House Republicans this week released e-mails showing that Lois Lerner used the term “__hole” to describe extreme right wingers on the talk-show circuit.
Does that mean the former IRS official has beef with conservatives in general? (YES YES IT DOES) A few select e-mails are not enough to answer that question for certain (perhaps not for the likes of you, it's pretty cut & dried, her "beef" with right wingers, you know the whole I destroyed 18 hard drives so my role in the targeting couldn't be prosecuted?) , but it’s fair to say she’s not very fond of the blowhard variety. (Do tell us what the blow hard variety is...)
The e-mails in question show an undisclosed individual complaining to Lerner about “the whacko wing of the GOP,” adding that “right wing radio shows are scary to listen to.”
Lerner responded: “Great. Maybe we are through if there are that many __holes.” She followed up with another message saying: “So we don’t need to worry about alien teRrorists [sic]. It’s our own crazies that will take us down.” (Yeah you know cuz those tea partiers have caused death & destruction everywhere they go..oh wait..nevermind... wrong ideology)
Those aren’t the words of an apolitical person. (Probably the only genuine thing you have written here) But career federal employees are allowed to have political views. The problem starts when they abuse their authority or otherwise act unethically because of those views. (uhuh kind of like the dog ate my hard drive and oh by the he ate 18 other hard drives too cuz he was hungry?)
Sure, Lerner was a registered Democrat. And she also expressed an interest in working for a nonprofit advocacy group founded by President Obama’s allies, saying in a January 2013 e-mail to another IRS official: “Oh — maybe I can get the DC office job.”
But all of that evidence is circumstantial. None of it proves conclusively that Lerner directed a campaign specifically to target conservative nonprofit groups and hinder them, as Republicans have suggested. (As some Republicans have suggested??? You know, the whole let's be careful what we put in our emails and destroying hard drives would lead only Republicans to suggest foul play?)
Keep in mind that the IRS’s controversial targeting efforts netted both left- and right-leaning groups, although mostly conservatives. (NO NO they didn't, that theory has already been debunked but nice try...)
It’s also worth noting that a self-described “conservative Republican” manager told GOP investigators that he elevated the first tea party case to Washington for additional analysis. An inspector general’s timeline of the targeting actions listed an event on that same date, Feb. 25, 2010, as the genesis of the inappropriate IRS behavior. (What is your point here and who is this "self-described conservative Republican" ? because there are a whole lot of self-described conservative Republicans" that are anything but and that would benefit from this targeting of the right since it's their butts the tea party is going after.)
At the end of the day, Republicans hoping to prove that Lerner led efforts to silence conservatives will need direct evidence. (Yeah, kind of hard to get that when they DESTROYED the evidence) They don’t have that yet, so it’s no surprise that they’re frustrated with the IRS saying recently that it lost years worth of Lerner’s e-mails. (Frustrated??? Really??? That's all you got? The IRS destroys several hard drives to keep investigators from finding out the extent of their criminal actions? Wouldn't you be a little frustrated too had George Bush's administration done this? No, this goes way beyond being frustrated. This leads to hopefully, a mass action of refusing to pay taxes until our IRS overlords stop targeting people simply for what they believe. When people no longer trust that government institutions will be fair with everyone, you know the whole equal justice under the law thing? They will stop giving them respect or paying taxes to the very people who are unfairly ruling over them. It's about time for a tax revolt...)
Russia has a flat tax of 12%, if we had that, we wouldn't need biased bureaucrats who think that people on the opposite side of the spectrum are a__holes...