Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 6:08:46 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
I know we have at least two people on these boards that say that they're lawyers. I'm not but if one of you could answer this question:

Isn't there some provision in the law where if you answer one question (or make a statement about the issue at hand) in front of the trial body (judge/jury/congressional hearing/whatever) that you can't invoke the fifth, after that without risking contempt charges?

Thank you, in advance for your answer.



Peace and comfort,



Michael


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 6:15:15 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Right.... I keep forgetting, this gets the Democrats a free pass in you eyes.





quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

"contemptful of Congress"



That`s like hypocrites being upset about hypocrisy.....


That`s like rapists being upset about rape.....


That`s like quacks being upset about malpractice....


That`s like adulterers getting pissed about cheating....


That`s like...well...you get the drift...


Love the creative-ful spelling too.





No...not at all.


Just need examples of bad faith and douche-baggery, before I comment.....


When democrats fuck up I say so....When republicans fuck up I say so......


It`s only a complete coincidence that republicans are train wrecking so often and so embarrassingly.....


If a democrat lead 4409 Americans to their deaths in Iraq.......I would say so.

See how it works......facts,the record,history and what happened.....



Those are the things that count(to normal folks).......not your and your party`s make-pretend or lame attempts to blame your failures on others.


< Message edited by Owner59 -- 5/23/2013 6:16:00 AM >


_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 7:10:53 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
Thank you. I got my answer on another thread



Peace and comfort,



Michael


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 7:58:30 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Thank you. I got my answer on another thread



Peace and comfort,



Michael




And.....you are?

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 10:36:03 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe

quote:

ORIGINAL: graceadieu
I'm sure. Whether or not she did anything illegal (or even had any responsibility for the profiling), she's clearly nervous that she might be getting in legal trouble over this.

Her refusing to testify won't be the end of the investigation, though. If anything, she made herself look guilty. I'm no lawyer, but I feel like probably she would've been better off taking the same tactic of "I didn't know anything" as the other guys.


I really don't fault her for taking the 5th. Someone is going to have this hung on them, right or wrong. The White House has shown the shell game they are capable of playing in regard to the truth through the whole Benghazi fiasco. She is probably well aware that they will sacrifice her in a heartbeat even if she is not at fault. Make them prove it. I think she did the smart thing.

Rep Issa had already accused her of giving false statements to Congress and there is an FBI (?) investigation on-going. Can't blame her for taking the 5th under those circumstances. The real crime is that ANY political organizations were allowed to claim tax exemptions as social orgainzations when the Law required exclusive activities for social improvement ot benefit.

(in reply to LizDeluxe)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 10:41:02 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
The old chestnut about dont ask questions that you dont want to know the answer to....

This shit will blow up when it becomes common knowledge that her boss when this took place was a W appointee, and she was a W administration appointee might just become widely know in all the opera bouffe in time for elections.

LOL.  

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 11:46:57 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe
quote:

ORIGINAL: graceadieu
I'm sure. Whether or not she did anything illegal (or even had any responsibility for the profiling), she's clearly nervous that she might be getting in legal trouble over this.
Her refusing to testify won't be the end of the investigation, though. If anything, she made herself look guilty. I'm no lawyer, but I feel like probably she would've been better off taking the same tactic of "I didn't know anything" as the other guys.

I really don't fault her for taking the 5th. Someone is going to have this hung on them, right or wrong. The White House has shown the shell game they are capable of playing in regard to the truth through the whole Benghazi fiasco. She is probably well aware that they will sacrifice her in a heartbeat even if she is not at fault. Make them prove it. I think she did the smart thing.

Rep Issa had already accused her of giving false statements to Congress and there is an FBI (?) investigation on-going. Can't blame her for taking the 5th under those circumstances. The real crime is that ANY political organizations were allowed to claim tax exemptions as social orgainzations when the Law required exclusive activities for social improvement ot benefit.


They didn't claim tax exemption as "social organizations." I think you might be defining "social improvement or benefit" in a different way than the IRS, too. There are limitations in place on what these organizations can do, and as long as they are following the letter of the law, then, there isn't anything to complain about.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 11:49:20 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The old chestnut about dont ask questions that you dont want to know the answer to....
This shit will blow up when it becomes common knowledge that her boss when this took place was a W appointee, and she was a W administration appointee might just become widely know in all the opera bouffe in time for elections.
LOL.  


