance. What type of regimes would be left as the major powers?

And here is why I'm thinking like this. If some of the things I suspect do come to light, we will be placed in the unenviable position of dressing a president in orange, and shipping him off to the Hague to stand trial for war crimes against humanity. They are the place where they do that now, are they not? If they do uncover this type of crime, and we both know they are there to discover, then the only proper actions would be to either ship him (and all accomplices) out, or try him ourselves. I do believe the latter would be more of a formality, because the Geneva Convention probably requires the World Court to try all war criminals. I am suspicious that he is already in violation of the convention because of one particular definition he had redefined to validate the drone attacks. Yes, he has taken the one step that Bush knew better about. He had the definition of a terrorist broadened to include everybody of military age in a war zone. Pretty arrogant of him/them, was it not?

What would the consequences of that be? I've been running them through my head for days now, and have yet to see a good conclusion. That alone prevents me from coming out and saying so be it, but that will probably be my position in any case. If we followed the proper course of action, I don't think it would take long for America to regain respect in the world. But if we uncover things and do not ............. ? I pray that this will not impede the progress of any investigation. McCain in particular would probably be eager to ship him off in that case. His experience in the Hanoi Hilton should be more than enough to make him demand it. I am prepared for any eventuality myself, but what about the Democrats? Would the obvious damage it would do to their party make them fight something like this tooth and nail? If I were among their ranks, I would be ready to change parties myself.

As for those who do not believe something like this could happen, I suggest they get a life, and get real. America won't fight a war to protect a president who tried to take her down once he's totally exposed.

I am in total agreement with you regarding the hero status of the whistle blowers. They were probably raised in a manner which left them no choice, but it still took a lot of courage to step forward. Their position is not one of envy. Of course Holy Wood will change that once it's time for movie and book deals (you don't think they'll sell out their ideals if money is to be made?), but right now I'm sure they are being presented some very bleak visions of their futures.

The bottom line is that if they can uncover evidence to incriminate the man (that hasn't been destroyed), he should be promptly impeached, and formally charged. We should also charge him for any damages the consequences of his actions will do to America, and reserve the right to punish him before he is sent to the world court, unless the crime is one that requires a blindfold and a cigarette. We are at war after all, as I don't recall any surrender or armistice taking place. I think this may be the reason he tried to personally declare the war over a year or two back. He may have foreseen the possibility of this happening back then. If so, that's just too damn bad. It only means that he knew the possible consequences of his actions before he took them. And what does his offering aid to an enemy of America in those (Al Qaeda) Syrian Rebels mean? Giving aid to the enemy in a time of war? I can guarantee you this is why McCain is pushing him to take the leap now that they have formally merged. Once he aids them in substantial fashion, they've got him. Have you wondered why he started pussy footing that issue? Well wonder no more. The man is in a corner.

I noticed that the lady who wrote the Benghazi article echoed a sentiment of mine. How much contempt would a person have to hold the American people in to lie to them continually like he has done? In my opinion, that alone should be enough to remove the man from office. If not, there are the multiple times he has blatantly broken his oath of office in full public view. The man could be impeached long before Benghazi is investigated and addressed. In my opinion that would be best. It would be much easier to go after a president who has already been removed from office in disgrace for crimes he should inevitably face. A sitting president might actually skate on some of them. That's what I fear anyway. It would send one clear message to any future president with power grabbing ideas as well.

Tim