- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 4,905
- Reaction score
- 1,578
- Location
- The darkside of the moon
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
We now know this about Obama. He's either:
1. The presedential version of Al Capone.
2. The most clueless dumbass to ever sit behind the Oval office desk.
Take your pick, but it is one or the other. There is "no none of the above".
"I have not done anything wrong," she said. "I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee."
Read more: Top IRS official refuses to testify at hearing, invokes 5th Amendment | Fox News
Agreed. And I was wrong about the questioning of Lerner. They didn't bother to ask much. I guess time is money, or something. A mosquito bit me on the back where I can't reach the other day. It must've taken some serious calculation for it to hit that spot. I've been interrogating some of the other mosquitos regarding the identity of the offender. They wouldn't talk. Now they can't. I find this approach more effective than Congressional hearings. You know, though, that someone in this mess has a singing voice.Is this what's to be expected when a group of lawyers are running things in DC? Maybe we should consider electing honest everyday no-nonsense farmers and housewives to lead us, since they still have common sense, and they are more trustworthy! They certainly couldn't do worse, and it would probably be an improvement! :stars:
Agreed. And I was wrong about the questioning of Lerner. They didn't bother to ask much. I guess time is money, or something. A mosquito bit me on the back where I can't reach the other day. It must've taken some serious calculation for it to hit that spot. I've been interrogating some of the other mosquitos regarding the identity of the offender. They wouldn't talk. Now they can't. I find this approach more effective than Congressional hearings. You know, though, that someone in this mess has a singing voice.
I think you're right, and I think it will come down to that. Offer Lerner immunity. Let's see what a committed Obama soldier she is.Enjoyed the mosquito analogy, because it's probably exactly correct. :thumbs:
However, our ancestors passed on the powerful "self-preservation" gene to us, and it seems to override everything else when it gets down to the nitty-gritty of what's best for ME! A lot of the potential singers are probably weighing promises or threats versus reality, I think, because they've seen too many thrown under the bus when they followed orders from on high, only to be left swinging in the breeze all alone. The stress levels have to be off the chart! :shock: Time will tell.
Enjoyed the mosquito analogy, because it's probably exactly correct. :thumbs:
However, our ancestors passed on the powerful "self-preservation" gene to us, and it seems to override everything else when it gets down to the nitty-gritty of what's best for ME! A lot of the potential singers are probably weighing promises or threats versus reality, I think, because they've seen too many thrown under the bus when they followed orders from on high, only to be left swinging in the breeze all alone. The stress levels have to be off the chart! :shock: Time will tell.
Your problem is that many of the folks who are "concerned" and "troubled" and just outright disgusted aren't members of the GOP. Take Max Baucus as only one example.
Another problem is that at some point--I'm not sure where--the President does have to be accountable. At the very least, he needs to explain why he supposedly knows nothing about what's going on. About anything.
I've seen the photo-opp pics in the "Situation Room" of him and Sec/State Clinton. Where was the President on 9-11?
I'm reading the Washington Post and, grudgingly, the NY Times. Sorry, but when you have the likes of Maureen Dowd and Eugene Robinson speaking up, the Obama Admin has a problem.
Your mistake is in thinking that people are "listening to the GOP." I'm not a Republican, and I'm not just reading what George Will has to say; I've been reading what progressives are now beginning to say.
And this is maybe what you should think about--the fact that it's not just the GOP speaking up now. Catch up on what Politico is saying. Check the WaPo headlines if nothing else.
Just don't cast the President as a victim...unless, of course, you mean to say that he's a victim of his own hubris. Do you seriously want your fellow citizens to regard the President of the United States as a "victim" or an "underdog"?
Seriously? Is he also a credulous dupe who just had no earthly idea what the heck was going on in his own Admin? Or were his chief legal counsel and chief of staff just too skeered of his basic coolness and awesomeness that they "protected" him from the FACTS that are now emerging?
If you genuinely regard Obama as some tragi-heroic, trailblazing hero, then I'd think you'd prefer to see him as a hardball-playing, ruthless, cynical political player than some pitiably clueless dolt.
If Obama is a "victim," it's of his own hubris. Or "boldness" for which he must be punished. Or doltishness. Your choice.
More than "legal jeopardy" - the Fifth protects from self-incrimination. She's worried she'll be found guilty of doing something not just illegal (e.g. ethical conduct), but criminal.The government would have just cause to do so in that the individual is indicating that to be honest under oath would potentially put them in legal jeopardy - you can only be in legal jeopardy as it relates to your job if you actually did something illegal.
Don't forget Fast & Furious.
Funny how Obama doesn't know and isn't responsible for anything, yet Bush was held widely responsible for a natural hurricane hitting New Orleans, and media barely pointed a finger at FEMA, the governor, or mayor.
Has Obama been held responsible for the incredibly slow recovery efforts in New Jersey after Sandy?
Absolutely ... F & F, SOLYNDRA, LIGHTSQUARED ... don't get me started ... I'm trying to NOT post a graphic I've already posted.
Corruption is the hallmark of Obama and his Administration.
But these current examples are like 4 Obama turds dropping into the bowl at one time.
Any actual or ersatz Obama supporter with any self respect would have turned off to him by now.
But as you can see on this site alone ... it ain't happenin'.
