Breitbart.com reports that the IRS Director of the division being investigated by the IRS Inspector General was allowed to sit in on the ‘interviews’ with IRS employees!

When the IRS IG was asked why…he tried to claim he was ‘unaware’ of it.

So if you worked for the IRS, and you were being ‘interviewed’ about wrongdoing by a supervisor, how outgoing would you be…with that supervisor sitting across from you?

The IRS will soon be enforcing Obamacare…

…EVERYONE is subject to Obamacare…

…and if the IRS chooses to target conservatives with denied healthcare services…?

Unlikely?

The same IRS official orchestrating the scandal now handles Obamacare oversight…

…then invoked the 5th Amendment…and refused to answer ANY questions.

The 5th Amendment says “No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…” (emphasis added).

But, if she did nothing wrong, broke no laws, violated no IRS rules, why invoke the 5th?

She can’t be a witness ‘against herself’ if she’s telling the truth…because under those circumstances her answers would only support her ‘did nothing wrong’ contention.

So, by invoking the 5th to use as a shield she’s either lying about her own innocence (while under oath, it would appear), or she’s protecting someone else.

She’s broken the law, either by lying about her innocence, or by using the 5th under false pretenses…i.e., NOT to protect her own rights, but to protect someone else.

Suspending an IRS manager’s pay isn’t Unconstitutional…suppressing and intimidating voters is seriously Unconstitutional, and is further enhanced by the scandal’s exposure.

First, we never suggested they be charged…just ‘encouraged’ to testify. How fast they provided that testimony would dictate how fast they get their pay (plus back-pay).

BlueCollar doesn’t suggest lower level IRS managers were guilty of building a structure of policy that was put in place to intimidate and suppress conservative groups…

…but they may have carried out the plan, even if unwillingly. And, giving them a chance to testify allows lower-level managers the opportunity to get immunity from that action.

Remember, the suggestion was not to cut their pay, simply suspend it until testifying. They would get all back-pay as soon as their cooperation was a matter of record.

(And really, how logical is it to worry about an IRS that doesn’t hesitate to freeze your assets without due process…but then believe it a problem when table’s are turned?)

Worse, the scandal’s revelation doesn’t change or stop the intimidation…it increases it!

If ‘money is the mother’s milk of politics’, then this IRS scandal and it’s exposure will further dry up political contributions to conservative groups across the nation.

Only an aggressive, effective, and quick purge of the guilty will change that.

If Congress deals with this scandal in their usual way, the threat of an ideological IRS breathing down the necks of potential donors will further suppress and intimidate many.

And you’ll see the consequences in 2014 and beyond.

Demand they act…now!

Contact your Congressional representative; demand that all IRS management connected to the various locations under investigation be suspended without pay.

(The link will take you to the House of Representative site; search assistance to find your representative is halfway down the page on the left under House Overview.)

No pay until they testify…and let them know the consequences of dodging questions.

For each ‘I don’t recall’-type dodge, add a 3 month no-pay suspension at the end.

Flushing rats from holes is easier with the right motivation; hitting them in their wallets will guarantee a more cooperative mindset…from lower level managers, especially.

And once that first cooperation ’domino’ is tipped, many will rush to avoid blame.

Without leverage, no investigation can expose the corrupting rot in the IRS.

Skeptical? Don’t think real financial consequences will work as a motivator?

Try using ’I don’t recall’ on your tax returns…or in a tax audit.

This unlawful IRS activity did not ‘just happen’ at mid-level positions. Orders came down from above…flushed out rats will defend themselves, exposing higher-up duplicity.

If refusing to protect Americans in foreign service doesn’t justify impeachment…

…those last 10 words of the presidential oath of office give clear and compelling reasons for removing a failed leadership from positions of elected office.

Teasury Dept intimidation, Justice Dept intrusions, State Dept coverups, Defense Dept cowardice…these acts - all BEFORE the Nov ’12 elections – didn’t occur in a vacuum…

…their leaders answer to 1 man…

…and their pre-election crimes benefited that man…and his political party.

