Lois Lerner

Unapologetic Lois Lerner Insists She's Done Nothing Wrong



“I didn’t do anything wrong,” retired Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Lois Lerner tells Politico in a rare interviews with the press. Lerner has stayed quiet since she came under fire as part an ongoing scandal involving the tax agency’s targeting of conservative non-profits.

Lerner thinks she did nothing wrong, and she won’t apologize. “Regardless of whatever else happens, I know I did the best I could under the circumstances and am not sorry for anything I did,” she said in an interview with the paper.

That’s basically all she says about her role in the scandal. Lerner, who, after reading a statement, exercised her Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination when called to testify before Congress last year, doesn’t really add anything to her defense with the statements in her piece. She declares that she stands by her workâ€"and that’s it.

She says she get a lot of hate mail and grief, and some of it is genuinely outrageous, including anti-Semitic remarks and death threats serious enough that federal agents have been called in for protection.

We do learn about her, um, favorite piece of hate mail:

 Among the hate mail, Lerner’s “favorite” is one that says she’ll “go down in history as the worst person ever in the United States.”

“I just thought, ‘Boy, worse than Jeffrey Dahmer?’” she asks, her face crinkling up, eyebrows pinching together in disbelief.

She and her husband, a partner at a law firm who sat with her during the interview,  seem fairly upset about the loss of income that has come as a result of the scandal.

“Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, she got these amazing ratings and bonuses. … And once she retired, she would have gone out with bells and whistles, and the IRS commissioner would have made a speech. … It went from that to: You’re under criminal investigation, and your career is ruined, in a week,” her husband Michael Miles said to Politico.

She may not have gotten all the “bells and whistles” when she left the agency last year, but she did manage to retire with benefits and a pension that has been valued in the range of $50,000 a year. That's not bad considering that when she retired, a review board was about to recommend that she be fired, citing mismanagement and “neglect of duties” in her role as head of the IRS tax exempt division, according to an Associated Press article from last year.

NEXT: Getting High With Willie Nelson Does Not Clarify Maureen Dowd's Understanding of Colorado's Marijuana Regulations

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m calmly awaiting the prosecution of her and the other officials involved in at least one illegal conspiracy.

    1. don’t hold your breathe. It will be funny if/when a republican is in the white house and proceeds to use the exact same methods currently employed by this administration, and when the media raises hell about it, throws back the countless defenses used for Obama that they wrote themselves.

      1. The path to dictatorship is now clear, without barrier or impediment.

        1. pretty much.

        2. What is scary is that with Obama’s cult of personality, had he been moderately competent, could have been President for life imho.

          1. Not him. But someone actually charismatic, competent, and amoral? For him, the door is wide open.

            1. And the Walkin’ Dude will walk right in.

          2. Luckily the more culty they get, the more incompetent they usually are. Just be very glad that seems to be the pattern. Until Damien shows up, of course.

            1. Occult of Personality?

            2. It is here and now. But crazy half-idiots have obtained great power before. I read once that some lunatic failed artist killed a bunch of people or something.

              1. You know who else…never mind.

                1. Here’s the educational/vocational background of the three biggest tyrants of the 20th century:

                  Stalin – Religious studies
                  Hitler – Art
                  Mao – Education

                  1. Mussolini – Elementary Education

                    1. And he was a journalist.

                      Pol Pot appears to be an exception, with at least some kind of technical training in electronics.

          3. I don’t think he has the work ethic for it.

      2. it can’t be repeated often enough: the emails are NOT lost. I don’t care how many devices were destroyed, they’re preserved on servers and on the devices and servers of her correspondents, some of whom were in the White House.

        So, yeah, like President Jeb is gonna go find them, lol. He’ll be busy rushing off to pin another medal on Citizen Hillary, whom he’s just appointed to some Presidential Commission on Gender Equality.

        1. Ah, someone else remembers this turd pinning a Freedom medal on Hillary at the Constitution Center. When Hillary wins the next Nobel Peace Prize (I’m sure she ranks very high on the finals list- I mean who else racked up some many airline miles?) the Bushs will be rushing to offer congratulations.

      3. throws back the countless defenses used for Obama that they wrote themselves.

        But that will be completely different. Those defenses apply only to the right Top Men. Remember the intellectual gymnastics that the goodthinkful people performed on the subject of Clinton and sexual harassment?

        1. Meh. You watch, they won’t be able to it will be a parade of news clips and newspaper articles, that the right will put out will be endless.

