Posted on 06/23/2014 4:20:29 PM PDT by GOPinCa
Oh come on.....Werfel brings her into the IRS for six months, she then starts working for the WH. This is bad as it gets. Soooooooo, Ms. O’connor is participating in political incest.
I can’t find the hearing on cspan1 2 or 3. Where is it?
But at least we now know that she isn’t a “hostile witness”.
That’s a relief.
I believe “hostile witness” is a legal term, not an indication of ones frame of mind.
She is a fixer for the WH.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/jason-chaffetz-irs-emails-find-those-geeks-108229.html?hp=r2
Jason Chaffetz on IRS: ‘Find those geeks’
(snip)
“We’ve got to find those geeks and those nerds,” the Utah Republican said Tuesday on Fox News.
(snip)
“I’ve got to believe there might be a possibility that those emails are still out there,” Chaffetz said. Like others on the House Oversight Committee — notably chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) — Chaffetz said he doesn’t believe the IRS’ explanation for the lost emails. He doubted that the IRS hadn’t checked their backup right after Lerner’s hard drive crashed in 2011, which Chaffetz said should have stored the emails for six months.
(snip)
“I’m worried the White House has sent signals that there isn’t going to be any scandal and everybody’s getting in line,” Chaffetz said. “Let’s remember why we’re in this mess. It’s totally unacceptable.”
Mica supposedly wants to chair the OGR committee in the next congress. NO!!!..give it to Chaffetz or Jordan..
I hope Gowdy learned from this how to structure the select committee...Hillary, if she saw Gowdy last night, should be VERY afraid..
Trey Gowdy gave Issa the correct term to use...non cooperating witness
I hope Gowdy is appointed to be AG in the future
Cleta Mitchell was on fox the other day and said there was a 10k reward for whoever locates those emails.
Thank you
Not sure about that. From the Heritage guide to the constitution -
"The scope of the pardon power remains quite broad, almost plenary. As Justice Stephen Field wrote in Ex parte Garland (1867), "If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching [thereto]; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity....A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender....so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence." A pardon is valid whether accepted or not, because its purposes are primarily public. It is an official act. According to United States v. Klein (1871), Congress cannot limit the President's grant of an amnesty or pardon, but it can grant other or further amnesties itself. Though pardons have been litigated, the Court has consistently refused to limit the President's discretion. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, however, in Schick v. Reed (1974), seemed to limit the Court's restraint to pardons under "conditions which do not in themselves offend the Constitution.""
Thank you
10k? How about $1,000,000 and witness protection??
Perfect! Especially since Jason does have a bit of the nerd about himself.
Lois Lerner took an ax
and gave her hard drive forty whacks,
and when she saw what she had done,
she gave six others forty one.
And yet some backups did exist,
so carefully she made a list.
So when she found them, she was not slow,
To give those too the old heave ho.
14 posted on 6/24/2014, 10:29:55 AM by Edward Teach
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.