For cowardice, desertion, and dereliction of duty, he should be stripped of office for his abject failure to protect Americans in Benghazi…

…and on the domestic scene…he still has much more to answer for.

But motive-and-opportunity clearly reveal all scandal trails lead to the White House…

IRS intimidation and voter suppression efforts against conservatives? The IRS is part of the Treasury Dept, under White House control…and pre-election efforts helped Obama.

Justice Dept accessing media phone records, monitoring conversations? DoJ answers to the White House, and illegally gathering that information helped…you guessed it.

State Dept removing all intel references to al-Qaeda in Benghazi talking points? Both the State Dept and intel agencies answer to…yep, the Anointed One…who happened to be campaigning on an “I killed Osama, and al-Qaeda’s on it’s heels” foreign policy.

All these illegal/shady/deceptive practices were for Obama’s benefit…and were carried out by Obama’s Team…for the benefit of Barack ‘Who-Me?’ Obama.

This is a clear example of Affirmative-Action liberal leadership, without a clue of how to run a campaign on solid issues, or how to run a country based on the U.S. Constitution.

If ‘Obama didn’t know’, he’s incompetent…if he did know, he’s malevolent.

Either way, he should be thrown out of the White House.

…would hearings (to ask why no help was sent) be called a ‘circus’, Mr. Obama?

If ‘Glen Clinton’ was killed on that rooftop, would it make a difference, Mrs. Clinton?

Just asking…

Not knowing the duration, intensity, or lethality of that situation should have spurred a leader to commit military assets – including Spec-Ops forces - to help fight off attackers.

Failure to send help wasn’t just incompetent…it was WILLFUL Incompetence.

If you see a child struggling after falling through ice on the lake, do you not do anything because you don’t know how long they’ve struggled, or how much longer they can?

Do you stay on shore and watch, unsure if the ice will hold your weight?

What if you had told the child to go ice skating in the first place?

The right thing would be to do whatever can be done to help, not just sit and watch.

What Obama, Panetta, and Clinton did is the equivalent of telling a child to go out and play on the ice; then, when hearing screams of distress and (from a window) seeing the child struggle, rather than help…chose to turn the lights out…and go back to sleep.

Their job was to protect Americans they put in harm’s way…and they did NOTHING.

(Actually, they did worse, if stand-down orders count as an ‘act’!)

How can any sane person defend such lethal incompetence?

Sadly, elections continue to prove otherwise.

‘Benghazi-Lying’ hasn’t stopped Democrats, or shamed a media that helps them.

But many seem to focus on the wrong issues, and the wrong lies.

Here are the 3 major issues to address, regarding Benghazi failures…

BEFORE

1) What kind of incompetent State Dept. leader would allow funding for non-essential low-priority projects in benign locations (elec car-charging stations in Vienna!), rather than critically essential security for high-priority terror hotspots like Benghazi?

Followup question: what fool would ever again vote for such an incompetent person?

DURING

2) Who is responsible for authorizing U.S. military intervention in other nations, when American lives are threatened by attacking terrorists and host nations won’t/can’t help?

Followup question: if it’s the sole authority of Obama, was he a-w-o-l, or ignored; if ignored, why hasn’t his (now, former) Secretary of Defense Panetta been charged; if a-w-o-l, is Dereliction of Duty a ‘high crime and misdemeanor’, which is impeachable?

AFTER

3) How does Obama justify removing the CIA’s various al-Qaeda references for Benghazi talking points, and inexplicably ADD a never-referenced video as the cause?

Followup question: if the deceitful ’video smokescreen’ gave cover to al-Qaeda, isn’t that defined as giving ‘aid & comfort’ to America’s enemies…a Treason offense?

****

And remember, what Clinton failed to do in order to ensure the security of her embassy people ‘Before’, is separate from the ‘During’ and ‘After’ failures of Barack Obama.

Remind us again…where does ‘the buck stop’…?