re: Gowdy just destroys Koskinen this morning

quote:

---

Why do people on this board get off on Trey Gowdy being hostile towards witnesses?

---

Because it's become a rare thing for federal employees to be held responsible for questionable or poor behavior. Something has to be especially egregious for there to be more than a slap on the wrist and/or a shuffling off to another agency, lobbying firm or retirement.

There is a deep belief among voters of both sides of the aisle that those in power in DC break laws at will and thumb their nose at those of us outside the beltway when we don't like it. When someone like Gowdy challenges them publicly on their bullshite (like concurrent investigations or there being no back-ups) with arguments that are absolutely lock-tight, it gives the masses a little faith that not everyone in DC is a posturing idiot that's only there for personal and/or party gain.

If the targeted groups were in line with your political/philosophical beliefs, you and Rex would both be cheering loudly for Gowdy.

quote:

---

any smart and INNOCENT

---

Innocents don't talk but the guilty do?

Awesome rex.

quote:

---

Rex, do you actually believe that the computer of everyone involved in this obvious witch hunt just happened to fail??? Do you really?

---

Where do you get your info?

quote:

---

Ok smart guy, do you actually believe they cant retrieve the "lost" emails from the server even if the hard drives have been "recycled" ?

---

I believe the reason emails had to be stored on local drives is because of limited server space, yes.

I also believe Mr. Koskinen when he says the IRS suffers 2000 disk crashes per year.

I also believe most official emails have been recovered by paper copies and from recipients, anyway.

quote:

---

Gowdy just destroys Koskinen this morni

---

Dude has a syrup bucket full of balls.
Love to watch him in hearings.

quote:

---

I have no problem with Federal employees being held responsible, but there is no reason, and it's counterproductive, for someone like Gowdy to constantly act like an angry arse toward witnesses. He doesn't come across as someone who wants to get at the truth but as someone who thinks he can score cheap theater points with easily impressionable people.

---

Scoring - Push (Both parties are quite strident and theatrical)

quote:

---

Koskinen was not at the IRS during the period in question. There was no call for Gowdy to get immediately belligerent just because Koskinen said he found no evidence of wrongdoing.

---

Scoring - Point (Rex)

quote:

---

Which brings us to the matter of your "what would we do if the targeted groups were in line with our point" of view statement. You're only assuming what you wish to prove... just as Gowdy does.

---

Scoring - Push (See comment above)

quote:

---

And did I say "counterproductive"? If Lerner refuses to testify then venom-spewing Republicans on the panel have mostly themselves to blame. She did precisely what any smart and INNOCENT person would do against "judges" who had already proclaimed her guilt.

---

Scoring - Negative Point (Rex)

Overall Scoring - Push

You were close, so close. But you just had to go knee jerk anger in your final paragraph. Overall, one of the most reasonable posts I have ever seen from you.

Kudos good sir.

quote:

---

Lots of liberal butthurt here.

---

do you deny that "destroy" is used by both sides to the point it doesn't mean anything?

quote:

---

I have no problem with Federal employees being held responsible, but there is no reason, and it's counterproductive, for someone like Gowdy to constantly act like an angry arse toward witnesses.

---

I disagree because Koskinen has either lied repeatedly about this or was pathetically uninformed (which shows piss-poor leadership). No matter which it is, it's his fault yet he keeps doing it.

Gowdy is showing his disgust and growing ire at such irresponsible behavior. With each round Koskinen has been proven to have incorrect information and that information would have stood as fact if not for the investigation going on. Not taking someone to task for that level of gross incompetence or outright dishonesty would be tacit approval of such behavior.

quote:

---

Which brings us to the matter of your "what would we do if the targeted groups were in line with our point" of view statement. You're only assuming what you wish to prove

---

bullshite. 298 cases came up, 16 were liberal. That's pretty one-sided. But that's only part of the story.

n August 2010, a formal "Be on the Lookout" list was created instructing staff to flag applications of tea party groups. In June 2011, the list was expanded to include the words "Patriot" and "9/12 project," (a Glenn Beck project) and applications with missions to "make America a better place to live," statements that criticized how the country is being run, or groups focused on government spending, debt or taxes. This BOLO also contained instructions on referring these groups for greater scrutiny.

Over the course of the next two years, 298 total cases were sent to D.C. for that greater scrutiny. Seventy-two of those groups had the name "tea party," 13 had "Patriot" and 11 had "9/12." The other 202 cases were listed as "other." In 160 of these cases, the application remained open between 206 and 1,138 days, while 108 were approved. Of those 108 that were approved, 16 were the aforementioned liberal/progressive groups. But wait, there's more!

There was also a BOLO for the word "progressive". Of all groups that had "progressive" in their name, only 30% were flagged for greater scrutiny (ie: the aforementioned 16) while 100% of the groups found to have "tea party", "9/12", etc in their names were referred. As if that wasn't enough, there's one more thing!

While the BOLO for the conservative words/phrases had specific directions on how to refer them for greater scrutiny, there was no such direction for those with the word "progressive".

tl;dr -

1. The IRS looked for multiple conservative words and phrases, but only one liberal one.

2. Of those found, ALL of the conservative groups were held up for greater scrutiny while only 30% of liberal groups were.

3. And the "greater scrutiny" for the liberal groups was in name only while conservative groups had to jump through hoops.

(and this doesn't even touch on how all 16 of the liberal groups were quickly approved while some of the conservative groups are STILL waiting)

Not seeing the biased targeting of conservative groups is only possible by either lying about not seeing it or purposely trying not to.

that's that transparency factor...pleading the 5th...most in history...uh huh