"Issa had so little evidence that when pressed he pulled out his standard cry that the White House won’t turn over the documents. Rep. Issa’s standard move when pressed for facts is to go all X-Files and claim the truth is out there, but Obama won’t let him have access to it.
By claiming that the administration is lying without any proof to back it up, Issa has revealed that the IRS investigation is nothing more than another partisan witch hunt. The good news is that after getting burned by the Republican edited Benghazi emails, parts of the media are showing more caution when dealing with Issa’s conspiracy theories.
Instead of bolstering his case for White House involvement in the IRS scandal, Rep. Issa shot himself in the foot. Issa couldn’t control his Obama hate on camera, and his outburst has blown a giant hole in Republican claims that President Obama was behind the IRS scandal."
05 Jun 13
See the video of Isaa and judge for yourself.
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/06/02/issas-gall/
He is forced to concede by CNN’s Candy Crowley that even his cherry-picked statements from IRS employees prove absolutely nothing for his working assumption that the president somehow organized an inquisition of Tea Party groups via the IRS. Watch him come up completely empty.
Note his bald description of Jay Carney: a “paid liar.” Maybe this is a good opportunity to revisit the past of the chief moral scold and smear artist in Washington. He’s been arrested for being a car thief, suspected of being an arsonist, and exposed as a proven liar.
No one’s past is perfect and everyone deserves a second chance. But if you apply the standards of evidence Issa uses to indict the president – pure innuendo, speculation and smears – then you can fairly say that Issa was a likely car thief, con-man, and arsonist. Having figured out how to steal cars, he then repurposed his expertise to set up a company to prevent car theft. In the end, it made him a multi-millionaire. And former crook.
Originally posted by moon1969One isn't related to the other. I for one never believed that any crime was committed with respect to Benghazi; just cowardice and lack of carig and competence. But administrations don't get to just not answer questions. The American people have a right to know what their government does. We're paying for it; the government is our servant, not the other way around (although that attitude seems quaint today).
"Issa had so little evidence that when pressed he pulled out his standard cry that the White House won’t turn over the documents. Rep. Issa’s standard move when pressed for facts is to go all X-Files and claim the truth is out there, but Obama won’t let him have access to it.
By claiming that the administration is lying without any proof to back it up, I ...[text shortened]... has blown a giant hole in Republican claims that President Obama was behind the IRS scandal."
Jon Stewart had a fantastic piece on the IRS scandal. Here is the one agency in the government that can turn people's lives upside down with a single phone call, being made to account for itself and answer questions. The head of the IRS visited the White House 157 times. Why? What was the content of those meetings? Taxes and Obamacare are not matters of national security. Certainly a President has the right to confidential counsel, but it's almost certain that criminal activity occurred - during an election season. How high did it go?
And don't give me that crap about 501(c)4 organizations being misused. The IRS already admitted it targeted conservative groups.
Heads need to roll. As it is, Obama's presidency is effectively over. I for one pray to God that Darrell Issa locks up government's engine for as long as Obama is president because Obama's government is harming America.
05 Jun 13
3 edits
We're paying for it; the government is our servant
Spoken like a true Republican. The government serves the people, not just the rich people. Take some advice from Jesus...look at the money. Whose face is on it? Yours?
No, the face is that of the government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Render_unto_Caesar
Originally posted by sasquatch672You totally miss the point. Isaa is not about finding out what happened at the IRS and preventing it from happening again. Instead, he is totally and dishonestly about smearing the White House for sheer political gain and without any evidence -- that the White House directed the IRS to go after the Tea Party.
One isn't related to the other. I for one never believed that any crime was committed with respect to Benghazi; just cowardice and lack of carig and competence. But administrations don't get to just not answer questions. The American people have a right to know what their government does. We're paying for it; the government is our servant, not the o engine for as long as Obama is president because Obama's government is harming America.
And it is brainwashed bots like you who believe it when there is absolutely no evidence. Innuendo is enough for you.
Read up on McCarthy. You will see striking similarities.
Originally posted by sasquatch672With regard to the talking points, sure, the CIA and State Department were deflecting against each other, but the emails show the White House had very little involvement. There were were three entities involved: (1) CIA that drafted the talking points; (2) State Department that wanted to make sure the CIA was fair in blame; and (3) the White House who had very little involvement and were only concerned about the investigation and later prosecution.
Jesus. I can only attribute your last post to willful ignorance.
You don't think it's significant that the State Department chose to alter the facts presented to the public in an election season?
EDIT: I'll tell you where I see an analog to McCarthyism in American government. In the IRS' persecution of conservative political groups.