I really hope you aren't claiming this is Bush's fault. Who appointed them means nothing in this particular case. It would be no more or less wrong had they been Obama appointees. I still haven't seen anything that shows that Obama had any more to do with this than Bush; that is, nothing to do with it.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 11:50:48 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
I am not saying it is Ws fault, it is no more his than it is Obamas. 

I mean, other than the fact that it turns out the teabaggers are a pretty inept bunch all the way around.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 11:54:49 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
I am not saying it is Ws fault, it is no more his than it is Obamas. 
I mean, other than the fact that it turns out the teabaggers are a pretty inept bunch all the way around.


Apparently, not. All the tea party groups that came under extra scrutiny still had their applications allowed, so they were successful enough to follow the rules.

Other than that, though, I sure hope you realize we, once again, agree on something. Might be time for you to consider seeing a shrink, as there has to be something wrong when you and I agree...


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 11:56:09 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: graceadieu
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'm sure it concerned her lawyer when Boehner asked "who's going to jail?" in relation to this.

I'm sure. Whether or not she did anything illegal (or even had any responsibility for the profiling), she's clearly nervous that she might be getting in legal trouble over this.

Her refusing to testify won't be the end of the investigation, though. If anything, she made herself look guilty. I'm no lawyer, but I feel like probably she would've been better off taking the same tactic of "I didn't know anything" as the other guys.


So if someone takes their 5th Amendment, they are automatically guilty of something? I believe the 18th century debate on this one was the fear of lawyers twisting and turning the words of an innocent man against him. It was done in humanity's past and will be done in its future. The direct purpose of the 5th amendment is to simply not be forced to execute one's legal interest in any form unless by voluntary action.

Last I checked, if one is in the Legislated branch of the US Government they are not allowed to JUDGE another's innocence of any crime. That would fall to the Judicial branch of the government. If Republican congressional folks don't like it when the President puts laws into effect, perhaps they should reexamine their primary purpose in the federal government!

(in reply to graceadieu)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 12:12:05 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
there are only a very few circumstances in which one may assume guilt in the laws of the US, via pleading the 5th.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 12:17:14 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The old chestnut about dont ask questions that you dont want to know the answer to....
This shit will blow up when it becomes common knowledge that her boss when this took place was a W appointee, and she was a W administration appointee might just become widely know in all the opera bouffe in time for elections.
LOL.  

I really hope you aren't claiming this is Bush's fault. Who appointed them means nothing in this particular case. It would be no more or less wrong had they been Obama appointees. I still haven't seen anything that shows that Obama had any more to do with this than Bush; that is, nothing to do with it.


Your old enough to remember the Clinton administration, DS. The history books clearly show that Republicans tried....ANYTHING and EVERYTHING....to pin Clinton to.....SOMETHING. A number of 'trumped up' scandals, investigations, and even stuff from the Clinton's pass before they really got into politics. An then they found he was having an affair with a Jewish intern and lied about it. Oh gosh, not an affair?!?!?!?!? So, the Speaker of the House (good old Newt) and Republicans impeached the president. Should we bring up that the Speak of the House was ALSO engaging an affair at the time. And that he was not punished by the same group of Republicans?

Than we had a Republican President. 13 Embassy attacks from 2002 to 2008 resulting in tons of property damage, many injuries and quite a 'few' more deaths than was in Benghazi. Did those 'angelic members of the GOP' hold the Bush administration as accountable and responsible as they are slamming the current president right now? Not even 100,000th the level! Why would Republicans hold their own to even the same level they bash the president and democrats? Why do conservatives NOT hold the people they vote into power to a higher level of accountability and responsibility with power as they do towards Democrats?

Clinton was impeached for what? Lying to the country about having an affair. Bush lied to the country for getting us into a war half way around the planet! 4,000+ US Soldiers are dead and another 25,000+ are injured (many of which we'll be paying for in the years to come). 100,000+ civilians put to the sword. And paid for that war with $4 Trillion worth of borrowed money. This war effectively doubled the US Debt. This is many times worst for a president to do to a nation than just getting a blow job! Not a single peep out of Republicans to hold one of their own to the same level if not twice the level of 'scrutiny' as they did towards Clinton and today with Obama.

This whole thing, like Benghazi, is simply the GOP's attempts to undermine a good President that we Americans are fortunate to have in the White House. They don't have anyone that they believe could race against Hillary in 2016. So they must do as much political damage as possible in the next three years. Because they really have NOTHING to offer this country right now. That is what Benghazi and this IRS flap is basically all about. Finding what went right and wrong is irrelevant to the GOP; only of 'pining' this on President Obama and Democrats in any way possible. And if they have to manufacture evidence, they'll just ask their mouthpiece, FOX News and right wing talk shows to spread the information to the 'lowest information voter'. You know, the one's that vote Republican without a second thought?

