I think that there should be a time limit on crying about former presidents. I am confident that I will have all the negative things I have to say about Bush Jr., said, within two years of him going home.
Nope, but he wants to make sure that this thing with Cisneros is investigated and discussed, so he should care about the issues with Neil Bush, too. If there is wrongdoing in either, then those involved should be punished. The thing is, he doesn't want to post up anything about a Republican. He has shown that again and again in his many posts here.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
feralkid
Lifer
- Jan 28, 2002
- 16,868
- 4,983
- 136
Wait, think of the great value it would have.
Look how some others' lives are so much better with blame:
Zendari's car doesn't start...Clinton's fault.
Pabster's toilet plugged...Clinton's fault.
Frackal's Cat poops on the rug...well, I think you get it.
The report was not done by the media, it was done by the prosecutor. If anyone "sat on" the story, it was the prosecutor, not the media. I know you guys love to rant and rave about the "liberal media", but when you do, it would help if you knew what the hell you were talking about.
/LIB-ON
Well, when BUSH LIED people DIED... Bush sucks.... Cheney did this... HALIBURTON!
/LIB-OFF
Well, when BUSH LIED people DIED... Bush sucks.... Cheney did this... HALIBURTON!
/LIB-OFF
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
/FANBOI-ON
I love Bush, he is doing what needs to be dun. Clinton sucks. Gore did this. I hate our troops and America and don't care how many have to die in Iraq to avenge 9/11
/FANBOI-OFF
I love Bush, he is doing what needs to be dun. Clinton sucks. Gore did this. I hate our troops and America and don't care how many have to die in Iraq to avenge 9/11
/FANBOI-OFF
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
Sounds to me like much ado about nothing, and the original article presents only one side of the situation. Here is the IRS expanation from a CNN article on subject:
--------------------------------
...
Justice department, IRS rejects allegations
In strongly worded rebuttals, officials from the Justice Department and IRS rejected Barrett's allegations.
Allegations about Cisneros's 1991 and 1992 tax returns were based on his failure to include amounts of speaking engagement income. Allegations relating to his 1993 return were based primarily on claimed specific deductions.
According to the former assistant chief counsel for criminal tax matters, the certified public accountant who prepared Cisneros's tax returns had access to records of all the omitted income. In addition, the IRS lawyer wrote in rebuttal, Cisneros's CPA signed an affidavit taking responsibility for providing faulty advice regarding the improper deductions. Finally, the IRS lawyer wrote, the CPA had previously been an informant against Cisneros and had made amateurish mistakes on Cisneros's tax returns "that almost invited an audit."
"The inaccurate statements and unfair insinuations contained in this final report are too numerous to catalogue," said Jo Ann Farrington, former deputy chief of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section.
Robert S. Litt, one of the Justice Department officials involved, called Barrett's suggestions of obstruction "a scurrilous falsehood," adding that the report was "a fitting conclusion to one of the most embarrassingly incompetent and wasteful episodes in the history of American law enforcement."
...
Full CNN article at:
CNN article
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bold added by me.
A very strong argument could be made that there are numerous instances of intentional malfeasance while in public office and directly related to public duties at the highest level of our government today. It's too bad that the independent counsel statute died, but it was being used for scandals more suitable to Entertainment Tonight (Faux News version) than issues that truely affect our government and country.
Somehow, Cisneros lying in his pre-employment interview, Clinton's restructuring of the White House travel office and Clinton having a quickie on the side seem pretty darn trivial in light of what is going on today in the name of our government.
--------------------------------
...
Justice department, IRS rejects allegations
In strongly worded rebuttals, officials from the Justice Department and IRS rejected Barrett's allegations.
Allegations about Cisneros's 1991 and 1992 tax returns were based on his failure to include amounts of speaking engagement income. Allegations relating to his 1993 return were based primarily on claimed specific deductions.
According to the former assistant chief counsel for criminal tax matters, the certified public accountant who prepared Cisneros's tax returns had access to records of all the omitted income. In addition, the IRS lawyer wrote in rebuttal, Cisneros's CPA signed an affidavit taking responsibility for providing faulty advice regarding the improper deductions. Finally, the IRS lawyer wrote, the CPA had previously been an informant against Cisneros and had made amateurish mistakes on Cisneros's tax returns "that almost invited an audit."
"The inaccurate statements and unfair insinuations contained in this final report are too numerous to catalogue," said Jo Ann Farrington, former deputy chief of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section.
Robert S. Litt, one of the Justice Department officials involved, called Barrett's suggestions of obstruction "a scurrilous falsehood," adding that the report was "a fitting conclusion to one of the most embarrassingly incompetent and wasteful episodes in the history of American law enforcement."
...
Full CNN article at:
CNN article
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bold added by me.
A very strong argument could be made that there are numerous instances of intentional malfeasance while in public office and directly related to public duties at the highest level of our government today. It's too bad that the independent counsel statute died, but it was being used for scandals more suitable to Entertainment Tonight (Faux News version) than issues that truely affect our government and country.
Somehow, Cisneros lying in his pre-employment interview, Clinton's restructuring of the White House travel office and Clinton having a quickie on the side seem pretty darn trivial in light of what is going on today in the name of our government.
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,067
- 32,593
- 146
He was impeaced for a mistake, not this mistake. This conduct could possibly be a completely seperate unethical, if not worse, action by the people of this administration.
Did you hear about the one where GHWBush squashed the investigation into his other son's insider trading issues?
Seattle Times coverage - Bush Admin 4 years of quashing
"But his report offered no evidence of a cover-up, except to say that numerous officials at the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) were not impressed with his claims that the former San Antonio mayor may have cheated on his federal income taxes before 1992.
When the Bush administration came into office in 2001, its top officials also refused to give Barrett permission to dig into old tax files.
But for at least four years after Cisneros pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for lying about how much money he had given a former mistress and left Washington, Barrett continued to spend $2 million a year pursuing his theory that his investigation had been thwarted.
. . .
Although the report focuses on the Clinton administration, it says the Bush administration also found no basis to expand Barrett's probe into possible obstruction of justice."
So if this is an abuse of power, corruption, obstruction of justice, or whatever mud you want to sling, the Bush administration is just as guilty.
"But his report offered no evidence of a cover-up, except to say that numerous officials at the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) were not impressed with his claims that the former San Antonio mayor may have cheated on his federal income taxes before 1992.
When the Bush administration came into office in 2001, its top officials also refused to give Barrett permission to dig into old tax files.
But for at least four years after Cisneros pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for lying about how much money he had given a former mistress and left Washington, Barrett continued to spend $2 million a year pursuing his theory that his investigation had been thwarted.
. . .
Although the report focuses on the Clinton administration, it says the Bush administration also found no basis to expand Barrett's probe into possible obstruction of justice."
So if this is an abuse of power, corruption, obstruction of justice, or whatever mud you want to sling, the Bush administration is just as guilty.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
If seems to be more that one person (Barrett) took off with a vendetta.
Apparently both the Clinton and Bush admins looked at the evidence that was available and decided that the problem was in not foor selection of a tax preparer; not a deliberate ommission of information.
Unless the preparer was instructed to ommit information (for the conspiracy theorists).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter