>>
>>FWIW, one of my favorite pieces of Jewish teaching is a quote from Hillel:
>>
>>"If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, who am I? If not now, when?"
>>
>>It guides my life.
>>
>
>I know that you've quoted the "first they went after ABC, and I/no one spoke out...and then they went after XYZ, and no one spoke out, etc" and then this.
>
>There's certainly value to these sentiments/thoughts - when they are applied consistently.
>
>I brought this up a few weeks ago - HRC speculated on a Trump presidency that would abuse federal power. She spoke of Trump possibly using agencies like the IRS.
>
>Funny how we just had such a situation - where the current administration used the IRS as retaliation for those who pushed for Citizens United - one where the political left tried to downplay it as a "phony scandal", or simply administrative error due to lack of funding.
>
>Imagine if a Trump administration tried to use the IRS to target his enemies - and then responded to charges the way the we've seen excuses from the current administration and the mainstream media.
>
>Fortunately, organizations such as Judicial Watch continue to dig into this. They issued some major news yesterday on just how far back this went:
>http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-fbi-investigation-documents-irs-scandal/
>
>So - such declarations as "who will be for me....first they went after ABC and no one spoke out" carry more weight when they are applied beyond just the "home team". Too many times, instances of injustice over overlooked because the target represents the "not invented here" syndrome.
>

I don't think I've said much about the IRS stuff at all. I totally reject that it came from the President since, to my knowledge, there's been no evidence of that.

It appears some people at lower levels abused their power and they should be removed and punished for it.

>Here's some more food for thought - the weapons inspectors in Iraq did find schematics in abandoned Iraq warehouses that strongly indicated Hussein was looking to re-institute chemical weapons programs. Remember that Hussein was already responsible for the deaths of over 100,000 in northwest Iraq. What if the attack on Iraq and the ousting of Hussein was the very action to prevent further atrocities....just like attacking Hitler much much earlier would have prevented huge atrocities. Given the vitriol on our attacking Hussein and the govt of Iraq - and then the juxtaposition of that with the criticism of the U.S. for waiting TOO LONG to attack Hitler and enter WW II - do you see some inconsistencies?

Your message is the first I'm hearing about such evidence; again, not something I've been paying much attention to. My first question would be whether there was a better way to stop him, one that didn't result in so many lives lost and utter chaos throughout the Middle East.

Tamar