          1. That doesn’t work today when people throw Obama’s pre-election arguments back in his face, so why will it work then?

            For every Republican pointing to a Democrat justification, the media can pull 10 Republicans saying how BS that justification was.

    2. I’m agitatedly awaiting her pardon.

      1. I said this years ago, but I have a feeling Obama’s “pardon orgy” right at the end of his term is going to make Clinton’s look like child’s play. Marc Rich times a thousand.

        1. Another reason to impeach him.

        2. I’ve thought that too, but I’m coming around to the idea that he’ll pardon his close cronies and throw the true believing drones under the bus.

          Of course, by the time that LL comes clean, out of spite, it will be ‘old news’ not worthy of coverage.

        3. He will never pardon Lerner. She is too small of a fish. They don’t care if she goes to prison. She served her purpose. Really, she is more valuable to them as a martyr to Republican overreach or as a designated scapegoat.

          Lerner is a fucking moron if she thinks Obama gives a fuck if she goes to prison after he leaves office.

          1. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but I’m curious where you think that leaves her legal future? Would any Republican president prosecute her?

            That’s my question for every Republican candidate about the Obama scandals — Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, whatever I’m forgetting — will there be any followup, or does the political class serve itself at the expense of Justice For All yet again?

            1. Nobody will get prosecuted, just like nothing happened to any of Bush’s cabinet after all the empty threats. At the end of the day these people are politicians first, nobody is without that much foresight to see that if they start with the floodgates there will be no end to the retaliations by both parties.

              1. One of the reasons we’re where we are is that the parties do shit like that.

          2. No so fast, hoss. There’s plenty of reason to suspect this scandal goes all the way up. If she gets prosecuted and looks to be in serious trouble, there’s the obvious way out. He’ll want to prevent that.

            1. She will only be prosecuted after he leaves office and if there is a Republican President. If that happens, it will be old news that won’t hurt anyone who matters and they can just claim she is lying and turn on her if she talks.

              1. You know, maybe I should just spontaneously declare that the Censor exists, and start directing the investigation on my own authority. More legitimate than this fucking diseased corpse of a lawfully constituted government.

            2. I’ll bet that it goes up to Valerie Jarrett – and that she gets a blanket pardon from Bammy, “to prevent the persecution of this private woman, by teathuglicans that are seeking to hurt me indirectly” or some such bs that the media will swallow whole.

              Then a few years later the truth will come out and only bitter right wingers will care at all.

              1. He would pardon Jerrett. But he won’t pardon Lerner. Lerner is nothing but bait fish.

              2. The main problem with that theory is that the IRS has pretty successfully flipped the bird to all attempts at investigation. As a result, they’re probably emboldened to continue pushing and pushing until things well and truly explode.

                1. That’s usually one of the root causes for organizations getting in so much trouble from the cover-up–the massive hubris.

        4. I think he’s way to self absorbed to pardon anyone. He just doesn’t care.

          1. ^^THIS^^

            Though, I could see him having a Bill Clinton like “fund Obama’s post Presidential life” pardon fire sale. But he will never pardon anyone otherwise.

            1. He’s self-absorbed and lazy enough to sign a Valerie Jarrett pardon without reading it or realizing what he’s signing.

              1. Yeah, she’ll just slip it into a big pile of stuff for him to sign.

          2. It has nothing to do with caring and everything to do with cronyism and machine politics. You can’t be a successful machine politician if everyone knows you will let them rot even though they helped you. Obama has a unique opportunity that only one person in all of the USA has to pay a lot of political debts and build up a lot of people owing him. Of course he’s going to use that. It’s one of the massive perks of becoming president and costs him nothing.

            1. Episiarch,

              These people only pay debts when they have to. Sure, they want those around them to think that they will help their cronies and be loyal. But they aren’t. Someone like Obama is a sociopath. He will do exactly what suits him at the time. There is no “omerta” with people like Obama. They are just like the Mafia. Sure, they will pay their debts when they have to. But they will also walk away or shoot the guy they owe money to in the head when they think they can get away with doing so.

              Obama doesn’t have to pardon Lerner and won’t suffer for not doing so. So he wouldn’t raise a finger to keep her out of jail and won’t lose a minute of sleep if she spends the rest of her life in prison protecting him.

