Barlowe Bayer is an extremely Conservative individual who voted for Willard Mittens Romney in the last election. Although he only did so because Mittens was the better of two bad options. Although the two options were not equally bad.
Hussein was, BY FAR, the worse of the two bad options. We know that even more today (that Hussein was the worse option), what with this Nixonian use of the IRS to target his political enemies, his lying about Benghazi and (most recently) unconstitutionally going around congress and trading 5 Taliban terrorists for 1 scumbag deserter.
For these reasons Barlowe says president Hussein should be impeached. On this topic Barlowe is in complete agreement with the expert opinion of an ex-military man named William Boykin who says President Obama is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors in regards to the Bergdahl swap.
Boykin also says "Jews are the problem" and the "cause of all the problems in the world" and "that President Obama identifies with and supports Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood".
Now, in regards to those three assertions Barlowe is only in agreement with the third one (Hussein identifies with and supports Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood). The first two anti-Semitic sounding comments were picked up by a hot mic. Boykin did not intend them to be heard by anyone except the individual he was speaking with.
Given this fact, Barlowe will respect the Lieutenant General's privacy and forget about the seemingly anti-Semitic comments. If Boykin decides to "come out" and declare himself to be an anti-Semite that is one thing. Until then Barlowe will assume he is not.
In any case, what I'm discussing here is Hussein's traitorous sidestepping of congress in releasing Taliban terrorists from Gitmo. And in exchange from someone who CHOSE to leave his post (deserted). Barlowe is utterly disgusted by these actions and believes Hussein should be removed from office for this reason (one among many).
And then be shipped off to Gitmo himself. Yeah, that is a complete fantasy, I know. But just because there is zero chance of it happening does not mean it isn't EXACTLY what the terrorist-sympathizing Muslim deserves.
As for this Bergdahl wuss, the same goes for him. Lt. General Boykin believes Bergdahl "needs to spend the rest of his life in prison at a minimum" and Barlowe agrees. Send him to Gitmo, or just put a bullet in his head.
Now some may argue that "the 5 Taliban detainees had to be released soon, no matter what [because] when wars end, prisoners taken custody must be released". And these people may also point out that the "5 Gitmo detainees were almost all members of the Taliban [and] none were facing charges in either military or civilian courts for their actions".
To this Barlowe says - why the hell were they not facing charges? Why the hell have we not already tried and executed these 5 Taliban scumbag terrorists who will no doubt return to the battlefield after they are released?
Furthermore, why did this not already happen under former prez Bush? Barlowe has no idea, although he is inclined to believe the reason has something to do with a failure of leadership from the supposed Commander-in-Chief. Both of them... the ex-CIC and the present CIC (Bush and Hussein).
Although, in the case of Hussien, his failures, I am positive, are intentional... because he's a Muslim himself and sympathizes with his "brothers in arms" who are valiantly fighting to bring down the "Great Satan".
Which is why Hussein MUST be impeached. Or should be impeached.
But will he be? I doubt it. At the very least we need to elect a Republican president in 2016. If not... well, we're screwed. America will descend further into Socialism and our Nation (as we know it) will be lost.