• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House says IRS official waived rights, contempt possible

This is not the point. Harassment doesn't only become harassment if there is a negative conclusion to the practice.



Again, side issue here...The IG's audit found that conservative groups were targeted for undue scrutiny. That is a fact.



Again, not the point. Do you think that harassment of political opponents is justified in an election season, using a agency like the IRS?



Obviously, from what I quoted from you above, as well as in this very sentence, in brackets, shows this statement to be untrue.



Is it wrong in an investigation to try and get to just how high this might have gone? Don't the American people deserve to know that? Or is it just this President you want to put 'off limits' to this oversight?



No. I would find that disappointing, and further evidence to why I consider Bush to have been a "progressive", only within the Republican party.



Weak man.....You're not taking sides, just name calling, and using pejorative defense....mmmmmm k, got it.



Ah well, as long as it is against some group you don't like, all's good.



Now there is some real irony right there....You're judging "bias", while displaying bias yourself in doing so....:lol:



"They did it too" justifications are never an excuse. Why are you not willing to look at the here, and now?



You don't mean that at all, as evidenced by to body of your post proceeding this sentence...



I can't speak for Fenton, but I have learned that we have yet another progressive poster, that makes it clear with avitar's, and posts that he is a progressive, spews progressive talking points, but yet hides their lean, and then thinks they are clever. That would not be clever sir, but disingenuous.

Wow. I'm flattered - thank you for all the words you took time to type out for me, but unfortunately there's too much here to respond to and I'm on my way out ... but I'll get back to you later when I have a little more time ... for now, let me just suggest to you that you take your own words on bias to heart yourself ... later my friend ...
 
It's amazing how quickly we go into topics that have absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The house does not have authority to make a legal determination. That's what the judiciary is for. The Legislature makes laws, the Judiciary interprets the law, and the Executive branch enforces the law.

I tend to ask questions when the absurdity of a post warrants such....But I understand why you wouldn't want to answer truthfully.
 
Wow. I'm flattered - thank you for all the words you took time to type out for me, but unfortunately there's too much here to respond to and I'm on my way out ... but I'll get back to you later when I have a little more time ... for now, let me just suggest to you that you take your own words on bias to heart yourself ... later my friend ...

I wouldn't be flattered when exposed so.....But I look forward to your response.
 
I tend to ask questions when the absurdity of a post warrants such....But I understand why you wouldn't want to answer truthfully.

Where exactly have I lied? This is kindergarten constitutional separation of powers.

The Republicans on the house committee voted that she waived her right to the 5th. It's not a legal opinion of any kind. They could have also voted that she has blue hair, with essentially the same effect.

It's an opinion of a legal matter by a legislature that carries no legal weight.

It's amazing how quickly we go into topics that have absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The house does not have authority to make a legal determination. That's what the judiciary is for. The Legislature makes laws, the Judiciary interprets the law, and the Executive branch enforces the law.
 
Where exactly have I lied? This is kindergarten constitutional separation of powers.

Well, then according to you, why would anyone take the oath? Or for that matter, why would anyone tell the truth to a congressional committee if they carry no force?
 
Was a conservative group's status taken away? Was it warranted? Let's
take Rove's Crossroads group, clearly a partisan political group ... was its 501(c)(4) status revoked? Make sure you don't do this prematurely as well Fenton ... I'll wait until everything is in to make a judgment (I just wish Issa wasn't involved since anything he touches is dirty), and suggest you do the same. And let's be honest, this too is about Obama, and Issa is trying hard to connect him to it. Wouldn't it be funny if we find that under Bush liberal groups were scrutinized more closely than conservative groups? But you have an advantage over me Fenton ... even if the evidence in the end contradicts you and your friend Grand Theft Auto Issa, it won't matter will it? Anyway, while there appears to be bias in who was targeted by the IRS, I'm willing to wager that conservative groups are more likely than liberal groups to violate their status. We'll see what happens, and I'd be interested in knowing whether there had been periods when liberal groups were unfairly targeted -- neither of which would be right, as it would not be right to give this status to groups who do not deserve it. Have a good day, and I hope you've learned something from my post and that you take my advice and slow down ...

Lol !

You can keep your "wisdom" backed by blind allegiance and generic ignorance. There is nothing you could teach me.