< Message edited by joether -- 5/23/2013 12:21:15 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 12:18:03 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
I am not saying it is Ws fault, it is no more his than it is Obamas. 
I mean, other than the fact that it turns out the teabaggers are a pretty inept bunch all the way around.


Apparently, not. All the tea party groups that came under extra scrutiny still had their applications allowed, so they were successful enough to follow the rules.

Other than that, though, I sure hope you realize we, once again, agree on something. Might be time for you to consider seeing a shrink, as there has to be something wrong when you and I agree...



It appeared though that it is only because of a slight vaugeness in the law and a large lassize-faire in the application of it, simultaneously.

I think it should go strict interpretation, and a whole bunch of useless motherfuckers will be booted.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 12:47:34 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The old chestnut about dont ask questions that you dont want to know the answer to....
This shit will blow up when it becomes common knowledge that her boss when this took place was a W appointee, and she was a W administration appointee might just become widely know in all the opera bouffe in time for elections.
LOL.  

I really hope you aren't claiming this is Bush's fault. Who appointed them means nothing in this particular case. It would be no more or less wrong had they been Obama appointees. I still haven't seen anything that shows that Obama had any more to do with this than Bush; that is, nothing to do with it.

Your old enough to remember the Clinton administration, DS. The history books clearly show that Republicans tried....ANYTHING and EVERYTHING....to pin Clinton to.....SOMETHING. A number of 'trumped up' scandals, investigations, and even stuff from the Clinton's pass before they really got into politics. An then they found he was having an affair with a Jewish intern and lied about it. Oh gosh, not an affair?!?!?!?!? So, the Speaker of the House (good old Newt) and Republicans impeached the president. Should we bring up that the Speak of the House was ALSO engaging an affair at the time. And that he was not punished by the same group of Republicans?


You really must stop lying about this. Clinton wasn't impeached over an affair. He was impeached over lying under oath. Period.

quote:

Than we had a Republican President. 13 Embassy attacks from 2002 to 2008 resulting in tons of property damage, many injuries and quite a 'few' more deaths than was in Benghazi. Did those 'angelic members of the GOP' hold the Bush administration as accountable and responsible as they are slamming the current president right now? Not even 100,000th the level! Why would Republicans hold their own to even the same level they bash the president and democrats? Why do conservatives NOT hold the people they vote into power to a higher level of accountability and responsibility with power as they do towards Democrats?


The ire isn't about Benghazi happening, but about the Administration's refusal to be honest about why the attacks happened. Bush didn't do that.

quote:

Clinton was impeached for what? Lying to the country about having an affair. Bush lied to the country for getting us into a war half way around the planet! 4,000+ US Soldiers are dead and another 25,000+ are injured (many of which we'll be paying for in the years to come). 100,000+ civilians put to the sword. And paid for that war with $4 Trillion worth of borrowed money. This war effectively doubled the US Debt. This is many times worst for a president to do to a nation than just getting a blow job! Not a single peep out of Republicans to hold one of their own to the same level if not twice the level of 'scrutiny' as they did towards Clinton and today with Obama.
This whole thing, like Benghazi, is simply the GOP's attempts to undermine a good President that we Americans are fortunate to have in the White House. They don't have anyone that they believe could race against Hillary in 2016. So they must do as much political damage as possible in the next three years. Because they really have NOTHING to offer this country right now. That is what Benghazi and this IRS flap is basically all about. Finding what went right and wrong is irrelevant to the GOP; only of 'pining' this on President Obama and Democrats in any way possible. And if they have to manufacture evidence, they'll just ask their mouthpiece, FOX News and right wing talk shows to spread the information to the 'lowest information voter'. You know, the one's that vote Republican without a second thought?


This is not what Benghazi is about, as stated above.

In case you missed it, Ron and I actually agree that Bush and Obama share the same amount of blame for the IRS flap; none.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 12:51:23 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
You really must stop lying about this. Clinton wasn't impeached over an affair. He was impeached over lying under oath. Period

Clinton was not impeached.  End of that joke, as I said he wiped his ass with the meaningless house document.  

He is no more impeached than there is a budget in the united states.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/23/2013 7:34:17 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You really must stop lying about this. Clinton wasn't impeached over an affair. He was impeached over lying under oath. Period
Clinton was not impeached.  End of that joke, as I said he wiped his ass with the meaningless house document.  
He is no more impeached than there is a budget in the united states.


How was he not impeached?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/24/2013 2:05:59 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You really must stop lying about this. Clinton wasn't impeached over an affair. He was impeached over lying under oath. Period
Clinton was not impeached.  End of that joke, as I said he wiped his ass with the meaningless house document.  
He is no more impeached than there is a budget in the united states.


How was he not impeached?



It's okay, DS. That's just the Pablum that the lunatic Lefties are told to swallow and regurgitate in an effort to re-write history.

The Commander-In-Heat was impeached. They just hate to admit it. Most of the mind-numbed demobots aren't savvy enough to know that impeachment doesn't mean removal from office.

You want real irony?

quote:

ORIGINAL Slick Willy 08 AUG '74 while campaigning for congress

I think the country could be spared a lot of agony and the government could worry about inflation and a lot of other problems if [Nixon would] go on and resign.

[There is] no question that an admission of making false statements to government officials and interfering with the FBI and the CIA is an impeachable offense.


Snopes



Peace and comfort,



Michael


< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 5/24/2013 2:17:09 AM >


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/24/2013 6:30:57 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You really must stop lying about this. Clinton wasn't impeached over an affair. He was impeached over lying under oath. Period
Clinton was not impeached.  End of that joke, as I said he wiped his ass with the meaningless house document.  
He is no more impeached than there is a budget in the united states.


How was he not impeached?



There is this thing called a constitution, in it is an advise and consent clause. The senate was advised, and did not consent.

If he was impeached, then there is a current budget in the United States.

The teabaggers would like to lie and pretend he was, not having any knowledge of the constitution, nor paying attention in 3rd grade to how a bill is passed into law.

They are inept as well as ignorant.   Teabaggers are not fact or reality based. 

Look at the link provided in the dumbest fucking bit of self-congratulatory proof of incorrectness of the nutsuckerish lies told by the right in daddysatyrs post. 

The shitbreathers in the house passed a nutsuckerish bill that was subsequently shit on by the senate. 


Where have we seen this before?  (In reality, now)

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/24/2013 6:42:33 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth - 5/24/2013 7:38:26 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Clinton was not impeached.  End of that joke, as I said he wiped his ass with the meaningless house document.  
He is no more impeached than there is a budget in the united states.

How was he not impeached?

There is this thing called a constitution, in it is an advise and consent clause. The senate was advised, and did not consent.


The Senate plays no role in the impeachment of a President.

I don't know what Constitution you're reading, but According to the US Constitution, Article I Section 2 ends with this little nugget:
    quote:

    The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.


Further,
    quote:

    The Impeachment Process in a Nutshell
      1. The House Judiciary Committee deliberates over whether to initiate an impeachment inquiry.
      2. The Judiciary Committee adopts a resolution seeking authority from the entire House of Representatives to conduct an inquiry. Before voting, the House debates and considers the resolution. Approval requires a majority vote.
      3. The Judiciary Committee conducts an impeachment inquiry, possibly through public hearings. At the conclusion of the inquiry, articles of impeachment are prepared. They must be approved by a majority of the Committee.
      4. The House of Representatives considers and debates the articles of impeachment. A majority vote of the entire House is required to pass each article. Once an article is approved, the President is, technically speaking, "impeached" -- that is subject to trial in the Senate.
      5. The Senate holds trial on the articles of impeachment approved by the House. The Senate sits as a jury while the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.
      6. At the conclusion of the trial, the Senate votes on whether to remove the President from office. A two-thirds vote by the Members present in the Senate is required for removal.
      7. If the President is removed, the Vice-President assumes the Presidency under the chain of succession established by Amendment XXV.
    (emphasis added)


Article 2, Section 4 of the US Constitution:
    quote:

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

    (emphasis added)


quote:

If he was impeached, then there is a current budget in the United States.
The teabaggers would like to lie and pretend he was, not having any knowledge of the constitution, nor paying attention in 3rd grade to how a bill is passed into law.
They are inept as well as ignorant.   Teabaggers are not fact or reality based. 


I surely hope you aren't blaming the Republicans for there not being a budget. They have passed budget resolutions every year starting in 2011. It's the Democrats that haven't passed the budgets. Obama hasn't even been given a budget to sign.

You may want to brush up on the US Constitution before you go accusing others of not having any knowledge of it.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Lois Lerner is Taking the Fifth Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.156