She could have answered every other question and pled the 5th every other one. I don't know that much about her. She's a career public servant who's specialty for her last two positions was to crack down on tax code violators. And she's a lawyer. A prosecutor in her own right. She likely knows better than anyone on the planet if she broke some law. She told the world she is pleading the fifth because she's innocent. There's no requirement she can't say what she wants about her reasons.
Bill Keller of the NY Times suggests Obama call republicans' bluff by appointing a special counsel. He suggests Patrick Fitzgerald or Ken Starr. I'd be fine with it. How about Ted Olson? Rudy? Take your pick. It won't matter.
So much for the "rogue" agents in Cincinnati excuse, although Lerner taking the 5th makes that laughable, anyhow. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/348983/oversight-washington-all-along-eliana-johnson
Hmm... Probably the next to be called, considering there is protocol, and the "rogue agent" excuse was an obvious lie. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/carolplattliebau/2013/05/22/who-is-cindy-thomas-n1603794
IRS emails: Look for statements 'critical' of government http://news.cincinnati.com/interact...statements-critical-government?nclick_check=1
It was completely unprecedented for the President to blast the Supreme Court Justices in the state of the Union address for their decision. I don't know if he did more to prod the IRS minions into action But he surely did motivate the predominately left public employees in to action with the shots he took at the Justices that night. I don't know what the heck the man expected to happen in result, But then he did not do a damn thing to prevent them from running amuck did he? What I want is to have everyone know Obama did do the deed whether he knows it or not. He is guilty of the causing the problem or guilty of not preventing it. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/was...he-supreme-court-campaign-finance-ruling.html
I agree he sets the tone. I agree you can pin the FAIL on the donkey and win. Having lived through Watergate, this isn't even close. And the heated rhetoric is a loser.
That is likely to be true. But, the investigations have just started. So, how the hell do you know? Answer: you don't. You have made up your mind in advance. Pretty lame.
Here's one of the terrifying faces of the Tea Party. What she said is perfect: http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/06/i-am-not-here-as-serf-or-vassal-i-am.html
My position is innocent until proven guilty. Others' positions seem to be he's guilty of all Nixon's crime without any proof at all. Which is lame? Do tell?
Cavity search? Just a thought, less personal attacks against Fez would probably increase the odds for him to take you seriously.
So we agree about the IRS. If it were up to me, there'd be no income tax - the whole concept is a massive invasion of privacy.
Only republicans can be pissed that they were targeted for not having their political nominee parties subsidized by tax payers.
Wrong. Show these "subsidies". Links. You are spewing Dem operatives propaganda disinformation talking points. Study a bit more before mouthing off.
I trust you would be ok with the next republican president allowing the IRS to harass these folks about their tax status: MoveOn.org Planned Parenthood Abortion clinics The Socialist Worker's Party Acorn (or whatever they're called now) The Progressive Majority Media Matters Progressive Radio Network Americans for Democratic Action NARAL There are lots of others that could be listed that a new R. prez make take pleasure in messing with. You would support a new president if he allowed that to happen then, right? Go Blazers