You purposely ignore pertinent information and construct a fairy tale world where the IRS didn't do anything wrong and applied their targeting evenly to all political groups.

You ignore the leaked donor list, the Commissioners statement that there was no evidence Progressive groups were treated unfairly, Lerner's planted question so she could lie about the front line agents in Cinci, her taking the Fifth, the multiple letters signed by her that went out to Conservative groups, the multiple letters signed by Carter Hull that directy contradict Lerners LIE that this was isolated to the Cinci office.

When I want a line of Bull Sh** that includes a bunch of pathetic Bush Blame and just loads of flat out innacurate information I'll ask you because its ALL you have to offer.
 
The only thing the 5th Amendment does is protect you from incriminating yourself.

And since there is no power in the constitution for the govt to compel you to speak, the 10th amendment reserves that right to the people.
 
No, the government cannot 'make her talk' but she can longer invoke the fifth because she has already testified. You cannot make statements in court, which she did, and then invoke the fifth. It's curious why the Democrats would want her to remain silent.

There is no such exception in the constitution. Your rights are unalieanble and can not be waived without your consent, at whatever time you choose.
 
I wouldn't be flattered when exposed so.....But I look forward to your response.

Exposed? LOL ... at least you have a sense of humor ... still, I know that writing all of those words, especially stringing them together into sentences was not easy for you, so I'm appreciative ... (I also forgot to tell you that you don't have to refer to me as "sir" ... WD -- as in Weapons of Mass Destruction without the middle initial -- is good enough) ...

Anyway, now that I have a little time, it turns out there was less to respond to than at first met the eye ... I was fooled by all the words ...

First, I asked if a group's status was taken away because the poster I responded to suggested it had been ...

Second, on the scrutiny, and this refers to one your later points, it appears that this time the right may have been scrutinized more, and I acknowledged that -- BUT, I think the IRS should scrutinize them and organizations on the left much more than they do -

Third, you're suggesting that the Obama campaign and administration used the IRS to target their political opponents? Kinda like the stuff Issa does, selectively releasing transcripts ... BTW, who was running the Cinn. IRS office during this time? A liberal Democrat? A Conservative Republican? Do you know?

Fourth, are you suggesting that Issa can be trusted to run a fair investigation? That alone should disqualify you from posting on DebatePolitics. For one thing, you don't begin with Obama did it, as Issa, you, and other cons think an investiogation should be conducted .... investigate, no innuendo along the way, and when you're done, report on what you found ...

Bush a progressive? Really? O.K. ... I'll leave that one alone and consider it a self-inflicted wound to your post ...

Weak man? LOL ... listen, if you want to hitch your wagon to one of Issa's stolen cars, knock yourself out ...

BTW, where you see irony, there is no irony ... but I've seen this before from people who think they're a lot more clever than they are ...

My interest in wanting to know if this has happened in the past is to see if there are any hypocrites in our midst ... I can't judge the now because we still don't have all of the data and Issa is messing this up too in his personal vendetta against the President ...

I say what I mean, but if you know better what I'm thinking, O.K. ...

What avitar? I didn't know I had one. What do you mean by "hides their lean?" I'm sorry that you think I'm disingenuous (I guess I'm being disingenuous by saying that, aren't I?) -- but as I said, "sir" is not necessary ... you and I are old friends now ...
 
Lol !

You can keep your "wisdom" backed by blind allegiance and generic ignorance. There is nothing you could teach me.

You purposely ignore pertinent information and construct a fairy tale world where the IRS didn't do anything wrong and applied their targeting evenly to all political groups.

You ignore the leaked donor list, the Commissioners statement that there was no evidence Progressive groups were treated unfairly, Lerner's planted question so she could lie about the front line agents in Cinci, her taking the Fifth, the multiple letters signed by her that went out to Conservative groups, the multiple letters signed by Carter Hull that directy contradict Lerners LIE that this was isolated to the Cinci office.

When I want a line of Bull Sh** that includes a bunch of pathetic Bush Blame and just loads of flat out innacurate information I'll ask you because its ALL you have to offer.

sorry you're unteachable, but see my response to your champion, J-Mac ... take care and good luck with your witch hunts (sometimes these threads sound like late 17th century Salem), wars against women, voters, the poor and working class, and immigrants ...
 
sorry you're unteachable, but see my response to your champion, J-Mac ...
take care and good luck with your witch hunts (sometimes these threads sound like late 17th century Salem), wars against women, voters, the poor and working class, and immigrants ...

