Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Taxes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="moreluck" data-source="post: 1138406" data-attributes="member: 1246"><p>Megyn Kelly discussed the Obama response with Andrew McCarthy, both attorneys, McCarthy a former prosecutor. She notes the Bloomberg reporter’s question was who in the White House knew about IRS targeting of conservatives.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Bloomberg reporter: Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the IRS’s actions before your Counsel’s office found out about the IG probe?</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Obama’s response: I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through press reports.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>Kelly brings up that the AP thereafter interpreted that as as denial of knowledge of the IRS practices. AP headline was “Obama assures he did not know about IRS political targeting”, which of course, was not at all what he said but no doubt what he wanted the take away to be.</p><p></p><p>So if you don’t respond specifically to that direct a question, what may one conclude?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Either you did know, or you are so unclear as to the involvement of your administration, you choose to deflect the question.</p><p>McCarthy discusses the concept in the law of implied admission when one doesn’t actually respond.</p><p>The American people deserve much more than weasel responses from our President.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="moreluck, post: 1138406, member: 1246"] Megyn Kelly discussed the Obama response with Andrew McCarthy, both attorneys, McCarthy a former prosecutor. She notes the Bloomberg reporter’s question was who in the White House knew about IRS targeting of conservatives. [INDENT]Bloomberg reporter: Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the IRS’s actions before your Counsel’s office found out about the IG probe? Obama’s response: I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through press reports. [/INDENT]Kelly brings up that the AP thereafter interpreted that as as denial of knowledge of the IRS practices. AP headline was “Obama assures he did not know about IRS political targeting”, which of course, was not at all what he said but no doubt what he wanted the take away to be. So if you don’t respond specifically to that direct a question, what may one conclude? Either you did know, or you are so unclear as to the involvement of your administration, you choose to deflect the question. McCarthy discusses the concept in the law of implied admission when one doesn’t actually respond. The American people deserve much more than weasel responses from our President. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Taxes
Top