              1. Except that this pardon power is worth something. Obama can pick and choose people to pardon who having them owe him is incredibly valuable. It also can allow him to discharge debts that he might really like getting rid of. That’s how people like Obama get places. Not using this power is like being given the power to print money and going “nah, I’m not going to bother”.

                1. Sure, he will use the pardon power. He just won’t use it to help Lerner. He will let her rot and use it on someone that can do something he needs.

                  1. Lerner will end up getting some no-show job at some left-wing non-profit soon after this this blows over. She won’t be left out to dry.

                2. What exactly is it worth to someone who’s heading for a permanent vacation? All I can think is that he’s enough of an egoist to care about his legacy, which could be endangered if he POs the people who are supposed to protect it.

                3. Sounds like Clinton took that literally. The value thing, I mean.

          3. Not to belabor this discussion, but just to have a little fun . . .

            How hard is it to pardon someone? If all it takes is scrawling his sig where some aide tells him to, I can imagine a little gang of concerned Dems persuading him to just “run through these before the movers arrive” lest he create enough ill-will to have his legacy in the hands of resentful caretakers.

            1. It’s valuable as a demonstration of how things work in D.C.

  2. Why she’s just a modern day American hero.

    1. She ranks right there with GI Joe and Rosie the Riveter.

  3. So they’re pissed that she can’t cash in on the Beltway’s revolving door.

    Boo. Freakin’. Hoo.

    1. Say, has she been disbarred yet?

      1. Have you? I mean, you’re even worse; you’re a corporate lawyer.

        1. I know, and I try to wash the blood from my hands each morning, but the damned spot simply will not wash away. Damn you limited liability artificial personhood! God damn you to hell!

          1. Well, you could do penance by giving up some of your volunteer hours at the orphanage to file some nuisance lawsuits against her.

            1. Wait, wut? A libertarian working for orphans???


              1. I don’t see any claim of ‘working for’.

                I believe he’s conscripting them as para-legals.

          2. Have you tried Fast Orange? I keep a tub in my garage.

              1. +1 Will not all great Neptune’s ocean

                1. What, will these hands ne’er be clean??No more o’ that, my lord, no more o’ that. You mar all with this starting.

          3. Lay on MacIssa and damned be he who cries enough!

  4. So.. I’m supposed to Feel Bad for Lerner and people who hate her are Racists and She Likes Dogs and Gardening, Just Like Me and It’s All Just Politics? That’s the message that the Democrats Politico wants me to take away from the IRS scandal?

    1. Strike fail.. Please mentally insert strike over the Democrats. Thank you.

    2. It is politico. They are a straight-up progressive propaganda outfit. Pravda looks like George Washington in comparison.

    3. I’m still waiting until they appoint a special prosecutor to find out who leaked her position at the IRS to the press.

      You see the only reason that she was outed as a IRS employee was to retaliate against her husband who had done something to anger the Booooooosh administration. War on Wimmen!!

      See it wasn’t that hard to pin this on the Bush administration and make her a victim.

  5. I believe her when she says she didn’t do anything wrong. Even if every accusation made against her is 100% accurate, she believes that everything she did was not only right, but also in the country’s best interest.

    She’ll go the way of White House fall guys like Oliver North and the Watergate Seven, wearing her bus tire tracks with pride because she did her bit for king and country.

    1. A few years to blow over and she’ll be an “IRS expert” appearing on assorted talk shows.

      1. In a just world, an “IRS Expert” would have to be a historian.

      2. MSNBC analyst, Lois Lerner.

    2. “I believe her when she says she didn’t do anything wrong.”

      In the sense that she thinks there is a war, and the ends justify the means in a war? Sure.

      I just don’t know if she’ll like the results once the people she and her ilk are waging war on realize they’re in a no-shit war, and that the ends justify the means in war, and react accordingly.

    3. It’s like the fucking 1930s again. Pick your poison.

    4. *She* didn’t do anything wrong, but those pesky minions were up to all sorts of mischief.

      1. She didn’t really know about all those Jews getting murdered. It was her underlings.

        1. Like Eichmann, she realized that the Obama Administration was inevitably going to exterminate non-profit conservative groups, she had her orders to use the IRS as a means to this end, and she just wanted to do it in the most efficient and least disruptive manner. Unlike Eichmann, who put the blame on his superiors, she pinned the blame on her subordinates.

  6. “Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, she got these amazing ratings and bonuses.

    Which is part of the problem with the permanent bureaucracy.