Teach what ? You don't posess any wisdom.

Your typical post paraphrased follows.

The IRS did nothing wrong..talking points, talking points , talking points, witch-hunt, Obama's great, bad stuff Bush's fault, talking points, talking points and opinions, opinions.

Now I already knew you were going to spout off a bunch of nonsense, platitudes and talking points before you showed up here lowering the collective IQ of your left wing ilk 10. points.

So you have nothing to teach me because your speil is highly expected
 
Exposed? LOL ... at least you have a sense of humor ... still, I know that writing all of those words, especially stringing them together into sentences was not easy for you, so I'm appreciative ... (I also forgot to tell you that you don't have to refer to me as "sir" ... WD -- as in Weapons of Mass Destruction without the middle initial -- is good enough) ...

Anyway, now that I have a little time, it turns out there was less to respond to than at first met the eye ... I was fooled by all the words ...

First, I asked if a group's status was taken away because the poster I responded to suggested it had been ...

Second, on the scrutiny, and this refers to one your later points, it appears that this time the right may have been scrutinized more, and I acknowledged that -- BUT, I think the IRS should scrutinize them and organizations on the left much more than they do -

Third, you're suggesting that the Obama campaign and administration used the IRS to target their political opponents? Kinda like the stuff Issa does, selectively releasing transcripts ... BTW, who was running the Cinn. IRS office during this time? A liberal Democrat? A Conservative Republican? Do you know?

Fourth, are you suggesting that Issa can be trusted to run a fair investigation? That alone should disqualify you from posting on DebatePolitics. For one thing, you don't begin with Obama did it, as Issa, you, and other cons think an investiogation should be conducted .... investigate, no innuendo along the way, and when you're done, report on what you found ...

Bush a progressive? Really? O.K. ... I'll leave that one alone and consider it a self-inflicted wound to your post ...

Weak man? LOL ... listen, if you want to hitch your wagon to one of Issa's stolen cars, knock yourself out ...

BTW, where you see irony, there is no irony ... but I've seen this before from people who think they're a lot more clever than they are ...

My interest in wanting to know if this has happened in the past is to see if there are any hypocrites in our midst ... I can't judge the now because we still don't have all of the data and Issa is messing this up too in his personal vendetta against the President ...

I say what I mean, but if you know better what I'm thinking, O.K. ...

What avitar? I didn't know I had one. What do you mean by "hides their lean?" I'm sorry that you think I'm disingenuous (I guess I'm being disingenuous by saying that, aren't I?) -- but as I said, "sir" is not necessary ... you and I are old friends now ...


Well, It is truly too bad that your talent of expressing yourself in words is wasted on progressive propaganda, and blind allegiance to protecting those that would break the law, gladly in your mind because your political opponents must deserve it, because they disagree with you. I can only assume you are a young man, because the arrogance is rarely seen in those of us that have lived long enough to see. Finally, You hate Issa, we get it, it's noted, as is your defense of wanting to stifle an investigation, and support lying to congress.

Friends? hmmmmm....don't know you, so I can't say if I think you are a friend or not...Based on our limited exchange, my guess is not.
 
Teach what ? You don't posess any wisdom.

Your typical post paraphrased follows.

The IRS did nothing wrong..talking points, talking points , talking points, witch-hunt, Obama's great, bad stuff Bush's fault, talking points, talking points and opinions, opinions.

Now I already knew you were going to spout off a bunch of nonsense, platitudes and talking points before you showed up here lowering the collective IQ of your left wing ilk 10. points.

So you have nothing to teach me because your speil is highly expected

you must've written bad papers in school because your paraphrasing skills stink ... but I can help you with that as well ... let me know ...

I lowered the IQ for the left ilk only 10 Points? Normally I lower it 15 in order to be able to talk with you, so this is good news for both of us, but moreso for you ...

Were you expecting this post?:2wave:
 
Well, It is truly too bad that your talent of expressing yourself in words is wasted on progressive propaganda, and blind allegiance to protecting those that would break the law, gladly in your mind because your political opponents must deserve it, because they disagree with you. I can only assume you are a young man, because the arrogance is rarely seen in those of us that have lived long enough to see. Finally, You hate Issa, we get it, it's noted, as is your defense of wanting to stifle an investigation, and support lying to congress.

