6 thoughts on “Darrel Issa”

  1. Obama administration defenders in the media claim that this is nothing because the emails we have seen so far only asked for publicly available information.

    But Issa’s contention is not the public/private nature of the information requested but the timing in which it was requested. Issa alleges that the FEC was conduction investigations prior to receiving authority to do so by the board and that the IRS helped with these unauthorized investigations.

    While improper, we don’t know if these actions only targeted groups other than Democrats or if it is common regardless of the political party of the groups involved.

  2. Issa is my congressman…..
    I wrote him about the Amash NSA vote. He voted to support the NSA, and the response I got back killed ANY respect I have for him. He is a big government guy only taking on causes as a partisan hack. I had hope he actually had standards but the response I got back was a dishonest platitude.

  3. He doesn’t have proof of collusion, he has proof of communication, so now he’s on a fishing expedition to see if he can find something inappropriate in that communication.

    Remember that the last time Issa promised a bombshell IRS revelation it turned out to be something that’d been known for months. He’s trying desperately to maintain interest in his investigations, despite having been at them for 2.5 years with no notable results. At this point one third of the House committees are busy investigating the Obama administration, an unprecedented degree of scrutiny, but they’ve yet to find anything that sticks.

    1. He doesn’t have proof of collusion, he has proof of communication

      Which incidentally is strong evidence of collusion. What valid reasons does the IRS have for communicating such information to the FEC? Especially, keeping in mind the demonstrated IRS bias against conservative groups in the first place?

    2. I recall that you have yet to provide any thing actually relevant to the IRS discussion. That the talking points you use seem to be missing any research into the actual scandal. And I know that after repeatedly being shown to be incorrect with links to actual IRS press releases and documents; you still keep coming back pushing your lies.

Comments are closed.