EDIT 2: your comparison of McCarthy and Issa in this context is absurd.
The emails demonstrate this that the White House had very little influence, and were only concerned about the investigation and later prosecution. There is absolutely no indication or evidence that the White House had some big conspiracy going to doctor the talking points for political gain. Instead, pure smear and innuendo by the right-wing and Fox News. McCarthy would be proud.
"We're getting to proving it." --Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
05 Jun 13
Originally posted by moon1969The IRS admitted it. They admitted they targeted conservative groups. I'm confused what evidence you find lacking.
You totally miss the point. Isaa is not about finding out what happened at the IRS and preventing it from happening again. Instead, he is totally and dishonestly about smearing the White House for sheer political gain and without any evidence -- that the White House directed the IRS to go after the Tea Party.
And it is brainwashed bots like you who bel ...[text shortened]... dence. Innuendo is enough for you.
Read up on McCarthy. You will see striking similarities.
05 Jun 13
Originally posted by moon1969I'll cede your point - that the White House had very little influence. I agree. I also agree with you that the White House had very little influence on the outcome of Benghazi. Leon Panetta told Obama at 5 PM EST, and Obama went to the residence. He needed his rest for his Las Vegas fundraiser the following day.
With regard to the talking points, sure, the CIA and State Department were deflecting against each other, but the emails show the White House had very little involvement. There were were three entities involved: (1) CIA that drafted the talking points; (2) State Department that wanted to make sure the CIA was fair in blame; and (3) the White House who had v ...[text shortened]... ews. McCarthy would be proud.
"We're getting to proving it." --Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
Obama the coward abandoned four Americans to die in Benghazi. Actually, he abandoned about 35 Americans to die. There were 31 survivors (give or take, those survivors cannot be located).
Originally posted by sasquatch672That's only because you desperately want something to slam Obama over. Never miss an opportunity to exploit American deaths, right?
I'll cede your point - that the White House had very little influence. I agree. I also agree with you that the White House had very little influence on the outcome of Benghazi. Leon Panetta told Obama at 5 PM EST, and Obama went to the residence. He needed his rest for his Las Vegas fundraiser the following day.
Obama the coward abandoned four ...[text shortened]... 5 Americans to die. There were 31 survivors (give or take, those survivors cannot be located).
During a surprise attack, of course the Commanders and agents in the field will be the primaries calling the shots.
06 Jun 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672and progressive groups too which one of them already lost the case
And don't give me that crap about 501(c)4 organizations being misused. The IRS already admitted it targeted conservative groups.
Heads need to roll. As it is, Obama's presidency is effectively over. I for one pray to God that Darrell Issa locks up government's engine for as long as Obama is president because Obama's government is harming America.
so will the conservative groups, eventually. misusing those privileges should have consequences
heads need to roll, but this issue shouldn't be the reason to use against obama. it just doesn't stick, but you're right. considering how similar obama's admin is to the w bush admin, it shouldn't be any surprise why he is losing his popularity, as well.
06 Jun 13
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperA surprise attack? There had been warnings and requests for security upgrades for six months. The Brita and the Red Cross pulled all their personnel out. With the information available to the government, the only surprise about this attack should have been that it wasn't larger.
That's only because you desperately want something to slam Obama over. Never miss an opportunity to exploit American deaths, right?
During a surprise attack, of course the Commanders and agents in the field will be the primaries calling the shots.
And the commanders in the field weren't calling the shots. If they had been, there would have been a military response. Those commanders received stand-down orders.
Originally posted by sasquatch672So you agree the Isaa and Fox News smears that the White House doctored the talking points for political gain, and there were some big WH cover-up of this, are not true, or at least there is no evidence to support such.
I'll cede your point - that the White House had very little influence. I agree. I also agree with you that the White House had very little influence on the outcome of Benghazi. Leon Panetta told Obama at 5 PM EST, and Obama went to the residence. He needed his rest for his Las Vegas fundraiser the following day.
06 Jun 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672Basically your entire post is nothing but an unsubstantiated wet dream.
A surprise attack? There had been warnings and requests for security upgrades for six months. The Brita and the Red Cross pulled all their personnel out. With the information available to the government, the only surprise about this attack should have been that it wasn't larger.
And the commanders in the field weren't calling the shots. If they ...[text shortened]... been, there would have been a military response. Those commanders received stand-down orders.
06 Jun 13
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperThis is when I smother you in an avalanche of fact-based media reports. Don't have the battery or the time to do it right now. But, basically, my entire post comes from State Department testimony.
Basically your entire post is nothing but an unsubstantiated wet dream.