    ? And once she retired, she would have gone out with bells and whistles, and the IRS commissioner would have made a speech. ? It went from that to: You’re under criminal investigation, and your career is ruined, in a week,” her husband Michael Miles said to Politico

    How dare one of the aristocrats be treated like a pissant.

  7. “I just thought, ‘Boy, worse than Jeffrey Dahmer?'” she asks, her face crinkling up, eyebrows pinching together in disbelief.

    Well, he was honest about what he did at least.

    1. And IIRC, he just fucked corpses. She fucked the living without consent.

      1. Whatever he did he harmed far fewer people than Lerner. So, yes, she is worse.

  8. No doubt you ratbagging teafuckers are happy that you’ve destroyed the life of a selfless public servant, whose only ‘crime’ was protecting democracy from the Kochtopus.

    1. I’d be even happier if in addition to destroying her life I could see her selfless ass sitting in the pokey. I’d go from happy to downright jubilant.

  9. Booo Hoooo! It’s classic entitled mentality and loss of touch with reality. IOW a politician/bureaucrat.

  10. “”I didn’t do anything wrong,””

    See, here’s the thing: Normally, other people who haven’t actually done anything wrong? WANT PEOPLE TO SEE WHAT THEY’VE DONE TO PROVE IT.

    The “i’ve done nothing wrong” combined with, “I refuse to testify about what i did”, and “it appears all records of my private conversations have been destroyed” = lack of credibility

  11. How long before MSNBC offers her a show?

    1. Doubtful. While she’s a sympathetic figure to their “cause,” she’s not a fire-breather.

      Well, that and she doesn’t look like a pubescent transgendered hipster.

  12. …she spent 20 years at the FEC before heading to the IRS in 2001.

    Her start was rocky at the tax agency, where employees scoffed at her lack of knowledge of tax law and IRS operations.

    Top (wo)men don’t need specific knowledge of that which they regulate.

    1. Lerner knew nothing about tax law and was given an SES job enforcing tax law. All that means is that she was hired to be a political hack. That is apparently her only skill and therefore the only reason the IRS or anyone else ever hired her.

  13. She has “done nothing wrong”. Okay, then she needs to testify before Congress and withdraw her assertion of her 5th Amendment right against self incrimination.

    One of two things is true here; either Lerner has done something wrong and is lying or she hasn’t and is wrongly asserting her right against self incrimination to engage in a political cover up. It is the right against “self incrimination” not incrimination of others.

    This entire piece just shows what a worthless hack rag Politico is. Any honest reporter would have crucified Lerner on the dilemma I mention above.

    1. I have an idea that a condition of the interview was “Why won’t you get off the Fifth?” was off limits.

      1. I am puzzled why Politico did this. All of the stupid partisan hills to die on, this is one of the dumber ones. There is no making Lerner anything but the horrible person she is. And trying to claim otherwise just brings the IRS abuse scandal back into the public’s attention. Lerner’s job is to fade away or to go to jail if a scapegoat is needed. Trying to humanize her does nothing for the cause. I can’t figure out why the powers that be told Politico to do it.

        1. Because they’re stupid and out of touch.

          1. Stupid is forever and always a good bet with this people.

        2. Because Politico is in the process of evolving into an enforcement arm of the Democratic party. I think that they’ve walked a left-leaning line for years, but when you run this right after you launch a hit piece on the DNC chair it begins to look like someone is giving you orders on what to run and how to frame it in a way that goes beyond just sympathetic.

          1. Process? I thought that was what they were. The question is why would the powers that be think it is a good idea to try and drag Lerner out of her hole.

            1. Because they need an article to link to for other articles defending the president. Politico got the job. Now when someone else wants to link to Lerner in an article explaining why this is No Big Deal they have the Politico piece to use, which, when read, will hopefully leave warm fuzzys about a noble public servant and her dogs in the minds of those inclined leftward and maybe convert some of the uninformed. It’s not going to help with people who care, but we are not the target.

        3. Probably because she’s a woman and they can paint the GOO attack dogs as sexist for,going after her.

          It’s calculated to create a wedge in the gender issue, not because they give two shits about her. If this was a white dude, he’d be hung out to dry by now.

          1. GOO=GOP

        4. Maybe some mid-level decisions by ambitious, eager-to-please bureaucrats who thought they were doing the boss a favor.

    2. She has “done nothing wrong”. Okay, then she needs to testify before Congress and withdraw her assertion of her 5th Amendment right against self incrimination.

