How’s my “Fact Check” status doing? 
??? What has happened to you, Miller?
Agreed. It was invented specifically to be offensive.
You know, Miller used to be a pretty cool guy around here. Something has changed, and I can’t even begin to guess what.
(Also, it was tactically foolish. It led to the highjacking of the thread, as he must have known it would, and it led to an escalation of ugliness here. It was pouring gasoline on a fire. Miller used to have more class than that.)
I wouldn’t know. I just assume you’re wrong about everything, and this has served me well so far.
I have not “re-characterized” anything. My statements have been accurate depictions of the actual opinion piece to which you linked. On the other hand, you started out with a whiny claim that the IRS needed to investigate the Clinton Foundation, about which no actual evidence of wrongdoing has emerged, and continue to flail about avoiding the fact that you cannot even provide evidence for your own claims.
When all else fails, talk dirty. I am truly impressed at your inability to carry on a genuine conversation based on facts.
It’s not a “big” anything.
All that use of the term “Democrat Party” does for me is confirm that the user is a troll, and a lame one at that.
I am still confused. I did as you asked and read the WSJ piece and I am still confused what law she was supposed to have broken and what evidence there is. Can you explain it like I am five? What should the IRS be looking for when they investigate the Clinton Foundation? Should they investigate just because somebody said so, or is their evidence of wrongdoing? If it was just some guy making statements, can I get the IRS to investigate you if I send tomndebb an email about it? If this whole thing is just based on hearsay, is that enough to stand up in a court of law? If it is not hearsay, but actual testimony, was the testimony given under oath?
I would really like to understand this whole thing; I keep hearing that Hillary needs to go to prison, but if she is guilty of a crime, why has she not been prosecuted? Don’t tell me there is a vast left wing conspiracy, because others have tried that and it was laughable then just as it is laughable now, right?
So let me get you straight, you are directly saying that the IRS is corrupt, which is why they are auditing Trump, but not investigating the Clinton Foundation? Is that your argument? Let’s be clear here. Please spell it out.
Why isn’t the US government investigating Trump for his missing emails?
Won’t happen. Uberarchshite throws out statements while refusing to own or defend them. He’s a coward and a troll.
Another good question, if the IRS is corrupt and is being ordered by the executive (eg Obama) to not investigate the Clintons, then tell me this:
In the eight years that GWB was in power, why did the IRS then not investigate the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation? Surely that would have been the perfect time to take them down if as you say the IRS really does what the executive wants in order to achieve political goals? So Uber, got an explanation?
Right, not much different than using ‘Libtard’ or ‘Repubelican’. It’s just silly, and makes the person writing it look silly.
Yes, obviously! 
Yep, that’s me. A hard core right wing troll.
You people are idiots.
I wouldn’t go so far as troll, but “Democrat party” is usually used as an epithet, and I think it’s reasonable to call it out as such. I find it obnoxious and rude to use epithets, and I’ll continue to tell people that when they use them. It doesn’t matter to me if a particular usage of “Redskin” is meant as a term of endearment, or meant to honor someone’s heritage – it has a history as a slur and epithet, and I think it’s rude to use slurs and epithets.
Not a big deal. And not a big deal to call it out.