Friends? hmmmmm....don't know you, so I can't say if I think you are a friend or not...Based on our limited exchange, my guess is not.

this has to be one of the shortest friendships I've ever had ... but it was good while it lasted ...

J, you and Fenton seem to have a difficult time understanding other posters' posts ... but I'm going to leave it there if it's O.K. with you ...

I'm screwing around with the arrogance stuff, but thank you for thinking me much younger than I am ... a lot of people tell me I look younger than what I am ...

Hate Issa? I don't hate Issa - he's not worth the trouble hate requires ... Are you an Obama hater? If you are, that might help to explain why you think I hate Issa. It's not always about hate my former friend ...

take care ... but we do agree that if someone used the power of the IRS to go after groups unfairly, they should be held accountable -- and that has started to happen ... BTW, was it a conservative Republican IRS employee who started this extra scrutiny of con organizations? That's what I read somewhere ... Can you confirm that? You seem to be following this very closely ...
 
And since there is no power in the constitution for the govt to compel you to speak, the 10th amendment reserves that right to the people.

Yes there is. It' called contempt.
 
this has to be one of the shortest friendships I've ever had ... but it was
good while it lasted ...

J, you and Fenton seem to have a difficult time understanding other posters' posts ... but I'm going to leave it there if it's O.K. with you ...

I'm screwing around with the arrogance stuff, but thank you for thinking me much younger than I am ... a lot of people tell me I look younger than what I am ...

Hate Issa? I don't hate Issa - he's not worth the trouble hate requires ... Are you an Obama hater? If you are, that might help to explain why you think I hate Issa. It's not always about hate my former friend ...

take care ... but we do agree that if someone used the power of the IRS to go after groups unfairly, they should be held accountable -- and that has started to happen ... BTW, was it a conservative Republican IRS employee who started this extra scrutiny of con organizations? That's what I read somewhere ... Can you confirm that? You seem to be following this very closely ...

Just because your'e more sucseptable to Democrat Lies and manufacured narratives doesn't mean you should take out your frustration on good highly intelligent people like Jack and I.

I mean after all thats been posted and exposed if I sincerely thought Cummings ridiculous attempt at cutting this investigation short by inventing this " Conservative Republican" IRS official who only sent back one case to Washington was the truth ?

Well I guess I would be pretty pissed off too.

But vent your self hate at something positive, constructive and quit taking it out on people who knew instinctively that the IRSs targeting was a product of Washington Liberal politics.

People that know its as bad as it sounds, people that knew Cummings was just making a desperate highly unethical attempt at shutting the IRS investigation down. You DO realize he concocted that BS for a reason right ?

A " CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN".....LOLOLOLOL !!!!

You could try those online " brain games ". They say they're supposed to make you smarter.

I don't waste time monkeying with those silly games of-course due to my brilliance being innate but you should give it a try.

I mean hell, lifes not fair, it's literally a roll of the dice..
Your'e either born with the cognitive potential to know instantly when your'e being lied to, manipulated.

Or your'e born with the cognitive potential to know, just barely and after a couple of failed attempts that a square peg won't fit into a round hole.
 
Just because your'e more sucseptable to Democrat Lies and manufacured narratives doesn't mean you should take out your frustration on good highly intelligent people like Jack and I.

I mean after all thats been posted and exposed if I sincerely thought Cummings ridiculous attempt at cutting this investigation short by inventing this " Conservative Republican" IRS official who only sent back one case to Washington was the truth ?

Well I guess I would be pretty pissed off too.

But vent your self hate at something positive, constructive and quit taking it out on people who knew instinctively that the IRSs targeting was a product of Washington Liberal politics.

People that know its as bad as it sounds, people that knew Cummings was just making a desperate highly unethical attempt at shutting the IRS investigation down. You DO realize he concocted that BS for a reason right ?

A " CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN".....LOLOLOLOL !!!!

You could try those online " brain games ". They say they're supposed to make you smarter.

I don't waste time monkeying with those silly games of-course due to my brilliance being innate but you should give it a try.

