A simple question

[maxiep]

In his Super Bowl interview, President Obama stated there wasn't a "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS.

If so, why did Lois Lerner just plead the Fifth in front of Congress?

 

[Denny Crane]

In his Super Bowl interview, President Obama stated there wasn't a "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS.

If so, why did Lois Lerner just plead the Fifth in front of Congress?

It's a smart thing to do when there's a fishing expedition looking to get you on something.

 

[maxiep]

It's a smart thing to do when there's a fishing expedition looking to get you on something.

That explanation defies Occam's Razor.

 

[Denny Crane]

That explanation defies Occam's Razor.

If you say so. She isn't going to testify against herself.

If they have a crime to charge her with, bring it on.

 

[MarAzul]

If you say so. She isn't going to testify against herself.

If they have a crime to charge her with, bring it on.

Yep, I think it is time to do just that. Appoint a special prosecutor and rack her arse up first, then proceed to next. I don't think she is the top dog in this bullshit scheme.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yep, I think it is time to do just that. Appoint a special prosecutor and rack her arse up first, then proceed to next. I don't think she is the top dog in this bullshit scheme.

Then grant her immunity. She'd have to testify then, or go to jail.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

The NSA won't appreciate this thread.

 

[maxiep]

If you say so. She isn't going to testify against herself.

If they have a crime to charge her with, bring it on.

But if it's just a fishing expedition, what would she have to say that would incriminate herself? She's pure as the driven snow, right?

 

[MarAzul]

But if it's just a fishing expedition, what would she have to say that would incriminate herself? She's pure as the driven snow, right?

Absolutely, We have Obama's word, there wasn't a "smidgeon" of wrong doing.

 

[MARIS61]

WHEN DID YOU STOP BEATING YOUR WIFE?

 

[jlprk]

Today Issa made a 15-minute speech, then cutoff power to the Ranking Democrat's microphone, accusing him of wanting to make a speech. Watch this video.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/issa-shuts-down-his-own-irs-hearing

 

[jlprk]

Ranking Democrat Cummings (#2 on the committee) kept talking without his mike and no one could hear him. He tried to note facts that Issa had deliberately excluded from his investigation, such as the IRS Inspector General’s report that found not a conspiracy directed by the White House, but an ad hoc decision by a local IRS manager who was himself a Republican.

Here's a list of Issa's many failed anti-Obama investigations.

http://www.salon.com/2014/03/05/dar...arrell_issa_is_bad_at_investigating_scandals/

 

[Natebishop3]

There is corruption in all levels of government. To think that there isn't corruption in the IRS is both naive and foolish.

 

[Denny Crane]

But if it's just a fishing expedition, what would she have to say that would incriminate herself? She's pure as the driven snow, right?

If there's a crime, convene a grand jury. I don't see one. Nor do I see a special prosecutor.

If she says anything at all that she's mistaken about or some other witness doesn't verify, she would be up for perjury. She'd be going under oath against hostile examination. It is a circus atmosphere where they are looking to beat their chests over this perceived slight. She wants no part of it, which is understandable.

Pleasing the 5th simply is not an admission of guilt.

If they are interested in finding the truth, they'll grant her immunity. Then she can't plead the 5th because she can't incriminate herself.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

In his Super Bowl interview, President Obama stated there wasn't a "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS.

If so, why did Lois Lerner just plead the Fifth in front of Congress?

My guess is that Obama didn't think when asked that there was corruption in the IRS.

Today he knows differently.

So the questions is.... what's he gonna do about it?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Then grant her immunity. She'd have to testify then, or go to jail.

This is the way to go. I dont think it will ever happen though. I would have to believe that back room deals have already been made to avoid tarnishing obama in any way.

 

[Eastoff]

It seems like posturing by the Republicans to me, but I can understand your point Maxie.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

It seems like posturing by the Republicans to me, but I can understand your point Maxie.

please let me make sure that I am not misunderstanding you. By posturing, are you implying that nothing happened? That this bitch was called in for questioning only for show? would you please enlighten me?

 

[Eastoff]

please let me make sure that I am not misunderstanding you. By posturing, are you implying that nothing happened? That this bitch was called in for questioning only for show? would you please enlighten me?

I would happy to expound upon my opinion. I think there was something inappropriate that occurred, but I don't think it was as bad as the situation the Republicans are trying to frame. I don't think it's fair to call her a bitch. I do think she was called in just for show.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

I would happy to expound upon my opinion. I think there was something inappropriate that occurred, but I don't think it was as bad as the situation the Republicans are trying to frame. I don't think it's fair to call her a bitch. I do think she was called in just for show.

wow..so all of the numbers that show an overwhelming amount of biased actions in several offices, that was ordered to be preformed by upper management who in turn were instructed by their bosses..all of this already on record, is "republicans trying to frame her" I will disagree with you,I believe her actions to date do indeed earn her the title of bitch. I also believe that she was called in to try to get her to say who instructed her to do what she did..many believe that it leads to the oval office..truth be told, I doubt anything comes of it.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I would happy to expound upon my opinion. I think there was something inappropriate that occurred, but I don't think it was as bad as the situation the Republicans are trying to frame. I don't think it's fair to call her a bitch. I do think she was called in just for show.

Something is clearly amiss. Maybe it's a big deal and maybe it's not. But as politics go, the party not currently occupying the White House always makes a big show of it all.

 

[Eastoff]

Something is clearly amiss. Maybe it's a big deal and maybe it's not. But as politics go, the party not currently occupying the White House always makes a big show of it all.

Thank you for a civil, and non-attacking response.

 

[maxiep]

If there's a crime, convene a grand jury. I don't see one. Nor do I see a special prosecutor.

If she says anything at all that she's mistaken about or some other witness doesn't verify, she would be up for perjury. She'd be going under oath against hostile examination. It is a circus atmosphere where they are looking to beat their chests over this perceived slight. She wants no part of it, which is understandable.

Pleasing the 5th simply is not an admission of guilt.

If they are interested in finding the truth, they'll grant her immunity. Then she can't plead the 5th because she can't incriminate herself.

First, if Congress finds her in contempt, it's up the AG to proscecute. Holder isn't going to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Second, if she gets immunity, she then takes the blame for everything and it goes no further.

You're smarter than this, Denny.

 

[Denny Crane]

First, if Congress finds her in contempt, it's up the AG to proscecute. Holder isn't going to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Second, if she gets immunity, she then takes the blame for everything and it goes no further.

You're smarter than this, Denny.

Immunity doesn't allow her to lie. She can still be charged with perjury. It does mean what she testifies to that is truthful can't be used against her.

She's not testifying. I'm smart enough to figure out why.

 

[maxiep]

Immunity doesn't allow her to lie. She can still be charged with perjury. It does mean what she testifies to that is truthful can't be used against her.

She's not testifying. I'm smart enough to figure out why.

And if she takes the blame, how would we know she's not lying? Is someone above her going to raise their hand and say, "I did it."?

The people in the administration above her and Democrats have both a bigger carrot and a bigger stick than do those investigating her.

 

[Denny Crane]

And if she takes the blame, how would we know she's not lying? Is someone above her going to raise their hand and say, "I did it."?

The people in the administration above her and Democrats have both a bigger carrot and a bigger stick than do those investigating her.

If they find ONE email that counters what she testifies to, she's toast.