Dang, I guessed I missed the graphic.
Imagine, the most powerful and potentially dangerous government agency in the United States, is caught applying their power selectively and politically, and one of its commanders pleads the 5th as the Executive Branch runs for cover and cries "nothing to see hear".
Stunning.
Max Baucus, really? Baucus is a red, red state Democrat who has voted
with Republicans on most big issues and single handedly killed any discussion of single payor healthcare reform that lead to the passage of Obamacare, the plan that Republicans hate because it does too much and badly, and Democrats don't like because it doesn't do enough, and it does it badly. A lot of the concern is about optics, not culpability, President's don't see their approval ratings rise as more people think they are guilty of something, they see their approval ratings rise as they see the President under attack with unfounded allegations.
It is a longstanding tradition, for good reason, that the White House keep an arms length relationship with the IRS. There is no process direction from the WH to the IRS precisely to avoid a reality or perception of political direction of the IRS. This is why some of the attacks have now devolved into accusing the President of "influencing" the IRS to be partisan by the simple act of being a partisan Democrat in charge of the Executive branch. Somehow saying what he approved of and what he did not approve of now counts as directives to the IRS (as if every President is not a partisan).
Who cares. Unless there is some evidence that the President was needed to give an order and could not be located, it is completely irrelevant. Find evidence his whereabouts affected the safety of the people in Benghazi, then ask this question.
Maureen Dowd has been an outspoken critic of Obama for years, and Robinson considers the IRS issue a scandal that doesn't involve the President, even though it looks bad.
Really, are you really? If you are, then you are reading that Benghazi could not have been prevented or better responded to unless the President was omniscient, and the "talking points coverup" was the result of negotiations between the CIA, State Department, with an understanding that Justice did not want details like who was suspected included to protect the investigation and the WH quickly approved the most informative versions of the talking points. On the IRS, if you are reading liberals, you would understand that the IRS is kept at a distance from the political leadership for a very good reason.
I get daily email updates from Politico and WaPo. Just a few minutes ago, I read the article about Petraeus and the Benghazi talking points and noted this quote from the CIA, "In an internal agency e-mail at 4:24 p.m. that Friday, he acknowledged that “there is a hurry to get this out.” The talking points should not “conflict with express instructions” from the National Security Council, the FBI and the Justice Department, he wrote, and that “in light of the criminal investigation, we are not to generate statements with assessments as to who did this.”
The only thing that liberal journalist are bothered about is the AP and Rosen stories, and they should be, if they don't defend themselves, who will?
I am not casting the President as a victim, I am describing my observations in light of my understanding of what happened 15 years ago to Bill Clinton, who saw his approval ratings go UP as he was impeached by the House. I don't "want" anything, it is an observation of what is happening.
Should the President be informed about ongoing investigations? Really? The only purpose for doing this would be to give him input, and avoiding political input is a key element of many executive functions. Imagine he WERE informed about the AP subpoena before it was executed and stopped it. Now THAT would be scandalous. Imagine he had meetings with the IRS Director to discuss process, now THAT would be scandalous. The GOP is trying to blame the President for not knowing things that President's SHOULD NOT know.
Again, I am making observations. As to how I regard the President, I see the President as a corporate Democrat, middle right authoritarian, a hair away from Mitt Romney on the political spectrum. But partisan politics are making that hair into a bottomless chasm, preventing governing from getting done. We are tragically broken systemically and no one is getting what they want except the corporate political funders who laugh at us while left blames right and right blames left, while they quietly steal from all of us beneath the fray.
Again, I am making observations, Obama is not a victim, but his approval ratings indicate that he is being seen as the victim of unwarranted political attacks. If people were buying the allegations against the President, his approval ratings would be going down, not up. His "punishment" seems to be elevating him, just as Clinton's "punishment" did for him. But the real victim is the American people, who are the victims of a lack of government. Feel free to blame Obama for this, but I can't help noting that Obama never said he wanted Republicans to fail, but I can recall the very top of the GOP saying that their top goal was making Obama fail (as opposed to making America succeed).
Absolutely ... F & F, SOLYNDRA, LIGHTSQUARED ... don't get me started ... I'm trying to NOT post a graphic I've already posted.
Corruption is the hallmark of Obama and his Administration.
But these current examples are like 4 Obama turds dropping into the bowl at one time.
Any actual or ersatz Obama supporter with any self respect would have been turned off to him by now.
But as you can see on this site alone ... it ain't happenin'.
The only dumbass i know of was the conservatives who gave the president the power to ignore what used to be their rights using a flimsy excuse of national security or terrorism. You did give him the power to do some of these things, and expecting someone in power not to use their power was really stupid. Of course, it was so much better when bush did these things, right?
Simple enough, she doesn't want to have to name names.
the 5th is to protect against self incrimination of a crime. not so you can protect others
Also she made an opening state which means she waves that 5th amendment right
The five most popular answers given at congressional hearings:
1) I don't know
2) I don't know
3) I don't know
4) I don't know
5) uh..........I don't know
the 5th is to protect against self incrimination of a crime. not so you can protect others
Also she made an opening state which means she waves that 5th amendment right
So the new tea party meme is if the 5th amendment imputes guilt to everybody who invokes that constitutional right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?