I mean hell, lifes not fair, it's literally a roll of the dice..
Your'e either born with the cognitive potential to know instantly when your'e being lied to, manipulated.

Or your'e born with the cognitive potential to know, just barely and after a couple of failed attempts that a square peg won't fit into a round hole.

How did I go from being arrogant to self hate? Damn Fen ... get your story straight, and quit saying how intelligent you are ... when you have to tell people how intelligent you are, something's wrong ... it should be obvious -- and while the opposite is true in your case, you stand a better chance of getting people to think you're intelligent by not calling attention to your intelligence, because they will then scrutinize your posts more carefully and realize that you're not ... as one of your best friends on these threads, some friendly advice) ...

as far as Cummings making this up, you don't believe the following? (it'll be so easy to discredit if it's not) ...

A series of emails and transcripts demonstrate that Cincinnati-based agents saw Tea Party protesters on television and informed Washington D.C. about a Tea Party group’s application for tax-exempt status. Soon, D.C. officials decided to target groups with conservative orientations. According to USA Today, “The records show that it was low-level employees in Cincinnati -- where all tax-exempt applications are processed --who first flagged Tea Party cases for review, but they engaged their managers in Washington early on.”

The initiator of the original scrutiny was IRS agent Jack Koester, who emailed his boss, John Shafer. Shafer informed his superiors in D.C., who quickly elevated it as a “high profile case.” Shafter wrote, “This case will be sent to inventory for further development. Political campaigns on behalf (of) or in opposition to any political candidate do not promote social welfare.”

A few days later, Shafer told another Cincinnati-based agent, Gary Muthert, to look up the number of Tea Party applicants. Shafer said, “No one said to make a search.” Soon, Elizabeth Hofacre, Cincinnati coordinator for emerging issues, said, “These cases were basically in a black hole.”

Shafer, who says he is a “conservative Republican,” said that he didn’t believe the White House was involved in targeting. “I do not believe that the screening of these cases had anything to do (with it) other than consistency and identifying issues that needed to have further development,” he added.
 
this has to be one of the shortest friendships I've ever had ... but it was good while it lasted ...

Don't fret it dude, in the real world I think one must carefully consider whom they choose as a friend. It is an important role for both parties, and I don't throw the term around casually. On the internet, it is even more important in my eyes to be cautious.

J, you and Fenton seem to have a difficult time understanding other posters' posts ... but I'm going to leave it there if it's O.K. with you ...

Disagreement with political posting does not construe difficulty understanding. I understand just fine.

I'm screwing around with the arrogance stuff...

Well, I would just offer a bit of advice. The written word sometimes is hard enough to determine when someone is "screwing around", so as a relatively new poster, I'd bag the hijinks till people know you better.

Hate Issa? I don't hate Issa - he's not worth the trouble hate requires ... Are you an Obama hater? If you are, that might help to explain why you think I hate Issa. It's not always about hate my former friend ...

Point taken.

... but we do agree that if someone used the power of the IRS to go after groups unfairly, they should be held accountable -- and that has started to happen...

Really? How's that? Because what I've seen so far is one guy stepping down, that was going to retire anyway two weeks after the dog and pony show of tendering his resignation. The real players in this are either promoted, on leave with pay, or reassigned. Oh, and all just got bonuses costing the very tax payers they were bullying, some $70 million dollars! Now there's accountability for you.....:roll:

... BTW, was it a conservative Republican IRS employee who started this extra scrutiny of con organizations? That's what I read somewhere ... Can you confirm that? You seem to be following this very closely ...

Oh, so you are clinging to Cummings's BS claim eh? Nah, that was just a weak attempt for the disingenuous Congressman to try and roll out the 'move along, nothing to see here' banner....Most intelligent people in this country saw right through it....
 
Why isn't she an ex-IRS official?
 
Don't fret it dude, in the real world I think one must carefully consider whom they choose as a friend. It is an important role for both parties, and I don't throw the term around casually. On the internet, it is even more important in my eyes to be cautious.



Disagreement with political posting does not construe difficulty understanding. I understand just fine.



Well, I would just offer a bit of advice. The written word sometimes is hard enough to determine when someone is "screwing around", so as a relatively new poster, I'd bag the hijinks till people know you better.



Point taken.