      Whoa, John. I know what you’re thinking but you’re dead wrong on this. We should never demand someone prove their innocence rather than assert their rights.

      Having said that, she should be charged with destruction of government property, the destruction of the emails and whatever else she can be charged with for evasion, but we shouldn’t demand she rescind her 5A Rights in the pursuit of her. Because that would make us just as bad as those who,will eventually use it against us.

      Lastly, I don’t think she’s truly entitled to her 5A rights once she makes a statement under oath declaring her innocence. But I’m no legal scholar.

      1. I’m beginning to wonder if public servants called to testify about their service before Congress should be protected by the Fifth. They fucking owe the taxpayers and voters answers about their activities. If that means a revelation of a crime, well t.s.

        1. They should lose their jobs. They still should have the right. But using it in relation to their government employment ought to immediately cost them their jobs and retirement.

          1. I totally agree with this, however.

          2. I’m not sure you can burden the exercise of 5A rights by having the government penalize you for doing so by firing you.

            1. The Supreme Court says you can’t. I, however, think they are wrong. The interest in full and fair investigations into official misconduct should allow the government to fire people who assert the 5th.

            2. And taking the 5th can be used against you in a civil suit. I don’t understand why some of these Tea party groups haven’t brought 1983 suits against Lerner personally.

              1. Immunity of Government Officers Sued as Individuals for Official Acts


        2. I would tend to agree except for the fact that congressional testimony can be used in a court since its under oath.

      2. There is a difference to what is said legally and what we can conclude based on our common sense outside of court.

        Her assertion of her 5th Amendment rights just mean we can’t hold it against her in a court of law. Yes, the government still has to prove she didn’t do it. The court of public opinion, however is different. Common sense tells you that her assertion of her right means she is guilty of something. You are free to assume that even if it doesn’t alleviate the need of the government to prove their case in court.

        1. Plenty of innocent people have asserted their 5A rights as a protest or to protect others.

          Having said that, oversight is a valid job for Congress. And impeding that oversight should be grounds for immediate termination and elimination of any benefits. I would also say it would be fair to exclude them from working for any government contractor. That would all but destroy the job prospects of these turds who hold the private sector in contempt.

          1. They absolutely have the right to assert it. And the public has the right to make of that what they will.

          2. I like it. Make the penalty contingent on not fully cooperating with Congress, regardless of whether you plead the 5th or not.

    3. Innocent people get to take the Fifth. This doesn’t make Lerner innocent. But let’s preserve the Fifth not only for the guilty, but for the innocent as well.

      You’ve got some lying witnesses saying they saw the defendant draw a gun on police and say “die, coppers!”? Well, in actuality the defendant was there, but was simply being beaten up by rogue cops and charged with resisting arrest. But if he’s forced to admit he was there, he’s helping the prosecutor convict him, and to hell with that.

      1. Yes they do. But they cannot escape the public’s conclusions based on that fact. This is about what happens outside the court room.

        1. OK, then, historians are entitled to draw their own conclusions from all the people who took the 5th when asked if there were Commies, or political corruptionists.

          And voters can anticipate the historians by saying, “wait, one of the President’s people took the 5th when asked about crimes? What kind of ‘most transparent administration in history’ is this?'”

          But in the criminal context, yes, protect anyone who invokes the 5th, protect them to the full, don’t give the govt. any more powers, the govt. has too much already.

  14. Wait, she reads her hate mail? Anyone got her address?

    1. When asked to produced the email which referred to her as the ‘worst person in the world’, ‘Sorry,’ she replied. ‘It was lost when my hard drive crashed.’

      ‘No problem,’ said the reporter. ‘Why would you lie about such a thing? Besides, hard drive crashes happen all the time.’

  15. My favorite part of the article is how Politico tries to claim Lerner is not particularly political. Nothing says apolitical like calling one side crazy in official emails.

  16. Dahmer was a teabagger, you know. What is with this woman and her preoccupation with them?

  17. According to this poorly sourced article, she has no financial worries as her work in government has earned her a $100,000 per year pension.

  18. Well that settles it then! Another fake scandal resolved.

  19. Keep in mind that lovely Lois is the real victim here–the way Dan Rather’s producer Mary Mapes was the real victim of Memogate. Maybe Robert Redford could give Lerner a sweet movie deal, too.

