PushBack Politics
Colbert Takes On Gohmert’s ‘Asparagus-gate’: ‘How Dare You Cast Aspersions On That Man’s Asparagus!’
Of all the contentious moments during Eric Holder‘s time before a congressional committee Wednesday, the one that stuck out to Stephen Colbert was when Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) exclaimed, seemingly out of nowhere, that the attorney general was trying to “cast aspersions on my asparagus.” Gohmert’s remark was particularly appropriate, in the eyes of Colbert, since cable news pundits had spent the hours leading up to the hearing hyping the “grilling” Holder would receive and previewing the questions he’d be “peppered with.” “Grilled and peppered,” Colbert said. “That explains why Darrell Issa was wearing that ‘Kiss the Cook’ apron.” But, he added, Holder “bit off more than he could chew” when he went face-to-face with “magical talking cantaloupe” Louie Gohmert. Holder challenged Gohmert’s assertion that the FBI wasn’t completely thorough in their investigation into the Boston Marathon bombings, which led to Gohmert’s accusation that the attorney general was trying to “cast aspersions on my asparagus.” “How dare you cast aspersions on that man’s asparagus,” Colbert fired back at Holder. “What is next, sir? Libeling his lettuce? Questioning his quinoa? Arguing with his arugula? Repudiating his rutabaga? Vilifying his vinaigrette before drizzling it on his scandal salad?” “Clearly, nation,” Colbert concluded, [...]
Paul Ryan Hammers Ousted IRS Head Over ‘Misleading’ Remarks, Why Progressive Groups Were Not Targeted
During today’s hearing on the IRS political targeting scandal before the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) hammered recently-resigned acting IRS chief Steven Miller for “misleading” statements previously given to the committee. The former GOP vice presidential candidate also cornered Miller into conceding that progressive buzzwords in organization titles were not at all included among the tax agency’s list of words to target for additional scrutiny. “How can we conclude that you did not mislead this committee?” Ryan repeatedly asked Miller after explaining that the ousted IRS chief had previously said things contradictory to what he has put forth at today’s hearings. The two got a bit heated when Ryan interrupted Miller to “clarify” for him what exactly he was asking. Audible laughter is heard in the background as the congressman berates the IRS chief. Ryan then moved on to the question of whether “progressive” terms were also included in the tax enforcement agency’s list of key words to flag for additional tax-exempt scrutiny. The congressman read off a few organizations approved for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status while including openly-progressive terminology in their names, asking, “If you were concerned about political activity, did you have targeting lists that [...]
Rachel Maddow – Republicans fall quiet in face of Obama deficit success
During today’s hearing on the IRS political targeting scandal before the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) hammered recently-resigned acting IRS chief Steven Miller for “misleading” statements previously given to the committee. The former GOP vice presidential candidate also cornered Miller into conceding that progressive buzzwords in organization titles were not at all included among the tax agency’s list of words to target for additional scrutiny. “How can we conclude that you did not mislead this committee?” Ryan repeatedly asked Miller after explaining that the ousted IRS chief had previously said things contradictory to what he has put forth at today’s hearings. The two got a bit heated when Ryan interrupted Miller to “clarify” for him what exactly he was asking. Audible laughter is heard in the background as the congressman berates the IRS chief. Ryan then moved on to the question of whether “progressive” terms were also included in the tax enforcement agency’s list of key words to flag for additional tax-exempt scrutiny. The congressman read off a few organizations approved for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status while including openly-progressive terminology in their names, asking, “If you were concerned about political activity, did you have targeting lists that [...]
John Paul Stevens: Bush v. Gore Decision Rationale Was ‘Unacceptable’
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said Thursday night that he’s come to the realization that the rationale behind the court’s Bush v. Gore decision that effectively decided the 2000 presidential election “was really quite unacceptable” because it differentiated between so-called “hanging chads” and “dimpled chads.” That distinction, he told a gala event for the liberal watchdog group Public Citizen in Washington, “violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.” All votes should have been considered the same way, he explained. Former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor recently expressed regret that the court had taken up the case at all, and Stevens said he was “pleased to hear” about O’Connor’s shift. The liberal Stevens wrote the dissent in that case. Stevens, who retired in 2010 and is now 93, was introduced as a “rock star” at the event and received applause for holding the record for the most dissents written by a single justice — a whopping 720. Excerpts from his stinging objection to the Citizens United decision were displayed on large posters around the room. The former justice also praised Chief Justice John Roberts as “intellectually honest” and an able jurist, even though the two disagree on most things. [...]
No comments:
Post a Comment