Started By
Message
locked post

How incriminating do these e-mails have to be....

Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:22 am
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24748 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:22 am
For this administration to endure the ridicule, criticism, and scrutiny they are about to get, not to mention the ensuing legal battles. They must be making the conscious decision that this is better than the alternative, which is turning the e-mails over.

Somebody (or somebodies) must be incriminated in those e-mails for them to try this.
Posted by GeauxxxTigers23
TeamBunt General Manager
Member since Apr 2013
62514 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:23 am to
Yep, and I'm pretty sure they're not destroying evidence to protect Lois fricking Lerner.
Posted by constant cough
Lafayette
Member since Jun 2007
44788 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:23 am to
Lois Lerner being witch hunt
Posted by Decatur
Member since Mar 2007
28719 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:24 am to
Lois and Michelle O were likely coordinating their outfits for their weekend Bohemian Grove getaways.
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:24 am to
Better question, why hasn't someone involved sold Lerner or the White House out and gotten rich off of it? Or notoriety? Why is this the only thing the United States government can do this well at keeping a secret?

I mean, the only IMPOSSIBLE thing is that there is no real scandal that goes beyond the IRS. Right?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98842 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:25 am to
quote:

endure the ridicule, criticism, and scrutiny they are about to get,


You do realize that as of 5:30 CDT yesterday, not a single nightly network news broadcast had even mentioned this story, and only one network morning newscast (CBS) had said anything?
Posted by southernelite
Dallas
Member since Sep 2009
53177 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:26 am to
They don't have to be incriminating at all. Just another carrot for the Republicans.

There may be something incriminating, but there doesn't have to be. They're pandering to their democratic base by "making the Republicans look stupid", blah blah
Posted by jb4
Member since Apr 2013
12662 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:26 am to
My guess is the order for the IRS to target conservative groups for the 2012 election cycle came from white house officials, throw in dems in congress. Comparing the efforts of conservative groups in 2010 election cycle and 2012 election cycle, the plan worked great to hurt such groups.
This post was edited on 6/19/14 at 11:29 am
Posted by SoulGlo
Shinin' Through
Member since Dec 2011
17248 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:26 am to
Exactly. Lerner is a very small fish. They're not protecting her. If she was the "rogue"they say she is, then they'd have every 1 and 0 of data ever pushed by her. She isn't the rogue though, and that's why everything's gone.
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:27 am to
President Nixon was an amateur.

Truly.
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
101436 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:27 am to
quote:

You do realize that as of 5:30 CDT yesterday, not a single nightly network news broadcast had even mentioned this story, and only one network morning newscast (CBS) had said anything?



Go to nytimes.com

No mention of this ANYWHERE.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
95677 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:29 am to
quote:

Somebody (or somebodies) must be incriminated in those e-mails for them to try this.


It may not be incriminating as much as embarassing and a political time bomb.



For instance, it's come to light that one of the people who was leaning on the IRS to target these groups was Rep. Bruce Braley (D-IA).

Braley is running for Senate to replace the retiring Tom Harkin and is already in trouble for doing things like going to fundraisers and making fun of the idea of a farmer going to Washington DC instead of a lawyer. Not the brightest move to make when you represent a state which pretty much known for farming.

This coming out after he's already in hot water over that crap has to raise the chances that he loses to Joni Ernst, who is already capitalizing on the anti-farmer crap by highlighting how she used to be a pig farmer and wants to go to DC to "make 'em squeal".


At least one other politician up for election this time around who is tied up in this mess is Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), who was tied to it early on.


I have a feeling that if the e-mails come out, pretty much every major Dem up in a contested seat this year, like Landrieu and Mark Pryor (Arkansas) will show up as having pushed the IRS to do this.

That's not enough to get a conviction for anything as much as cause a massive public opinion swing against Dems and cost them a lot of vulnerable seats.

Losing the Senate opens the floodgates against Obama because Harry Reid and his procedural crap are part of what is keeping a lot of embarassing stuff from happening to him.
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
115890 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:32 am to
quote:

For this administration to endure the ridicule, criticism, and scrutin


I think they are assuming, based on past history, that they won't get that much and this story will go away. And no one will ultimately care.
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24748 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:33 am to
quote:

why hasn't someone involved sold Lerner or the White House out and gotten rich off of it?


Because there is only a small group of people who know who told Lerner to target conservative groups. Lerner may be the only one at the IRS who knows where the orders came from. Anybody who is involved could know that they will likely go to jail if they blow the whistle, and if they don't go to jail, the Democrat party will ruin them. They also know that if they go along with the ruse, there will be a presidential pardon in it for them.

These are also political ideologues who believe in their cause. Remember Sandy Berger getting caught destroying documents that supposedly incriminated the Clintons? They didn't send a thug to do this. They had Sandy Berger do it in order to keep the loop as closed as possible.
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51806 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:33 am to
This ain't got a damn thing to do with Lois freaking Learner or some jackleg Senator for Iowa.

It goes straight to the top and anyone that is stupid enough to believe any different should be rendered sterile and deported.

Lets not forget who was in the WH visitor logs MORE THAN ANY OTHER PERSON!!
Posted by Decatur
Member since Mar 2007
28719 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:34 am to
quote:

Because there is only a small group of people who know who told Lerner to target conservative groups.


Link?
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24748 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:35 am to
quote:

quote:
You do realize that as of 5:30 CDT yesterday, not a single nightly network news broadcast had even mentioned this story, and only one network morning newscast (CBS) had said anything?


Go to nytimes.com

No mention of this ANYWHERE.


They will start with the stories once they hear a plausible defense of this action. So far they haven't heard a reasonable account as to how this could have legitimately happened. So they will sit on it.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
95677 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:36 am to
quote:

This ain't got a damn thing to do with Lois freaking Learner or some jackleg Senator for Iowa.

It goes straight to the top and anyone that is stupid enough to believe any different should be rendered sterile and deported.

Lets not forget who was in the WH visitor logs MORE THAN ANY OTHER PERSON!!


I'm playing devil's advocate here.


I figure these e-mails are dirty as hell and would lead to jail time for a lot of the people involved if there were any justice.

I'm just trying to think of a situation where they'd be blocking their release if there were nothing illegal or incriminating in there.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98842 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:37 am to
quote:

Go to nytimes.com No mention of this ANYWHERE.


Because all the people that get their news from nightly network broadcasts read the NYT

<<< see, I can do it too
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51806 posts
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:39 am to
quote:

I figure these e-mails are dirty as hell and would lead to jail time for a lot of the people involved if there were any justice. I'm just trying to think of a situation where they'd be blocking their release if there were nothing illegal or incriminating in there.



There you go using common sense again!! You know that's not allowed anymore!! Off with his head!
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram