Video: The obligatory Obama-O’Reilly Super Bowl interview

posted at 8:01 am on February 3, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Not obligatory on our part, mind you, but apparently on Barack Obama’s part. Why he agreed to do an interview with Fox and Bill O’Reilly is anyone’s guess, because he clearly wasn’t there to answer questions. Instead, we got this strange dance where both men almost continually interrupted each other, and the President of the United States claiming that every problem in his administration could be blamed on Fox News.

Hey. if that’s true, why did Obama give Fox the interview? Apparently, Obama can’t fire anyone.

For instance, here’s part of the exchange about Benghazi, which was a terror attack despite the White House’s initial insistence that it was a demonstration that spun out of control:

O’REILLY:  – but I just want to say that they’re — your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out.

OBAMA:  Bill, think about…

O’REILLY:  That’s what they believe.

OBAMA:  – and they believe it because folks like you are telling them that.

O’REILLY:  No, I’m not telling them that.

And here we have Obama’s answer on the IRS targeting of conservatives, which is again only a problem because of Fox News:

OBAMA:  I do not recall meeting with him in any of these meetings that are pretty routine meetings that we had.

O’REILLY:  OK, so you don’t — you don’t recall seeing Shulman, because what some people are saying is that the IRS was used…

OBAMA:  Yes.

O’REILLY:  – at a — at a local level in Cincinnati, and maybe other places to go after…

OBAMA:  Absolutely wrong.

O’REILLY:  – to go after.

OBAMA:  Absolutely wrong.

O’REILLY:  But how do you know that, because we — we still don’t know what happened there?

OBAMA:  Bill, we do — that’s not what happened.  They — folks have, again, had multiple hearings on this.  I mean these kinds of things keep on surfacing, in part because you and your TV station will promote them.

Finally, here’s part of an exchange in which Obama promises to hold people accountable for the failure of ObamaCare, but when O’Reilly notes that no one has lost their job yet, O’Reilly allows Obama to offer a couple of complete non-sequiturs:

OBAMA:  – and those who are underinsured are able to get better health insurance.

O’REILLY:  I’m sure — I’m sure that the intent is noble, but I’m a taxpayer.

OBAMA:  Yes.

O’REILLY:  And I’m paying Kathleen Sebelius’ salary and she screwed up.

OBAMA:  Yes.

O’REILLY:  And you’re not holding her accountable.

OBAMA:  Yes, well, I — I promise you that we hold everybody up and down the line accountable.  But when we’re…

O’REILLY:  But she’s still there.

OBAMA:  – when we’re in midstream, Bill, we want to make sure that our main focus is how do we make this thing work so that people are able to sign up?

And that’s what we’ve done.

O’REILLY:  All right.

Seriously, I don’t know why Obama bothered to do this interview at all. The only answer he seemed interested in sharing was that Fox News is a big Meany Channel with Meany Reporters who Keep Asking Questions When I Give The Only Answers I Want To Give. I’m not sure this is doing Fox any favors, either, other than some satisfaction over putting the President on a hot seat for a short period of time when most other news channels want to treat Obama like a celebrity. Anyway, watch the video, or perhaps just follow the link to the rest of the transcript instead. You’ll find it less frustrating.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

The tea party obama is anti America, anti working man and anti minority in my opinion. They He made it very easy voting for Barry even though I disagree with him more than 50% of the time.

loveofcountry on February 3, 2014 at 1:57 PM

He also hates the middle class, vehemently, as I told you a million times, from day one.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:02 PM

But you’re sure they all lied…”Obama/Hillary/their surrogates”…
at least pick one specific alleged liar and one specific alleged lie and share the proof for that?
 
verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 1:21 PM

 
Let’s ask verbaluce:
 

Fairly ok statement in the Rose Garden.
I would have prefered a more vigorous defense of free speech and a more vigorous villification of the film, But that did seem to follow.
 
verbaluce on September 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Fairly ok statement in the Rose Garden.
I would have prefered a more vigorous defense of free speech and a more vigorous villification of the film, But that did seem to follow.

verbaluce on September 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Now, now, rogerb, that was when verbie had more coffee.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:04 PM

Lest any of you forgot

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:06 PM

what I find ok is not taking the conspiracy wing of the Republican party seriously.

The tea party is anti America, anti working man and anti minority in my opinion. They made it very easy voting for Barry even though I disagree with him more than 50% of the time.

hateofcountry on February 3, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Please provide credible, multi-sourced proof of the Tea Party being

1. Anti-America

2. Anti working man

3. anti minority.

And before making a fool out of yourself again, remember that the Tea Party is responsible for getting Michigan’s right-to-work bill passed, as well as supporting such legislation in other states.

And also remember that the $100,000 reward offered for whoever provides video proof of Tea Party Racism has still gone unclaimed, years after it was first offered.

Finally, please provide credible and multi-sourced cites of how the Tea Party is “anti American”.

We’ll be here.

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Yes it is indeed just that.
It’s never been ‘shown’ they lied.
But you’re sure they all lied…”Obama/Hillary/their surrogates”…
at least pick one specific alleged liar and one specific alleged lie and share the proof for that?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 1:21 PM

Oh, so you’re picking uninformed.

This seems to be your schtick.

Seriously, Obama said that the Bhengazi attack was prompted by a YouTube vid. So did Hillary. So did Susan Rice. Multiple documents and sources have surfaced that clearly show that they always knew it was a terrorist attack (in a region where the Brits got out and the Red Cross because of terrorist activity). Obama even claimed in an interview they always knew and always called them terrorist attacks (even though he clearly didn’t, when asked point blank previously he refused to say they were).

They’ve also shown a complete lack of accountability and responsibility on this issue. Someone – typically Sec of State – has to sign off on a facility not conforming to standard security practices like the facility in Bhengazi.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 2:08 PM

Multiple documents and sources have surfaced that clearly show that they always knew it was a terrorist attack

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 2:08 PM

My final post on Page 2 has a hyperlink to the declassified documents, straight from the government.

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 2:10 PM

verbal is flailing hard. Where’s Candy with the transcript when you need her?

Christien on February 3, 2014 at 2:14 PM

No! However what I find ok is not taking the conspiracy wing of the Republican party seriously.

The tea party is anti America, anti working man and anti minority in my opinion. They made it very easy voting for Barry even though I disagree with him more than 50% of the time.

loveofcountry on February 3, 2014 at 1:57 PM

LOL, holy phuck you’re stupid. Even dumber than the verbalduece. Let me guess, you’re non-partisan..like non-partisan.

HumpBot Salvation on February 3, 2014 at 2:18 PM

He lied about his own lies last night.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:21 PM

BTW, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 2:27 PM

It’s never been ‘shown’ they lied.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 1:21 PM

Indeed

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:28 PM

It’s never been ‘shown’ they lied.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 1:21 PM

Nah, he didn’t lie.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM

Trolls, for you

“I would challenge to a battle of wits, but I see you are unarmed!”

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Lying sack…

… I don’t even bother listening to a single word he has to say.

Seven Percent Solution on February 3, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Best lie of last night “not even a smidgeon of corruption

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Best lie of last night “not even a smidgeon of corruption“

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Makes you wonder what it has to be to qualify as corruption, eh?

Thats the scary part

BobMbx on February 3, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Makes you wonder what it has to be to qualify as corruption, eh?
Thats the scary part

BobMbx on February 3, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Anything conservatives do….

dentarthurdent on February 3, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Makes you wonder what it has to be to qualify as corruption, eh?

Thats the scary part

BobMbx on February 3, 2014 at 2:43 PM

No, that’s the easy part really.

Your Favorite PoliticianRState

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 3:11 PM

Obama was simply preaching to his choir.

MT on February 3, 2014 at 3:11 PM

All Obama did was try his hardest to blame Fox News for asking good, hard questions. I hate the man. Truly the worst president in my lifetime. BTW, I was born in 1951, during the administration of Harry Truman, who had on his desk a sign that said “The Buck Stops Here”.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

“The Buck Stops Here”.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM

That’s a far cry from “I found out the way you found out, media reporting”.

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 3:33 PM

I guess a conference suddenly came up.

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 3:36 PM

“Oh, Bill, you’ve got a long list of my mistakes of my presidency…”

When Obama said this O’Reilly should have responded with “I’m astonished and deeply saddened to hear you say that. Mr. President. I’d remind you that I merely compiled that list. I didn’t create it. The American people deserve direct and specific answers, rather than an observation that the list exists when asked to provide those answers.”

thatsafactjack on February 3, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Seriously, Obama said that the Bhengazi attack was prompted by a YouTube vid. So did Hillary. So did Susan Rice. Multiple documents and sources have surfaced that clearly show that they always knew it was a terrorist attack (in a region where the Brits got out and the Red Cross because of terrorist activity). Obama even claimed in an interview they always knew and always called them terrorist attacks (even though he clearly didn’t, when asked point blank previously he refused to say they were).

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 2:08 PM

No – what these folks did initially was draw a connection to the video. They were already dealing with reports, and following stuff like the Mazar-i-Sharif attack in 2011, it wasn’t a stretch. You and other assign a definiteness to statements and reactions that simply didn’t exists. It’s telling that the only ‘proof’ you’re able to offer of ‘lies’ is a bunch of strained parsing of initial statements and off the cuff remarks.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:53 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Oh please, when they met with the families on the return of the bodies they stated that the video maker would be arrested and punished. And he was but not for the video but some other trumped up charge. No free speech for him.

Cindy Munford on February 3, 2014 at 3:55 PM

You can do your own homework. I don’t have to repeat things for others.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Um, sure…that’s why you made your initial comment?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:56 PM

It is utterly fascinating how people defend this president and the lies that he repeats time and again. And, never takes responsibility for anything that goes wrong.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2014 at 4:04 PM

Cindy Munford on February 3, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Read Tyrone Woods’ Mom’s telling of that meeting.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:53 PM

You seem to be searching for something a little more conclusive than what’s already been offered up. To be honest anyone with the intellect of a gnat could see the writing on the wall. Maybe we can get our hands on a copy of the State Dept. self-investigation, you know, the one where Hillary and other top officials were never questioned. Would that help? Prolly not.

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:53 PM

You seem to be searching for something a little more conclusive than what’s already been offered up. To be honest anyone with the intellect of a gnat could see the writing on the wall. Maybe we can get our hands on a copy of the State Dept. self-investigation, you know, the one where Hillary and other top officials were never questioned. Would that help? Prolly not.

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM

That SIC report didn’t give you what you wanted, did it?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM

No – what these folks did initially was draw a connection to the video. They were already dealing with reports, and following stuff like the Mazar-i-Sharif attack in 2011, it wasn’t a stretch. You and other assign a definiteness to statements and reactions that simply didn’t exists. It’s telling that the only ‘proof’ you’re able to offer of ‘lies’ is a bunch of strained parsing of initial statements and off the cuff remarks.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Your lack of knowledge of what’s already been said and researched on this topic is very telling.

You’re either willfully ignorant or the powers of self deception are so strong in you that you can’t see facts.

There is no strained parsing going on. We have direct and strong public statements from Obama/Hillary/others regarding Bhengazi that were false when we now know they knew at the time without any doubt that the attacks were acts of terrorism.

There’s also the complete lack of accountability on why the consulate didn’t have proper security. This consulate had a security incident before the one that killed Stevens and the others.

The Brits and Red Cross and others had already left due to the dangerous situation there.

And “YouTube” video was never given as a reason. That was a pathetic excuse. And you know it.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 4:33 PM

That SIC report didn’t give you what you wanted, did it?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Oh, the SIC, butt-covering “report” that’s a complete joke?

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM

That SIC report didn’t give you what you wanted, did it?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Oh, the SIC, butt-covering “report” that’s a complete joke?

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM

Sucks when bipartisan investigations don’t deliver on predisposed notions, huh?
/
Maybe Issa will bake a nice pie someday.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Sucks when bipartisan investigations don’t deliver on predisposed notions, huh?
/
Maybe Issa will bake a nice pie someday.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM

You only wish it was my “predisposed notions”.

Obama contradicted himself on a number of occasions.

When it was politically expedient for him to do so he denied – point blank – that it was a terrorist attack. Later he said that of course he’d always called it a terrorist attack.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Cindy Munford on February 3, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Read Tyrone Woods’ Mom’s telling of that meeting.

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Democrats Refuse to Hear Testimony from Parents of Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods, Who Died in Benghazi

‘Nuff said.

F-

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Obama contradicted himself on a number of occasions.

When it was politically expedient for him to do so he denied – point blank – that it was a terrorist attack. Later he said that of course he’d always called it a terrorist attack.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 4:54 PM

In fact, Democrat newspaper the Washington Post gave verbaloon’s Cult Leader O’bama 4 Pinocchios for his lies about whether or not Ben Ghazi was a terror attack.

During the campaign, the president could just get away with claiming he said “act of terror,” since he did use those words — though not in the way he often claimed. It seemed like a bit of after-the-fact spin, but those were his actual words — to the surprise of Mitt Romney in the debate.

But the president’s claim that he said “act of terrorism” is taking revisionist history too far, given that he repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack. He appears to have gone out of his way to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack, so he has little standing to make that claim now.

Indeed, the initial unedited talking points did not call it an act of terrorism. Instead of pretending the right words were uttered, it would be far better to acknowledge that he was echoing what the intelligence community believed at the time–and that the administration’s phrasing could have been clearer and more forthright from the start.

Four Pinocchios

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:07 PM

Democrats Refuse to Hear Testimony from Parents of Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods, Who Died in Benghazi

‘Nuff said.

F-

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Indeed…when it’s b.s. of that level.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:26 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Also, Obama said that there wasn’t a smidgen of corruption regarding the IRS targeting conservative political groups.

But he got up there and said that it was unacceptable. He was outraged. He would make sure it was investigated and government held accountable.

And now there’s nothing to it. It’s just Fox news that keeps that old “IRS is corrupt” canard going. And I’m sure Lois Lerner’s history of corruption at the FEC isn’t relevant. And her pleading the 5th is meaningless.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:27 PM

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:27 PM

He said if the allegations were true –
but then it turned out not to be.

But what is your theory here?
What actions do you accuse Obama of on the IRS ‘scandal’?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

F-

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Indeed…when it’s b.s. of that level.

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:26 PM

lol! Only “b.s.” is the not-so brilliant satire you link to. Because it doesn’t mention the Democrats who stayed.

Here are the names of the Democrats who walked out:

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.)
Rep. John Tierney (MA-6)
Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (MO-1)
Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA-9)
Rep. Jim Cooper (TN-5)
Rep. Gerald Connolly (VA-11)
Rep. Matt Cartwright (PA-17)
Rep. Mark Pocan (WI-2)
Rep. Tammy Duckworth (IL-8)
Rep. Danny K. Davis (IL-7)
Rep. Peter Welch (VT)
Rep. Tony Cardenas (CA-29)
Rep. Steve Horsford (NV-4)
Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-1)

All of them are from safe districts so didn’t have to worry about the repercussions.

But they obviously are as interested in protecting their Cult Leader as you are, reality be damned. Too bad he couldn’t win the college graduate vote in 2012!

4 Pinocchios-

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Translated: “Time for me to abandon Ben Ghazi, just like my Cult Leader did, and pivot to the IRS!”

A+

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:37 PM

That SIC report didn’t give you what you wanted, did it?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Maybe that’s why we don’t let private entities self-investigate when they break the law. But it seems to be a real common practice with this administration, namely the DOJ, SIC, DHS, and IRS, just to name a few.

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 5:39 PM

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:27 PM

He said if the allegations were true –
but then it turned out not to be.

