>

Spoiler: He did exactly what he was hired to do.
He DID do his job - the exact job that Trump specifically hired him to do. >

This is the correct answer. >

the rest of you can stay after class and clean the erasers. >

What's an eraser? - Gen Z Redditors >

That's one of the secrets we're taking with us to our graves. >

Call them on a pay phone to explain it. >

They better be ready to cough up some rare pristine pogs for the information. >

Self-answering headline. >

"Why" indeed.  Senate oversight should be all up in this. >

Almost like Republicans are protecting a rigged system in their favor. >

shhhh, wait till you figure out the system is rigged for one demographic, it isnt republicans, and it has been from day one..It will blow your mind when you see it. >

Yeah. Like when the IRS didn’t audit that demographic’s president!
Wait, what are we talking about? >

Corruption. Nothing more than that. >

I’m assuming it’s a rhetorical question. >

Because a) that’s what he was hired to do and b) even if he did trump would have called him a big liberul deepstate poopoo head on Twitter which would immediately lead to death threats from his 5headed Qannon followers. >

Beautiful assemblage of words. The bestest! No one is better at words than you. I bet you had an uncle who knew english. >

Dear Rep. Kildee,
Please name one person appointed by Trump to the government, who did their job, let alone did their job even close to correctly.
Love,
Everyone who paid attention. >

Seriously how are there still dems that don’t get it? It’s been like this for decades, but at the very least it’s been obvious since W that this is just how republicans operate. >

Someone paid him off not to. >

Is this one of those rhetorical questions where the answer is obvious? >

Negligence is a crime, in many situations. 
Not doing your job shouldn't be protected. That's the MO of most conservative appointments - get control of the executive, appoint people who fundamentally believe that their department should not exist, and then arbitrarily (I use that word very specifically) choose what parts of the department you ignore. 
So if you are a tax head, and you have documented evidence of fraud, and it's documented that you had that documentation, and you neglected to do something about it. That's criminal negligence.
The american public elected officials to create laws. If you don't want to enforce it, you pass legislation. You don't insert judges to arbitrarily ignore the law. You don't appoint department heads who try everything to sabotage their own department. And if you do that, and it enables crime, that is, itself, a crime. >

Trump appointed. >

And yet despite all his blatant corruption, and scams, and lies, and felonies he's still walking around a free man; playing golf, eating at his buffet, watching Fox News for 12 hours at a time, and 'Truthing' constantly. It seems even Garland is afraid of Trump as well... >

Why didn't the DoJ arrest the IRS chief for breaking the law?
Maybe because the president gets to appoint not just the head of the IRS but also the head of the DoJ?
America's system of government grants way too much power to the president. Like the power to pardon your buddies who conspired with you to commit crimes.
The Founders thought that the elite members of the Electoral College would never choose a corrupt man to be president, but that was unfoundedly optimistic. >

It’s called under the table audit. >

He did his job.  He was trump appointed.  He did what trump wanted.  US law?  Decency?  Honor?  No.  What trump wanted. >

Because the IRS only targets the poor! The Democrats! They would never dare to audit the Republicans, or the rich! That’s their bosses! >

It's called cronyism. Let's not pretend to be so shocked. >

I’m because trump appointed him >

Seriously,  these people have an obligation to faithfully execute their duties. It's time we made it a legal obligation. >

Hush money in the cup. >

Sue him and claw back his compensation for the entire term of his employment as the head of the agency.  He had a job, and he willfully failed to do it.  He shouldn't get paid. >

Criminal malfeasance >

He did the job he agreed to do. Just not the one he swore to do. >

How many peer tapes does Putin have? >

Dan, as a constituent of yours the answer is simple. You play too much party came with those that couldn't care about the rule of law. >

Quid… >

Pro... >

Because their a bunch of crooks