Really? How's that? Because what I've seen so far is one guy stepping down, that was going to retire anyway two weeks after the dog and pony show of tendering his resignation. The real players in this are either promoted, on leave with pay, or reassigned. Oh, and all just got bonuses costing the very tax payers they were bullying, some $70 million dollars! Now there's accountability for you.....:roll:



Oh, so you are clinging to Cummings's BS claim eh? Nah, that was just a weak attempt for the disingenuous Congressman to try and roll out the 'move along, nothing to see here' banner....Most intelligent people in this country saw right through it....

there's not much to respond to here, but you believe that what Cummings said is made up? Even though it is so easy to check? Has that been shown not to be true? I may have missed it, or is this another con talking point? you guys are so bent on going after this president (from day one), that sometimes you overreach, so let me offer you some advice since I suspect you are a relatively young person and not the most critical of thinkers ... Just stick with the facts, but more importantly, let the investigation run its course, tell Issa to try to be at least a little even-handed so that people will take the committee's findings seriously (although you cons may have killed any chance of that by having Issa, of all people, head this investigation), and take it from there ... it is in the interest of people on the right and left to make sure that the IRS does not abuse its power ... remember,

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)
 
there's not much to respond to here, but you believe that what Cummings
said is made up? Even though it is so easy to check? Has that been shown not to be true? I may have missed it, or is this another con talking point? you guys are so bent on going after this president (from day one), that sometimes you overreach, so let me offer you some advice since I suspect you are a relatively young person and not the most critical of thinkers ... Just stick with the facts, but more importantly, let the investigation run its course, tell Issa to try to be at least a little even-handed so that people will take the committee's findings seriously (although you cons may have killed any chance of that by having Issa, of all people, head this investigation), and take it from there ... it is in the interest of people on the right and left to make sure that the IRS does not abuse its power ... remember,

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)

Why do you even participate in this debate if you admit your'e poorly informed on this subject ?

You " read somewhere a Republican Conservative " was the genesis of the IRSs targeting ?

Your'e basically trolling this thread bilnded by ideology refusing to apply any objective effort to educating yourself thoroughly.

Because if you had, you wouldn't be making ridiculous claims that give Cummings credibillity.

Let the grown ups talk from now on about the IRSs scandal and quit embarrassing yourself.
 
Why do you even participate in this debate if you admit your'e poorly informed on this subject ?

You " read somewhere a Republican Conservative " was the genesis of the IRSs targeting ?

Your'e basically trolling this thread bilnded by ideology refusing to apply any objective effort to educating yourself thoroughly.

Because if you had, you wouldn't be making ridiculous claims that give Cummings credibillity.

Let the grown ups talk from now on about the IRSs scandal and quit embarrassing yourself.

now you're being blatantly dishonest ... that's not entirely true (my apologies) ... you've been blatantly dishonest in the past ... Cummings released portions of the interviews, as Issa had been doing ... I provided you with an article, or was it the other poster on your con tag team? ...

Let me give you the same advice, despite the fact that you are unteachable ... see the investigation all the way through (it's the American way) ... who knows, we may be on the same side when it's all over ... I know that there aren't many Republicans with integrity, but there are some (or so I'm told) ... so why Issa of all people? - even many Republicans think he's slimy ...
 
now you're being blatantly dishonest
... that's not entirely true (my apologies) ... you've been blatantly dishonest in the past ... Cummings released portions of the interviews, as Issa had been doing ... I provided you with an article, or was it the other poster on your con tag team? ...

Let me give you the same advice, despite the fact that you are unteachable ... see the investigation all the way through (it's the American way) ... who knows, we may be on the same side when it's all over ... I know that there aren't many Republicans with integrity, but there are some (or so I'm told) ... so why Issa of all people? - even many Republicans think he's slimy ...

The fact remains, your'e actually trying to mitigate the IRSs specific targeting of Free Americans and your'e using Cummings ridiculous assertion as your only point of information.

What are you going to teach me ? How to blindly follow a corrupt ideology ?
 
The fact remains, your'e actually trying to mitigate the IRSs specific targeting of Free Americans and your'e using Cummings ridiculous assertion as your only point of information.

What are you going to teach me ? How to blindly follow a corrupt ideology ?

now you're boring me .... :yawn:
 
Back
Top Bottom