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Far-Right news sources

Associated Press

IRS apologizes for targeting tea party groups

CNN

Report finds IRS targeted conservative groups, delayed applications

Washington Post

IRS admits targeting conservatives for tax scrutiny in 2012 election

Please continue. You’re getting more delusional by the minute!

A+

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:45 PM

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Leaving aside your I’m sure so reputable sources for this information…
you believe that those people got up at walked out on the families?
You truly believe and accept that is what happened?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:46 PM

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Translated: “Time for me to abandon Ben Ghazi, just like my Cult Leader did, and pivot to the IRS!”

A+

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:37 PM

You need to at least try and follow along.
Or did you mean to throw this snark at gwelf?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:50 PM

He said if the allegations were true –
but then it turned out not to be.

But what is your theory here?
What actions do you accuse Obama of on the IRS ‘scandal’?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Ha ha ha ha.

You mean the DOJ/FBI investigation currently being headed up by a political appointee who’s an Obama donor and where no one has talked to any of the targeted groups?

And if the investigation is still going then why has Obama decided already that there isn’t even a particle of corruption? Holder says he can’t talk about the investigation because it’s ongoing. But it looks like Obama’s already decided the investigation is over.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:50 PM

He said if the allegations were true –
but then it turned out not to be.

But what is your theory here?
What actions do you accuse Obama of on the IRS ‘scandal’?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Oh, yeah. That’s why Obama was outrageously outraged that his political opponents were targeted.

What actions did Obama take in the scandal? I don’t think he ordered it but it’s obvious that his fellow travelers in the bureaucracy feel free under his “leadership” to corruptly target the dear leaders political opponents. So, in the wake of several federal agencies targeting his political enemies it’s obvious Obama doesn’t care and tacitly approves of their behavior by not holding them responsible. He didn’t order the corruption but he’s protecting it and encouraging more.

Also, you might recall that the IRS broke the law – they illegally made confidential information available to outside groups. And the congressional testimony totally demolishes the only defense the Obama admin gave for it that it was some rogue office in Cinncinati.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Leaving aside your I’m sure so reputable sources for this information…

you believe that those people got up at walked out on the families?
You truly believe and accept that is what happened?

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:46 PM

My source was CNN, Cultist.

Please continue.

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:57 PM

But it looks like Obama’s already decided the investigation is over.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 5:50 PM

I’d say that’s the general feeling of most folks, yes.
Maybe they’re all too distracted by the big Solandra scandal.
Or F&F scandal?
Or the New Black Panthers cover-up.
Or the FEMA Concentration camp scandal.
Or the scandal where they bought all the bullets.
Or that guy that sold Obama crack when he was a senator.
/
/
/

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:59 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Apparently you and Obama are the only people in America who are claiming they know who ordered conservative groups to be targeted and why so why don’t you share it with us.

Or are you going back to your fact-free lie that the IRS didn’t target conservative groups?

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Leaving aside your I’m sure so reputable sources for this information…

you believe that those people got up at walked out on the families?
You truly believe and accept that is what happened?

verbaloon on February 3, 2014 at 5:46 PM

My source was CNN, Cultist.

Please continue.

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Youb are again not following.
I said ‘leaving aside’ sources…

you believe that those people got up at walked out on the families?
You truly believe and accept that is what happened?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:01 PM

I’d say that’s the general feeling of most folks, yes.
Maybe they’re all too distracted by the big Solandra scandal.
Or F&F scandal?
Or the New Black Panthers cover-up.
Or the FEMA Concentration camp scandal.
Or the scandal where they bought all the bullets.
Or that guy that sold Obama crack when he was a senator.
/
/
/

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:59 PM

So you can’t address the substance or the facts so now you’re just changing the subject.

It’s amazing how incurious liberals are when one of their guys is in power.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:04 PM

Or are you going back to your fact-free lie that the IRS didn’t target conservative groups?

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:00 PM

I’m sure there’s a heavy thread somewhere on this.
It is clear that groups were singled out by the IRS…of every persuasion. The real issue here is political orgs of both stripes misrepresenting themselves to get tax exempt status for fundraising etc. The IRS’s job is to actually police that as best as they can.
Maybe there’s a better way to do it?
I’m sure you’d welcome that, right?

(And now Del’s gonna accuse me of pivoting to IRS here as a deflection on Benghazi…man.)

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

So the internal “investigations” fully cleared the people involved?
 
The problem with these things is you have the administration investigating their own.

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

I’m sure there’s a heavy thread somewhere on this.
It is clear that groups were singled out by the IRS…of every persuasion. The real issue here is political orgs of both stripes misrepresenting themselves to get tax exempt status for fundraising etc. The IRS’s job is to actually police that as best as they can.
Maybe there’s a better way to do it?
I’m sure you’d welcome that, right?

(And now Del’s gonna accuse me of pivoting to IRS here as a deflection on Benghazi…man.)

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

You really do live in a fact free world. It’s been long established by congressional hearings and reporting that indeed conservative groups were singled out and suffered illegal requests that no other groups did and that a much much higher proportion of conservative groups were targeted than liberal groups.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:09 PM

I’m sure there’s a heavy thread somewhere on this.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

There’s been several. And in each one you jumped in denying that anything was going on. Totally ignoring but never refuting the facts presented in each of them.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:10 PM

It’s been long established by congressional hearings and reporting that indeed conservative groups were singled out and suffered illegal requests that no other groups did and that a much much higher proportion of conservative groups were targeted than liberal groups.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:09 PM

I suppose it’s true that those against gun regulations are subjected to more gun purchase background checks that those who support Gun control…right?
Have gun control supporters been targeted by law enforcement here?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:13 PM

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that Obama’s campaign got itself deemed an non-political non-profit group in short order but many conservative groups got harassed for facebook postings, private emails, donor lists and other illegal requests for information?

And that it’s another amazing coincidence that only information on conservative groups was “leaked” by the IRS to liberal political groups.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:14 PM

I suppose it’s true that those against gun regulations are subjected to more gun purchase background checks that those who support Gun control…right?
Have gun control supporters been targeted by law enforcement here?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:13 PM

Your dodge won’t work.

First, only conservative groups were asked to illegally divulge certain information. The IRS acted illegally in these instances. Period.

Secondly, a whole bunch of liberal and conservative groups made requests to the IRS and the numbers show that there was an unmistakable and undeniable bias towards harassing conservative groups.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:19 PM

Verbulance turn your TV to O’Reilly’s program tonight and listen to what he and others have to say.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2014 at 6:19 PM

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

You really do live in a fact free world.

gwelf on February 3, 2014 at 6:09 PM

Reality-free, as well.

Del Dolemonte on February 3, 2014 at 6:30 PM

I would say they were unfairly targeted/singled out.

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 6:31 PM

Katherine Herridge, along with the Ds, yes the Ds, who NO longer believe a word of what obama says on Benghazi, just blew verbie and his idiots out of the water.

The CIA guy, who now works for the Hillary campaign, was discredited. He is a fake who covered for obama and Hillary, ahead of the 2012 election.

verbie, sue me.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2014 at 6:37 PM

Fast & Furious, which resulted in Holder getting Censured for 3 criminal Felonious crimes of Perjury…Nothing to see here…

IRS Targeting ‘my’ political enemies? There was nothing corrupt about it…my personally appointed Top Donor who investigated it says so!

Benghazi?! What are you talking about? never heard of it…

NSA?! Is that the National Soccer Association?!

So this corrupt, Communist tutored, racist hate-spewing pasto-mentored, Socialist POS declares the only scandal is that Fox news refuses to simply let all of these things go / ‘die’ – the way he did to 4 Americans in Benghazi — by ABANDONING THEM! Every other media kisses his @$$ and pushes his propaganda…and this would all be behind us now if Fox News would just shut up about it and let him and his staff get away with their crimes, Constitutional violations, & scandals.

