Wat_Tyler
Allah's Favorite
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2004
- Posts
- 70,648
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We need a special prosecutor to offer immunity in exchange for heading up the ladder.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/348982/no-special-counsel-irs-scandal-andrew-c-mccarthyIn the unfolding IRS scandal, we already know President Obama’s conservative political opponents were targeted for the revenue agency’s version of waterboarding. On cue, prominent Republicans and conservatives are starting to call for a special counsel — clearly under the misimpression that a “special counsel” would mean a prosecutor “independent” of the Obama Justice Department. Here at NRO, my friend Larry Kudlow lends his voice to those advising the GOP that a special counsel is the way to go. With due respect, I think it would be a blunder.
The special counsel is a legal anomaly. More important, pushing for one sends entirely the wrong signals. It indicates that criminal culpability takes precedence over political accountability. Worse, it suggests that the evil here is the malfeasance of a few government officials. To the contrary, the problem is a perversely complex regulatory framework that gives the IRS — which should simply collect taxes based on an easily knowable formula — enormous discretionary power to discriminate and intimidate. That makes the IRS an un-American weapon, particularly when it is controlled by an Alinskyite will-to-power administration.
Sure, we can worry about prosecuting the weapon-wielders at some point. The urgent problem here, though, is the weapon itself. Our energy should be devoted to exposing the scandal in the light of day and shaming Washington into dismantling the IRS — which is actually planned to swell markedly, and grow even more intrusively offensive, under Obamacare.
Andy McCarthy, NROWe have had “special” counsels since that time, but no independent ones in the sense of formal autonomy from the Justice Department and the president. And the more independent the charters of special counsels have been, the more strident have been the complaints about their zeal. In the most recent example, Patrick Fitzgerald (full disclosure: a longtime friend of mine) was given an especially wide berth by the Bush Justice Department to investigate an allegedly felonious leak of classified information. As it turned out, the leak was not unlawful, yet Fitzgerald ended up first jailing journalist Judy Miller for contempt (Miller refused, for a time, to identify her sources to his grand jury), then prosecuting Scooter Libby not for the leak but for “process crimes” (i.e., offenses — perjury and lying to agents — alleged to have been committed during the investigative process). Those legitimately worried about leaks were left unsatisfied while Libby admirers remain convinced that he was railroaded.
Wat?
The car or Forrest Grump?![]()
![]()
![]()
The cat is bullying the woman on the car.
What a mean cat.
She needs a battery of psychologicals.
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6987996672/h1B5A51FA/
)http://www.nationalreview.com/article/349009/epa’s-conservative-problem-jillian-kay-melchiorThe EPA has an IRS problem.
The agency has rubber-stamped fee-waiver requests from environmentalist groups seeking information, but it denied similar requests from conservative groups, an extensive examination of EPA correspondence suggests. It’s the latest instance in which federal agencies have used their executive authority against perceived political opponents.
Public information about government can be obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. If a requester plans to use the information to improve public understanding about a policy issue or government operations, rather than putting it to commercial use, Congress has decided that the fees for collecting and transmitting this public information can be waived.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute obtained 1,200 pages of EPA correspondence between January 1, 2012, and April 26, 2013, in circumstances that appear to indicate the process is handled unfairly. A congressional review of these documents showed that environmental groups’ fee-waiver requests were approved 92 percent of the time, while CEI saw 93 percent of its fee-waiver requests denied. Only 8 percent of the total number of FOIA fee waivers granted went to conservative think tanks; their requests were denied 73 percent of the time. (Full disclosure: My employer, the Franklin Center, is one of the conservative groups whose requests were examined.)
Terms like "overreach" and "baseless speculation" are judgments and not indicators of objectivity.
We are one up on the original poster.
We'll read his cut'n pastes and respond to them...
I see.
So now it is the Republicans fault because they are lying.
Did you skip the news that the Administration bullied the health care records for millions of citizens into their own hands? I know the last two weeks have been awash in scandals, so for liberals, this one probably slipped through the cracks.
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/irs-face-lawsuit-over-theft-60-million-patient-health-records
So was Michelle really all that wrong? If she wasn't, what with Americans knowing that healthcare insurance is now going to be enforced by the IRS, then perhaps the underlying fear is still present, what the IRS did to the Tea Parties by asking endless questions, perhaps then if you as an individual are called in for an audit you will get treated in the same manner...