Lynch: Lois Lerner was protected by prosecutorial discretion

[easyt65]

"Justice Department officials used “prosecutorial discretion” to shelter former IRS official Lois Lerner from a grand jury after she was held in contempt of Congress.

“I believe that in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, the matter was handled and was resolved,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday morning."

LINK: Lynch: Lois Lerner was protected by prosecutorial discretion « Hot Air

'Protected by Prosecutorial Discretion:
Former Atty Gen Eric Holder: 4 Felony Counts of Perjury before Congress proved, Obama and DOJ refused to punish/prosecute; Holder 1st US Atty General to ever be Censured (for his crimes, by a bi-partisan Congress)

Lois Lerner: Admitted in an interview that her department 'improperly scrutinized' select Americans and groups and apologized. Like Holder, she is being protected from Prosecution.

Hillary will be next, no matter what crimes are found...

 

[Manonthestreet]

Law says "shall" refer to Grand Jury.....there is no discretion there....Lynch broke the law

 

[Lumpy 1]

Democrats depend on the Justice Department being corrupt and Obama disregarding his oath of office, if fact. I believe they're proud of it.

 

[FA_Q2]

There is nothing surprising there. The political elite and their lap dogs are immune from such things. This has been obvious for a long time now.

 

[TNHarley]

Its fuckin sad our govt has to plead the 5th..
Speaking of which, how in the fuck is that even Constitutional?

 

[the_human_being]

"Justice Department officials used “prosecutorial discretion” to shelter former IRS official Lois Lerner from a grand jury after she was held in contempt of Congress.

“I believe that in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, the matter was handled and was resolved,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday morning."

LINK: Lynch: Lois Lerner was protected by prosecutorial discretion « Hot Air

'Protected by Prosecutorial Discretion:
Former Atty Gen Eric Holder: 4 Felony Counts of Perjury before Congress proved, Obama and DOJ refused to punish/prosecute; Holder 1st US Atty General to ever be Censured (for his crimes, by a bi-partisan Congress)

Lois Lerner: Admitted in an interview that her department 'improperly scrutinized' select Americans and groups and apologized. Like Holder, she is being protected from Prosecution.

Hillary will be next, no matter what crimes are found...

Payback is gonna be Hell. Obama and the Democrats have opened the door. That door will swing back and hit them in their butts.

 

[BlindBoo]

Who protected the CIA when they destroyed the torture tapes?

 

[easyt65]

Who protected the CIA when they destroyed the torture tapes?

Sorry, but I have to laugh just a bit when I hear the Liberals whine and bitch about submitting the animals who are beheading and burning people alive to non-lethal water-boarding to get information that can / will save / has saved lives....
Those POOR Islamic Extremists.

Just for the record, if I knew I had in my custody one of the planners of the Paris attack days before it happened and I thought for one second waterboarding his ass would save ONE Parisian, I would NOT hesitate.

The media asked the DUMBMASS question the other day 'if you had the chance to go back in time to kill baby Hitler to save lives, would you do it?' The preferred / acceptable answer regarding murdering this baby seemed to be 'YES'!

Comparatively, are you Liberals telling me 'NO', that if you had the opportunity to go back and time and use non-lethal water-boarding on a terrorist if you knew doing so would prevent 9/11/01 You would NOT do it?! SERIOUSLY?!

 

[FA_Q2]

Who protected the CIA when they destroyed the torture tapes?

Conservatives which just goes to show that the political elite are immune.

I fail to see how that is acceptable as a point in this thread though. It is nothing more than an excuse to let this particular indecent get swept under the rug. Are you a partisan hack? I guess that you do not believe that you are. If that is true then why deflect the issue rather than address it?