He also, in answer to a letter O’Reilly read, said he wanted to fundamentally change America into something good, because it won’t be until he remakes it in his/Frank Marshall Davis’/Jeremiah Wright’s/Saul Alinksky’s/his daddy’s image of what it should be..a place that Michelle O’ will FINALLY be proud of!

easyt65 on February 3, 2014 at 6:42 PM

I suppose it’s true that those against gun regulations are subjected to more gun purchase background checks that those who support Gun control…right?
Have gun control supporters been targeted by law enforcement here?

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:13 PM

Now you’re just twisting in your own skin.

antipc on February 3, 2014 at 6:43 PM

It warrants an investigation. And it warrants action.

rogerb on February 3, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Katherine Herridge and other Democrats have been brainwashed by Fox News. I loved it when Krauthammer reminded everyone of the apology that Obama gave at the United Nations a week or so after the Benghazi attack ……………. an apology about the anti-Islamic video.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2014 at 6:51 PM

He said if the allegations were true –
but then it turned out not to be…

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

It is clear that groups were singled out by the IRS…of every persuasion…

verbaluce on February 3, 2014 at 6:07 PM

IRS auditor reaffirms that conservatives, not liberals, were targeted

The IRS inspector general said this week that while some liberal groups were given extra scrutiny by the tax agency, they were not subjected to the same invasive queries as tea party groups — a finding that seems to confirm a political bias was at play.

In a letter sent late Wednesday and released Thursday, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George said that just 30 percent of groups with the word “progressive” in their name were put through special scrutiny for tax-exempt applications, but 100 percent of groups with “tea party,” “patriot” or “9/12” in their name were subjected to invasive questioning.

“TIGTA concluded that inappropriate criteria were used to identify potential political cases for extra scrutiny — specifically, the criteria listed in our audit report. From our audit work, we did not find evidence that the criteria you identified, labeled “Progressives,” were used by the IRS to select potential political cases during the 2010 to 2012 time frame we audited,” Mr. George said.

…Hours after the letter was released, acting IRS chief Daniel Werfel said that while an initial investigation has found no evidence of bias or political motivation, he didn’t disagree with the auditor’s conclusions.

Flora Duh on February 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Flora!

Back at Hot Gas?! If so, welcome!!!

22044 on February 3, 2014 at 9:30 PM

Flora Duh on February 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Flora Duh:I too, hope your back—————————–:0

canopfor on February 3, 2014 at 9:39 PM

Flora Duh on February 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Great to see you…

OmahaConservative on February 3, 2014 at 9:40 PM

Flora Duh on February 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM


Good to “see” you!

PolAgnostic on February 3, 2014 at 11:15 PM

Flora Duh on February 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Oh my gosh! It’s great to see you posting, again.

Fallon on February 3, 2014 at 11:24 PM

How can you tell when Obama is lying? His lips are moving.

Also, he was as amazingly wrong on the Super Bowl’s score as he has been about everything else.

Theophile on February 4, 2014 at 4:15 AM

O’Wrong!
An attack on our US embassy compound is not a terrorist attack it is an act of war.
Being that it was carried out by al qaeda, a terrorist organization, means that the war on terror has not been one.
He knew and yet he covered up the facts. Obama should be impeached for his insulting, continuos lies.

kregg on February 4, 2014 at 5:40 AM

CORRECTIONS:
” … not [just] a terrorist attack, …”
” … has not been one [won].”

kregg on February 4, 2014 at 5:44 AM

Here’s the problem: According to recently declassified testimony of Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, before the House Armed Services Committee in October, the U.S. military regards itself as legally barred from going after the perpetrators of the Benghazi attacks (and, presumably, others who attack Americans) unless they are affiliated with al-Qaeda. The Obama administration’s parsing of words to deny al-Qaeda’s direct involvement effectively precludes a military response in these situations.

J_Crater on February 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM

On topic/

It’s not like Bill can just file an 1040EZ, if you catch my drift.

verbaluce on February 3, 2014

It’s sad to see someone with whom I disagree with on philosophical views, and on who’s word is viable, devolve into just another mindless prevaricator like “Perfesser” Libfree.

S. D. on February 4, 2014 at 9:10 PM

It’s certainly a lovely time of year for all these conferences.

rogerb on February 5, 2014 at 6:28 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3