Trey Gowdy Owns Commissioner Koskinen, Again

[JoeB131]

Political hacks are ruining America. We need statesmen.

No, big multi-national corporations are ruining America.

And dumb ***** like you get terribly upset when a big corporations doesn't get to bend you over because someone at the IRS did her job.

"Oh, you did your job in a way that screws over my team! That's not fair!"

 

[Meathead]

Gowdy's got those thugs squirming. Obama's administration is on par with Nixon's in the sleaze department.

 

[JoeB131]

Gowdy's got those thugs squirming. Obama's administration is on par with Nixon's in the sleaze department.

Dream on. When you are dragging up the same people to answer the same questions again and again, it usually means you have nowhere to go and you are just grandstanding.

Issa and Gowdy's big problem is that after making Lerner (a woman appointed by George W. Bush) the central villain in this drama, he can't just offer her immunity for her testimony and get to the supposed bottom of this.

Instead, they have to insinuate that the e-mails from four years ago would prove that Lerner kidnapped the Lindbergh Baby and sank the Lusitania if we only just had them, but those damned IT guys lost the e-mails right after they helped Lerner build her TARDIS.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Joe is simply afraid they will get to the truth of the matter, it appears Gowdy got closer than anyone else.

It will all be over soon.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe is simply afraid they will get to the truth of the matter, it appears Gowdy got closer than anyone else.

It will all be over soon.

actually, I'm not worried about that at all.

You guys are exactly in the same problem you were a couple of weeks ago. You think Lerner (someone Bush appointed) was at the center of all these conspiracies..

You just can't prove it.

So dragging the IRS commissioner up again to answer the same questions he answered a couple of weeks ago... does what, exactly?

If your goal is to "get" Obama, the only way you do that is to give Lerner Immunity and hope she implicates him. The problem is after nearly a year of vilifying the woman, you've already tainted anything she has to say.

Much like the Polish Coyote, you guys have chewed off three legs and are still caught in the trap.

 

[Meathead]

Gowdy's got those thugs squirming. Obama's administration is on par with Nixon's in the sleaze department.

Dream on. When you are dragging up the same people to answer the same questions again and again, it usually means you have nowhere to go and you are just grandstanding.

Issa and Gowdy's big problem is that after making Lerner (a woman appointed by George W. Bush) the central villain in this drama, he can't just offer her immunity for her testimony and get to the supposed bottom of this.

Instead, they have to insinuate that the e-mails from four years ago would prove that Lerner kidnapped the Lindbergh Baby and sank the Lusitania if we only just had them, but those damned IT guys lost the e-mails right after they helped Lerner build her TARDIS.

Why would you be defending sleaze? If it happened during Bush you'd be whining from the rooftops.

Being a failure and living in a shit hole is no excuse for being sleazy btw.

 

[JoeB131]

Gowdy's got those thugs squirming. Obama's administration is on par with Nixon's in the sleaze department.

Dream on. When you are dragging up the same people to answer the same questions again and again, it usually means you have nowhere to go and you are just grandstanding.

Issa and Gowdy's big problem is that after making Lerner (a woman appointed by George W. Bush) the central villain in this drama, he can't just offer her immunity for her testimony and get to the supposed bottom of this.

Instead, they have to insinuate that the e-mails from four years ago would prove that Lerner kidnapped the Lindbergh Baby and sank the Lusitania if we only just had them, but those damned IT guys lost the e-mails right after they helped Lerner build her TARDIS.

Why would you be defending sleaze? If it happened during Bush you'd be whining from the rooftops.

Being a failure and living in a shit hole is no excuse for being sleazy btw.

If it happened during the BUsh years, the fuckup would probably have a body count attached to it. Bush couldn't **** things up without killing people.

I simply don't care that some rich people couldn't defraud the IRS. My problem is Obama is getting apologetic. They ought to be pointing out the fraud and asking for prosecutions.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I simply don't care that some rich people couldn't defraud the IRS. My problem is Obama is getting apologetic. They ought to be pointing out the fraud and asking for prosecutions.

Of course you don't care. You never do. Obama's presidency is collapsing all around him.

They can't get any prosecutions when the administration continues stonewalling Congress. It has already been established that Lerner targeted those groups, and also has been established that Koskinen lied about destroying the backup tapes. The IRS is running out of rope and you know it.

No amount of whining from you will solve that.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Dream on. When you are dragging up the same people to answer the same questions again and again, it usually means you have nowhere to go and you are just grandstanding.

Issa and Gowdy's big problem is that after making Lerner (a woman appointed by George W. Bush) the central villain in this drama, he can't just offer her immunity for her testimony and get to the supposed bottom of this.

