Clay Bennett by Clay Bennett

Clay Bennett

Comments (26) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Darsan54

    Darsan54 said, 11 months ago

    Oooooh, this is sarcasm on so many levels !! Not to mention so totally true.

  2. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    Hmm, just the lights being on would set it off.

  3. DoctorUmmmNo

    DoctorUmmmNo said, 11 months ago

    Hillary doesn’t want you to look in the trunk.

  4. Christopher Shea

    Christopher Shea said, 11 months ago

    @Joadtom

    With every hearing Issa holds without actually turning up any evidence of wrongdoing, “nothing to see here” looks more and more like the right answer.

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, 11 months ago

    @Christopher Shea

    " “nothing to see here”

    The Treasury IG for Tax Administration wrote a report on his investigation dated May 14, 2013, Reference Number: 2013-10-053, that strongly contradicts the “nothing to see here” concept.

  6. Ted Lind

    Ted Lind GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    I love Congressional hearings. The perpetrator badgers everyone to try to prove their preconceived notion, the congressmen all wake up just long enough to make their political points, and they drag on until everyone forgets why they were there in the first place. The only problem is they are getting paid.

  7. mikefive

    mikefive said, 11 months ago

    @Ted Lind

    I’ve never figured out why Congressmen feel they must introduce their 10 second question with a ten minute harangue or rant. More often that not it makes the point they are trying to make pointless. A well thought out question can make the point as well as be an inquiry.

  8. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, 11 months ago

    Ignorance I can understand. Aggressive ignorance coupled with arrogance is dangerous. Issa is an arrogantly ignorant ideologue, who instead of fulfilling his responsibility in a hearing, set one up purely as political theater.

  9. eepatt

    eepatt said, 11 months ago

    @motivemagus

    “set one up purely as political theater.”? What do you mean “one?” Didn’t you ever hear about his travelling road show on the Affordable Care Act?

    This is an excellent cartoon. Issa is an unbeleivably dishonest jerk who puts political posturing way ahead of his sworn duty to help govern our country.

  10. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon said, 11 months ago

    Yep, that’s our boy (my Congressional rep), ’cept maybe that should be a clown car, loaded with an assortment of other wing-nut characters.

  11. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, 11 months ago

    And not one of you see a thing wrong with the possibility that the IRS was deliberately targeting the president’s political “enemies” in order to delay their ability to do the same work that those in favor were doing with out hindrance.

    OH, and the one in charge at the time being unwilling to say anything concerning the matter is not a red flag … or a flag of any color evidently.

    The IRS targets people. I know from first hand experience. So ya’ll can say all you want, you just don’t know.

    But here is something not on the radar that should concern us all.

    http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/philadelphia-judge-issues-ruling-that-could-give-anonymous-online-commenters-second-thoughts/

    Be careful what you say here………

  12. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon said, 11 months ago

    @Bruce4671

    Two things to comment on, Bruce. First, it has been abundantly proven that, Issa’s efforts to the contrary, the IRS did not target the President’s “political enemies”, as inferred by (for example) the recent edited version of Issa’s report that he supplied to FOX News but not his own “committee”.
    .
    The second comment is a thank you for the link. It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but this is a case of targeted defamation that harmed a business. There has been precedence for prosecuting paid trolls who deliberately attack a competitor’s goods or services, through misleading reviews or false claims. We’re not talking about Dr. C going off on a generic rant about “liberals” here, but targeted attacks of slander and defamation directed at specific targets, for financial gain.

  13. DoctorUmmmNo

    DoctorUmmmNo said, 11 months ago

    @Zuhlamon

    The second comment is a thank you for the link. It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but this is a case of targeted defamation that harmed a business.

    Johnny ‘Doc’ Dougherty is a union leader, not a business.

  14. mikefive

    mikefive said, 11 months ago

    @Zuhlamon

    “…the IRS did not target the President’s “political enemies…”

    From the cover sheet of the TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION:

    “Inappropriate Criteria Were Used to Identify Tax-Exempt Applications for Review”

    From the “Highlights” page:

    “The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in play for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued.”

    I think “targeting” is an appropriate designation for what the IRS was doing.

  15. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, 11 months ago

    The question NO ONE in Congress asks is, why should ANY political organization get favorable tax treatment.
    -
    The actual law states that organizations with any political activities do not qualify for favorable tax treatment.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (11).