  20. This loathsome partisan directed the full brunt of the IRS against individuals who had different solutions to the same problems we’re all trying to solve. She should not receive a pension. She should be put before a jury of her peers to answer for her actions. AND FIND THOSE FUCKING EMAILS ALREADY.

  21. “”I didn’t do anything wrong,” retired Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Lois Lerner tells Politico”

    In her mind that is true. That is why she is going to stand up, look us in the eye, and tell us everything.

    I have to conclude that she is a liar. I have to also conclude that Tony and his ilk are liars also. There are too many examples like this for them not to be. If you concentrate too much power, if you remove accountability, evil people will use it to enslave everyone else. This is not speculation. It is not a gamble. It is a certainty. It happens every. single. fucking. time.

    It was the bedrock principle guiding the constitution, the reason for the rebellion. That same constitution that those very kinds of people have been trying, with great success, to undermine, discredit, and throw off ever since it was written.

    Lerner is an evil, lying bitch.

  22. OT: Israel says I’ll see your School Shooting Drills and raise you one Crazy Homework Assignment.

    Eleventh graders at Thelma Yellin High School of the Arts in Givatayim, Israel, were asked to write a suicide note as homework for their advanced English class.

    1. “Dear world, I just feel I had to kill myself after I ruthlessly tracked down and torture-murdered my advanced English class teacher…”

      1. Don’t try it. I had a similar assignment back in school (write your obituary or something), so I wrote about being gunned down by cops after a freewheeling murder-spree. Then I had some fun meetings with the guidance counselor. I guess it could be worse; if it happened today, I’d probably be in the pokey.

  23. There is one thing of value buried in this article.

    As head of the division where it all began, Lerner certainly bears some of the blame for the selective scrutiny of tea party applications, and numerous emails understandably raise eyebrows.

    So even Politico is admitting that the IRS targeting the Tea Party. So, no more Prog talking points about how their groups were victims too. Ah, no, the IRS was weaponized against the administration’s opponents and even a court mouth piece like Politico admits as much.

    1. It is notable how the Left has a habit of treating its own indiscretions like a teenager, who jumps from denial of culpability to exasperation with any further mentions of their guilt as though it were immediately ‘old news’


      Parent: “i noticed that the car was making some funny noises…”


      Parent: “uh, yes; but honey, after you borrowed the car, i found the neighbors dog wedged under the wheel-well…”


      1. Yes. They always deny it until it can no longer be denied by even the most brain dead partisan. Then they act like everyone has known about it forever and dismiss it as “old news”.

        1. Benghazi has gone this route.

      2. Another version of this is the Classic Bully.

        Bully: SLAP! PUNCH! KICK!

        Victim: “Ouch, ohhhhh.”

        Bully: (stands back) “Okay, I apologize. Now forgive me or all the bad blood between us is entirely your fault.”

  24. I feel just terrible for her low-7 figure poverty. Has she considered starting a Kickstarter campaign to help her make ends meet through these trying times?

    1. She’s got a law license. If she can’t monetize that, the hell with her.

  25. Could you imagine the outrage from the media if Roger Goodell tried the Lois Lerner defense?

    1. That outrage would be justified. Sports is serious business, politics is simply a retarded Special Olympics version of sports.

  26. Sadly, she lives in a better neighborhood than I do. So, I won’t have the pleasure of not inviting her to my cocktail parties, which are awesome by the way.

    1. Send her an invite, and then follow it up with a retraction, saying it was sent in error because you really don’t want to associate with her kind.

      1. There is always that.

  27. She and her husband, a partner at a law firm who sat with her during the interview, seem fairly upset about the loss of income that has come as a result of the scandal.

    “YOU OWE ME.”

    Fuck you, you avaricious lying cunt.

    1. This is how out-of-touch these bastards are. They virtually write their own hate mail.

  28. As each day passes, and a new scandal (malfeasance, incompetence, police brutality, et c, et c) emerges, I become ever more incensed by the unrepentant greed and self-aggrandizement of people who sincerely believe the government owes them a job for life.

    No, it doesn’t. GTFO.

  29. Suderman has done something wrong, and we all know what it is…

  30. Notice how all of her statements are completely consistent with her being a partisan Democrat activist warrior abusing her authority, guilty of the primary accusations leveled against her. She did the best she could, and she’s not sorry.

  31. She’s a martyr to the cause of the Lightbringer, and that’s all she needs to be happy. And a 6-figure defined-benefit retirement account.

  32. It worked for Nixon.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.