Instead, they have to insinuate that the e-mails from four years ago would prove that Lerner kidnapped the Lindbergh Baby and sank the Lusitania if we only just had them, but those damned IT guys lost the e-mails right after they helped Lerner build her TARDIS.

Why would you be defending sleaze? If it happened during Bush you'd be whining from the rooftops.

Being a failure and living in a shit hole is no excuse for being sleazy btw.

If it happened during the BUsh years, the fuckup would probably have a body count attached to it. Bush couldn't **** things up without killing people.

I simply don't care that some rich people couldn't defraud the IRS. My problem is Obama is getting apologetic. They ought to be pointing out the fraud and asking for prosecutions.

Like all the dead children on the border who were there on obammies urging?
A body count like that one?

 

[JoeB131]

I simply don't care that some rich people couldn't defraud the IRS. My problem is Obama is getting apologetic. They ought to be pointing out the fraud and asking for prosecutions.

Of course you don't care. You never do. Obama's presidency is collapsing all around him.

They can't get any prosecutions when the administration continues stonewalling Congress. It has already been established that Lerner targeted those groups, and also has been established that Koskinen lied about destroying the backup tapes. The IRS is running out of rope and you know it.

No amount of whining from you will solve that.

Okay, if it's been established, where are the indictments?

Asking the same questions again and again is not 'We're about to crack the case, Watson".

Also, after listening to your lot announce the impending collapse of Obama's presidency since 2009, I'm reminded of the boy who cried wolf.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Like all the dead children on the border who were there on obammies urging?
A body count like that one?

Do you have a number for that?

And it's Obama's fault that Central America is in a state of chaos?

Hey, I think we found the perfect woman for you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I simply don't care that some rich people couldn't defraud the IRS. My problem is Obama is getting apologetic. They ought to be pointing out the fraud and asking for prosecutions.

Of course you don't care. You never do. Obama's presidency is collapsing all around him.

They can't get any prosecutions when the administration continues stonewalling Congress. It has already been established that Lerner targeted those groups, and also has been established that Koskinen lied about destroying the backup tapes. The IRS is running out of rope and you know it.

No amount of whining from you will solve that.

Okay, if it's been established, where are the indictments?

Asking the same questions again and again is not 'We're about to crack the case, Watson".

Also, after listening to your lot announce the impending collapse of Obama's presidency since 2009, I'm reminded of the boy who cried wolf.

You can't get indictments when the Justice Department is in league with the people you want prosecuted. Any more questions?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Joe, I'd be getting ready for work if I were you.

0730, right?

 

[JoeB131]

You can't get indictments when the Justice Department is in league with the people you want prosecuted. Any more questions?

There's a constitutional remedy for that.

It's called impeachment.

Of course, again, you'd need something called 'evidence'.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, I'd be getting ready for work if I were you.

0730, right?

Yes, then you can declare victory because I stop humoring you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

"Secrecy, being an instrument of conspiracy, ought never to be the system of a regular government."

Jeremy Bentham

 

[TemplarKormac]

You can't get indictments when the Justice Department is in league with the people you want prosecuted. Any more questions?

There's a constitutional remedy for that.

It's called impeachment.

Of course, again, you'd need something called 'evidence'.

Can't get evidence when people are intentionally trying to destroy or hide it now can we?

We have a legal remedy for that. Obstruction of Justice.

For that, all you need is some ornery IRS employees, a corrupt Justice Department and White House.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Joe, I'd be getting ready for work if I were you.

0730, right?

Yes, then you can declare victory because I stop humoring you.

Naw, I'll laugh when you make yourself late humoring me. You're obsessed.

 

[JoeB131]

"Secrecy, being an instrument of conspiracy, ought never to be the system of a regular government."

Jeremy Bentham

Nice pithy quote.

But here's the thing.

The reason why this was a controversy was the tea party groups wanted to claim a tax deduction where they could hide the names of their donors.

In short, they wanted to influence the outcomes of elections without letting us know who they were.

By the standard you just set down, shouldn't that be a concern?

 

[JoeB131]

You can't get indictments when the Justice Department is in league with the people you want prosecuted. Any more questions?

There's a constitutional remedy for that.

It's called impeachment.

Of course, again, you'd need something called 'evidence'.

Can't get evidence when people are intentionally trying to destroy or hide it now can we?

We have a legal remedy for that. Obstruction of Justice.

For that, all you need is some ornery IRS employees, a corrupt Justice Department and White House.

So aren't you getting into a catch 22 here, spanky?

YOu can't get evidence because you won't grant immunity to the people you want to talk to,

and you can't get indictments because you don't have evidence.

You see, here's the thing. It's not their job to make your case for you.