Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More than a month after the Inspector General's report was released, we still have some huge unanswered questions. Who was responsible? Why did it go on so long, and why did no one at the IRS come forward? Why did it take so long for the story to become public after so many people in federal gov't had learned of it?
A former federal Inspector General takes a stab at some of these questions.
From my personal experience as an IG of another agency, I suspect the answer. I do not blame IG George personally, as he is a career civil servant who depends on a steady salary and, thereafter, a pension.
But I learned, through being fired by the Obama administration, that performing one’s responsibilities as one should, and potentially adversely affecting the administration’s image, is not the way to keep one’s job
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walpin
Similar questions have been raised about other IGs who somehow have been discarded. Amtrak IG Fred Weiderhold, Treasury special IG Neil Barofsky, and International Trade Commission IG Judith Gwynn all left their positions after disputes that weren’t appreciated by the administration
This goes back to another thread that I posted previously, about an interview of a sharp and well-connected DC attorney named Dan Epstein, who said:
Quote:
"President Obama is an incredibly sophisticated president when it comes to executive power...this is a president who very much redefined the game of power in America"--Dan Epstein.
Issa is your issue. He has no credibility on either side. Read up on all the crap he's trying to pull.
"read up" does not constitute an argument. If it did, I could simply say "read up on the Obama admin, and all the crap they're trying to pull." Voila--I win the argument.
And in this way, the IRS "scandal" begins to circle the drain just like Benghazi and F&F before it, in spite of the desperate right-wing efforts to avoid a final flush.
Issa is definitely a problem. He comes out of the gate, balls to the wall, then peters out.
I don't much care for him. As my mother would say, he has no sticktoitivness.
In fairness to Issa, I think that house oversight has become inherently a toothless tiger, especially if the party being overseen has the MSM in their corner. I watched the hearing where ex-IRS comm. Miller testified. It was a total stonewall. Even my apolitical buddy who was watching it with me at the gym said, "geez, he's not answering anything, is he." Yet that was not how it was reported the next day in the MSM.
It has been this way for a long time. Remember when the oversight committee investigated Ruby Ridge, a key question was who had authorized the rules of engagement. The FBI clammed up. No one would admit to knowing who was responsible, and congress to this day never found out. We have evolved a kind of sovereign federal bureaucracy. As can be seen from this thread, that's the way the libs like it.
And in this way, the IRS "scandal" begins to circle the drain just like Benghazi and F&F before it, in spite of the desperate right-wing efforts to avoid a final flush.
It's deja vu all over again.
Maybe, but to extend your chosen metaphor, more flushes are going to be required, just like with a federally-mandated low-flow toilet. There are still 3 tea party lawsuits out there, and the judge in any of these cases can opt to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the whole mess. There are also still the elections in 2014, where the electorate will be able to weigh in on whether they want a politicized IRS. There are still many open questions. Who in the IRS illegally leaked the NOM donor list. What about the case of Catherine Engelbrecht who applied for 501c4 status and was targeted by a bunch of federal agencies.
In short, it's too soon for the left to exchange high fives over having successfully pulled off a jack-booted-thug strategy.
Flush as often as you like. It still goes to the same place.
The death knell of failed right-wing witch hunts has become cliche'.
"But, but, but... there are still unanswered questions."
You guys have morphed from annoying to banal.
Now you've mixed up your own metaphor. I am not the one flushing. And now you've added another metaphor: 'witch hunts.' Mixed metaphors used to be verboten among academics, but I suppose we're now in a dumbed-down era.
We will have to wait to see which witch the voters don't like in 2014. I'm willing to bet that the voters don't approve of a politicized IRS.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
