Hmm, there appears to be a pattern with this woman: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...dium=email&utm_campaign=TWS Weekly Newsletter
heres the fucin deal if you have one of these orgs off running wild..well, its an isolated incident If you have two or so, you can pass it off as a coicidence but when you have five, fuck it...thats an agenda. You can not set an agenda without complance, and compliance can not be made with out direction
No big deal. The IRS did their own investigation and then hid the results from Congress...before the 2012 election. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...atives-official-refuses-answer-questions.html
Special Prosecutor more likely after today's evasive (or no) testimony? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/22/the-houses-irs-hearing-live-updates/
You linked a Washington Post (read, Liberal, Democrat, Obama loving mainstream media) article. :MARIS61:
Inspector general: Disclosure of tax info to Pro Publica ‘could have been’ illegal Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/21/i...ublica-could-have-been-illegal/#ixzz2U3qH1QV2
Could have been surely means absolutely was. From your article: He noted, however, that such behavior does not have “criminal penalties associated with it,” and that punishment would be “removal from the position.”
That was a comment about a different issue, ie the rules of IRS employment. Why do you persist is this kind of horseshit? Your rep is taking a major beating in this thread. Do you even care what folks think anymore? Seems not.
Just this thread? fuck... anymore its like he steps in dogshit and trys to tell us how bad the grass smells...
Later in the hearing, George added that under the Restructuring and Reform Act, there are considered to be “10 deadly sins” — one of which is the “revealing of tax information willfully to harm a taxpayer.” He noted, however, that such behavior does not have “criminal penalties associated with it,” and that punishment would be “removal from the position.” D'oh! there goes your theory shot down in flames.
What crime? Who's going to be charged with something? Read that real carefully. To harm. Implies intent to harm.
Rep. Gowdy, a former prosecutor, nailed Lerner on procedural rules because she gave an opening statement. She'll have to go in front of the committee again. Special prosecutor is right around the corner... http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...fth_amendment_rights_by_giving_statement.html
IRS Chief visited WH 118 times in 104 months. Why is the head of the IRS at the WH that much? Is this common protocol?
Actually, she does get to selectively plead the 5th. In a court, she would have to take the witness stand to waive the 5th. Here she was compelled to appear, and there was no witness stand. She did announce well ahead of time she'd be pleading the fifth. Issa made her appear anyway. It's ok though. Some people don't care about HER rights, eh?
She then gave a statement of innocence, after which she pled the 5th to not self-incriminate herself. "Hey, I'm innocent. What, you want to ask questions? No way!" She's guilty as hell, as is this entire corrupt administration. Look up what she did as the head of the FEC and the Christian Coalition, a case she lost. Frankly, though, I'm bored with you and your nonsense, so this will be our last exchange. Please allow me to ignore you, because you've already been proven to be a liar in this thread.
The most bizarre thing to me is that a self-proclaimed "Libertarian" is the most staunch defender of what are obvious lies and corruption, and lies on his own ($1b by Tea Party groups) in his defense. Scary mindset...
