TexasCHLforum.com

I'd have thought someone capable of being appointed to, well, anything would have been able to understand the concept of "a 'yes' or 'no' question".

RoyGBiv wrote:

Dave2 wrote:I'm watching the IRS hearings, and Mr. George just said, in so many words, that the targeting isn't political because conservatives might be terrorists. Seriously.

I didn't catch that.. but.. I'm doing spreadsheets while the hearings are playing on the other screen, so, I may have missed it..

Mr. George is, generally, one of the good guys in all this.. He seems to be competent, thorough and answering questions to the best of his ability or to the limits imposed upon him by current law. I wonder how he feels having to sit beside those other tyranny-enabling slimeballs.?

When asked how he could come to the to the conclusion that this wasn't politically motivated, he said something along the lines of "I can't answer that without giving, for example, terrorists information about how to get tax-exempt status".

We have finally found a Constitutional Amendment this administration likes... the Fifth.

Jaguar wrote:We have finally found a Constitutional Amendment this administration likes... the Fifth.

Really? Likes?

And you think this ADMIN and DOJ would allow YOU the right to invoke 5th amendment rights should you become a target of the DOJ?

Sure you could enjoy your 5th amendment rights from a comfy jail cell perhaps…. But unlike those doing so now.. you’d not be headed home after refusing to answer questions

E.Marquez wrote:

Jaguar wrote:We have finally found a Constitutional Amendment this administration likes... the Fifth.

Really? Likes?

And you think this ADMIN and DOJ would allow YOU the right to invoke 5th amendment rights should you become a target of the DOJ?

Sure you could enjoy your 5th amendment rights from a comfy jail cell perhaps…. But unlike those doing so now.. you’d not be headed home after refusing to answer questions

I stand corrected - they like all amendments, for them, not "us".

I should have seen that.

interesting.....they are saying that by making an opening statement that Lerner waived her fourth amendment rights.......

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/d ... ml?hp=t3_3

Now the Dems are worried this will having a chilling effect -- on the IRS!

He doesn't care that this has had a chilling effet on the country, and political donations in particular which may have changed the outcome of some races. But let someone at the IRS err bacause they think this scandle will actually hold them accountable and we have a problem.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/con ... 28831.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


End the IRS -- NOW! http://www.fairtax.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mamabearCali wrote:interesting.....they are saying that by making an opening statement that Lerner waived her fourth amendment rights.......

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/d ... ml?hp=t3_3

I watched this part closely.... Since I'm not informed on the legal aspects of 5A refusals, I found it very interesting.
Gowdy was livid, apparently with cause, that she was permitted to leave after giving her "statement" under oath.

As I understand it, 5A allows you to refuse to answer questions on a one-by-one basis, so, other than making her sit there and get berated, I'm not sure what good dragging her back in will do other than generate some sideshow fireworks. Maybe my 5A understanding is incorrect.

She needs to be held to account, as does Sarah Hall Ingram.
Both should be in jail, for a term dependent on their cooperation in rolling up both underlings involved and superiors.

I would like to hear from a Ms. Cindy Thomas as well, seems her name is coming up more often lately.

From; http://www.fox19.com/story/22380127/rea ... rs-scandal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So who in the chain of command would have received all these flags? (late approvals automatically generate a flag.) The answer, according to the IRS directory, one woman in Cincinnati, Cindy Thomas, the Program Manager of the Tax Exempt Division.

If it had been a Republican in the chair, the Dems would have asked question after question, making him repeat over and over "I refuse to answer...", and making him look guiltier with each question.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=jRHBgf2gH0U[/youtube]

It all points to the prez: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... n_newsreel

AND..... in the "You Just Can't Make this Stuff Up" category.....

....It's all Bush's fault: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... andal.html

The minion acts as if the questions are going to slow him down. I bet the train was going to leave at the same time whether Franken answered the question or not. Slime balls.

mojo84 wrote:The minion acts as if the questions are going to slow him down. I bet the train was going to leave at the same time whether Franken answered the question or not. Slime balls.

I gotta get me some minions.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

mojo84 wrote:The minion acts as if the questions are going to slow him down. I bet the train was going to leave at the same time whether Franken answered the question or not. Slime balls.

I gotta get me some minions.

I'll be a minion for you, TAM.