>I already stated how I would react. But feel free to go on speculating and stereotyping me.
>
>Mike, if you say it, I accept it.
>
>But since it's not likely that he would ever acknowledge it - there's a far more practical question.
>
>Right now, there is strong evidence of unlawful and unethical conduct regarding the IRS. The targeting is only half the story - the other half is sharing confidential information with groups allied to the President. There is the possibility of collusion between the IRS Chief counsel and the President (and since the DOJ will not look into it, at this point it would take a special prosecutor to dig into what went on in the closed door meetings two days before the Chief Counsel ordered Lerner to send him all 290+ Tea Party applications).
>
>So here is my question - what is your opinion of a president who says there is not a smidgeon of corruption here, and absolutely refuses to appoint a special investigator, despite all the information available and despite that his own DOJ has worked with Lerner (as was discovered in certain emails) in the targeting? In this situation, is this an impeachable offense?
>
>Note - no references to any prior president allowed. :)

AFAIK there is absolutely no evidence linking the IRS targeting of some Republicans to the White House. I take it as an overzealous local IRS office running amok. I don't know why there is no special prosecutor but isn't that a pretty rare thing reserved for major malfeasance by major figures? I think those in KC who were involved in this will be punished. As well they should be.