B-Man Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 IRS SCANDAL UPDATE: Silencing The Opposition. Cornyn Demands Answers From AG Holder on Texans Targeted by the IRS The IRS Targeted Conservatives, but 280 Days Later Nobody Has Been Indicted . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 IRS SCANDAL UPDATE: Silencing The Opposition. Cornyn Demands Answers From AG Holder on Texans Targeted by the IRS The IRS Targeted Conservatives, but 280 Days Later Nobody Has Been Indicted . Not pursuing accountability for the IRS actions is good for the country. The Tea Party threatens to derail the pursuit of the redistributive agenda and long-lasting power for Democrats. For the good of the country, it's necessary to eliminate roadblocks such as election outcomes, the Supreme Court, inaction by congress or resistance to any Federal Agency activities aimed at the goal. Nothing trumps the agenda. Not fiscal responsibility, not the constitution or honesty. Time is short, the mission must go forward and the dirty work must be carried out by many. We, the Obama administration know what needs to be done, what's best and how it needs to be done. Those that complain, challenge or resist simply need to be sidestepped in the interest of fairness and equality. Those that are in the way simply seek to maintain their control over those who have not received their fair place in society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Not pursuing accountability for the IRS actions is good for the country. The Tea Party threatens to derail the pursuit of the redistributive agenda and long-lasting power for Democrats. For the good of the country, it's necessary to eliminate roadblocks such as election outcomes, the Supreme Court, inaction by congress or resistance to any Federal Agency activities aimed at the goal. Nothing trumps the agenda. Not fiscal responsibility, not the constitution or honesty. Time is short, the mission must go forward and the dirty work must be carried out by many. We, the Obama administration know what needs to be done, what's best and how it needs to be done. Those that complain, challenge or resist simply need to be sidestepped in the interest of fairness and equality. Those that are in the way simply seek to maintain their control over those who have not received their fair place in society. Barry will not stop until everyone lives like they were born into white privilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Obama denies any wrongdoing on IRS, Benghazi. “President Obama said Sunday there was “not even a smidgen” of corruption in the IRS targeting of conservative groups, and that his team did not try to deceive the nation about the terrorist attack in Benghazi to aid his reelection bid in 2012. In a contentious interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox News before the Super Bowl, the president said he doesn’t remember meeting with former IRS chief Douglas Shulman during any of Mr. Shulman’s 157 VISITS to the White House during his first term.” This reminds me of something: “Number of times that Hillary Clinton, providing testimony to Congress, said that she didn’t remember, didn’t know, or something similar: 250.” . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Obama denies any wrongdoing on IRS, Benghazi. “President Obama said Sunday there was “not even a smidgen” of corruption in the IRS targeting of conservative groups, and that his team did not try to deceive the nation about the terrorist attack in Benghazi to aid his reelection bid in 2012. In a contentious interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox News before the Super Bowl, the president said he doesn’t remember meeting with former IRS chief Douglas Shulman during any of Mr. Shulman’s 157 VISITS to the White House during his first term.” This reminds me of something: “Number of times that Hillary Clinton, providing testimony to Congress, said that she didn’t remember, didn’t know, or something similar: 250.” . That's entirely possible; the "White House" isn't just the president, it's a BIG office/organization. I highly doubt that 157 visits to the White House means 157 meetings with the President...and it's likely that any "meetings" with the President were a three-minute handshake, of which the President probably has dozens a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 That's entirely possible; the "White House" isn't just the president, it's a BIG office/organization. I highly doubt that 157 visits to the White House means 157 meetings with the President...and it's likely that any "meetings" with the President were a three-minute handshake, of which the President probably has dozens a day. You assume too much Thomas. No one is saying that they met 157 times. However it is highly probable that they had at least one meeting (more than 3 minutes....lol) in Mr. Obama's entire first term. Evasive answers do not need your support. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) That's entirely possible; the "White House" isn't just the president, it's a BIG office/organization. I highly doubt that 157 visits to the White House means 157 meetings with the President...and it's likely that any "meetings" with the President were a three-minute handshake, of which the President probably has dozens a day. If I remember correctly the logs show that he did meet with the president for a substantial amount of time a couple days before a memo was sent down that is perceived to be the catalyst for the targeting. I believe you and I have already discussed this with you believing that nothing happens within the government within a couple days and me believing that if they wanted to pull this off they could do it in that amount of time. We probably ended the discussion with you calling me an idiot and me calling you a prick. Edit: We specifically discussed the extensive WH meeting that William Wilkins, Chief Counsel for the IRS had with Obama two days before the crackdown was initiated. Edited February 3, 2014 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 You assume too much Thomas. No one is saying that they met 157 times. However it is highly probable that they had at least one meeting (more than 3 minutes....lol) in Mr. Obama's entire first term. Evasive answers do not need your support. I would add that it's also something of a relative number when you consider that in the same time period, Kathleen Sebelius visited the WH about six times. In hindsight this makes sense since the use of the IRS to shut down opposing voices was tremendously successful and the ACA is the single largest government FUBAR in the history of, like, forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Obama denies any wrongdoing on IRS, Benghazi. “President Obama said Sunday there was “not even a smidgen” of corruption in the IRS targeting of conservative groups, and that his team did not try to deceive the nation about the terrorist attack in Benghazi to aid his reelection bid in 2012. In a contentious interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox News before the Super Bowl, the president said he doesn’t remember meeting with former IRS chief Douglas Shulman during any of Mr. Shulman’s 157 VISITS to the White House during his first term.” This reminds me of something: “Number of times that Hillary Clinton, providing testimony to Congress, said that she didn’t remember, didn’t know, or something similar: 250.” . How silly of O'Reilly to ask questions that the President has not interest or intent to answer succinctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 You assume too much Thomas. No one is saying that they met 157 times. However it is highly probable that they had at least one meeting (more than 3 minutes....lol) in Mr. Obama's entire first term. Evasive answers do not need your support. . So why bring up "He was at the White House 157 times" then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 So why bring up "He was at the White House 157 times" then? Line #3 of my response However it is highly probable that they had at least one meeting (more than 3 minutes....lol) in Mr. Obama's entire first term. In his interview, Mr. Obama stated that he did not recall meeting with Mr. Shulman even once. I then pointed out that due to the high number of visits ( 157) that was improbable. Not important in the big scheme of things, other than example # 2,223 of evading answers and non-transparancy . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Yawn I know, right? I mean, why would anyone ever consider the notion that the most feared domestic wing of the federal government, entrusted with the punitive powers to destroy lives, being used as a political weapon to surpress dissent and punish opposition, to be destructive to the very fabric of republican governance and the underpinnings of a free society? Edited February 3, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yawn Would you make up your mind? Benghazi was funny, IRS malfeasance is boring. What are the NSA and Fast and Furious scandals then? Oh, and BTW, what do you consider the unconstitutional palace coup that is going on with Obama and his lawmaking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yawn = past someone's nap time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I know, right? I mean, why would anyone ever consider the notion that the most feared domestic wing of the federal government, entrusted with the punitive powers to destroy lives, being used as a political weapon to surpress dissent and punish opposition, to be destructive to the very fabric of republican governance and the underpinnings of a free society? I intentionally missed the O'Reilly/Obama interview yesterday, but I read where Obama explained to O'Reilly that things like the IRS and Benghazi are only issues because Fox News keeps bringing them up. Obama is in dire need of getting the gatomans riled up for November because he has completely quit on trying to do anything other than hide for the rest of his time in office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 3, 2014 Author Share Posted February 3, 2014 ......he has completely quit on trying to do anything other than hide for the rest of his time in office. as long as no one lets him have a pen or a phone, that's not a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 as long as no one lets him have a pen or a phone, that's not a bad thing. I have progressive friends in my Facebook TL crowing about the interview. They take it as a sign that Obama will now do what they all hoped he would do when they first elected him. I'm thinking...everything he has touched in the past five years has turned into an unmitigated mess, but you somehow think he can do some good? That's some serious knob-gobbling right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 3, 2014 Author Share Posted February 3, 2014 I'm thinking...everything he has touched in the past five years has turned into an unmitigated mess, but you somehow think he can do some good? That's some serious knob-gobbling right there. as long as there are enough people who will buy the 'it's Bush's fault' line, he'll continue to get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Who cares? A few lanes on a bridge were closed! How can this possibly compare? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Besides, his supporters think gun owners should be put in concentration camps and killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Besides, his supporters think gun owners should be put in concentration camps and killed. Infowars. In other news, I lost a **** load of money yesterday because I bet the Illuminati controlled Super Bowl that the Broncos would have won 19-14. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Who cares? A few lanes on a bridge were closed! How can this possibly compare? Exactly! Real government abuse of power vs Fox news manufactured scandals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 LOL...........there are little trolls and there are nationally known trolls. Sam Stein ✔ @samsteinhp Follow Why is the IRS scandal a thing again? 9:45 AM - 3 Feb 2014 In case you’ve forgotten, “real journalists” are Smarter Than You™. Huffington Post political editor and White House correspondent Sam Stein reminded us of that today Very nice. Maybe he’s genuinely curious, or maybe he’s just trolling. Either way, he’s a pretty lame excuse for a journalist But conservatives are givers, and so here are some answers to Stein’s question anyway. Probably because 1) IRS officials admitted to the essential elements of a fed. crime and 2) no one went to jail. 3) American citizens were asked by the US Government about the content of their prayers. 4) American citizens were targeted for increased scrutiny because of their political beliefs. The IRS apologized for this. 5) The head of the IRS responsible refused to incriminate herself by testifying and retired early leaving her post. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Exactly! Real government abuse of power vs Fox news manufactured scandals Stop with the liberal memes like "manufactured scandals." The IRS scandal is much worse than "Bridgegate," assuming they're able to prove anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Stop with the liberal memes like "manufactured scandals." The IRS scandal is much worse than "Bridgegate," assuming they're able to prove anything. It's bigger than that. The IRS situation begins to delegitimize government and begins to legitimize fringe elements with a violent agenda. It's a very scarey thing. Edited February 4, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Maybe this is where all this started. Napolitano's Homeland Security report about the dangers of "right-wing extremism". “Rightwing extremism,” the report said in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to “those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.” “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks. “As the department responsible for protecting the homeland, DHS will continue to work with its state and local partners to prevent and protect against the potential threat to the United States associated with any rise in violent extremist activity,” Ms. Napolitano said Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/#ixzz2sJwLFnpa Every agency of this administration is focused on political conquest. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/#ixzz2sJvjl0HH Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 IRS SCANDAL UPDATE: Email: IRS’s Lerner, Treasury Department secretly drafted new rules to restrict nonprofits. The Obama administration’s Treasury Department and former IRS official Lois Lerner conspired to draft new 501©(4) regulations to restrict the activity of conservative groups in a way that would not be disclosed publicly, according to the House Committee on Ways and Means. The Treasury Department and Lerner started devising the new rules “off-plan,” meaning that their plans would not be published on the public schedule. They planned the new rules in 2012, while the IRS targeting of conservative groups was in full swing, and not after the scandal broke in order to clarify regulations as the administration has suggested. The rules place would place much more stringent controls on what would be considered political activity by the IRS, effectively limiting the standard practices of a wide array of non-profit groups. Gangster government, all the way down. Renewed GOP Focus on the IRS Scandal: Republicans slam new rules that could limit conservative nonprofits in 2014, but not unions . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Because it's his fifth amendment right. Got a problem with the Constitution? She waived her right to the fifth amendment when she made her opening statement. You can't say, like she did, I'm innocent and did nothing wrong then refuse to testify but taking the fifth. It doesn't work that way. Before you start using the Constitution as an argument learn a little about it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Thats according to you. Your opinion is not fact. That's why we debate things in this country. I consider the positions of many on this board wrong, too. So be it. Many of you seem to me to be victims of group think, almost a mob mentality of government bad, Obama bad, whatever. And when I point out the insanity of some of your positions some of you go nuts like Tom just jumping in and screaming like a two year old "You are dumb" and then his minions start their zero calorie posts of insults but they don't even know what they are criticizing. Not sayin you do that, or chef, or even tasker and a few others, even 3rding tries--you guys actually back up you positions--but it seems to me a politics board should be about discussion, even if it gets nasty--hey, that's fun too--and not just a Conservative circle jerk. . Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. -Thomas Paine To question government, to be suspicious of government, is fundamentally what makes us Americans. The constitution was set up in such a way to limit government. Government stands in opposition to freedom. Because politicians main interest is in the accumulation of power and the more they accrue the less liberty there is for society. On a personal note I don't care what party a politician is in I don't trust any of them. Edited February 5, 2014 by gumby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 From the Wall Street Journal: Obama's IRS 'Confusion': New evidence undercuts White House claims about IRS motivation. House committees are still digging into the IRS political targeting scandal, and based on a hearing Wednesday there's more to learn. The day produced more evidence blowing apart President Obama's claims that there was "not even a smidgen of corruption" or political motivation in the IRS handling of groups applying for tax-exempt status. Mr. Obama wants Americans to believe that the targeting resulted from the confusing tax law governing nonprofits, which he says was "difficult" to interpret and resulted in mere "bureaucratic" mistakes. This is also the Administration's justification for issuing new regulations governing 501©(4)s that would effectively silence White House opponents this election year. Published in the Federal Register in November, the new rules cite the "lack of a clear and concise" regulation as reason for the rewrite. House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp blew up this fairy tale at Wednesday's hearing with new IRS Commissioner John Koskinen. Mr. Camp unveiled a June 14, 2012 email from Treasury career attorney Ruth Madrigal to key IRS officials in the tax-exempt department, including former director Lois Lerner. The email cites a blog post about the political activity of tax-exempt 501©(4) groups and reads: "Don't know who in your organizations [sic] is keeping tabs on c4s, but since we mentioned potentially addressing them (off-plan) in 2013, I've got my radar up and this seemed interesting." Interesting for sure. The IRS typically puts out a public schedule of coming regulations, and Mr. Camp noted that in this case "off-plan" appears to mean "hidden from the public." He added that committee interviews with IRS officials have found that the new 2013 rules were in the works as early as 2011, meaning the Administration has "fabricated the rationale" for this new regulation. More at link: http://online.wsj.co...65161576171176? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Yeah, well, lanes on a bridge were closed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) IRS SCANDAL UPDATE: Email: IRS’s Lerner, Treasury Department secretly drafted new rules to restrict nonprofits. The Obama administration’s Treasury Department and former IRS official Lois Lerner conspired to draft new 501©(4) regulations to restrict the activity of conservative groups in a way that would not be disclosed publicly, according to the House Committee on Ways and Means. The Treasury Department and Lerner started devising the new rules “off-plan,” meaning that their plans would not be published on the public schedule. They planned the new rules in 2012, while the IRS targeting of conservative groups was in full swing, and not after the scandal broke in order to clarify regulations as the administration has suggested. The rules place would place much more stringent controls on what would be considered political activity by the IRS, effectively limiting the standard practices of a wide array of non-profit groups. Who gets the ramifications of this? What is Treasury doing giving a heads up to IRS, on something like this? Why is this anywhere near Treasury's radar? But, more importantly, this is not how large organizations behave in the wild. Not even close. Major WTF happening on my radar here. Nobody would be sending an email like this, from one "division" to another, and openly use the term "off plan" unless they were directed to from above, or knew they were safe in doing it, because they had approval. Speaking, without that approval, never mind committing it to paper = fired.So, there's no way in hell that this Ruth Madrigal sends this email without her boss knowing, unless she is a plant/rogue. Next, this appears to be a joint effort, that has been previously discussed? Now we are either talking a conspiracy(legal term) between 2 rogue employees at 2 different departments( 1% chance), or, this is the smoking gun that shows this was an INTER-departmental communication, supporting an inter-departmental policy. One Department doesn't set policy for another. Inter-departmental policy only emanates from: The office of the Big Boss. It may not have been Obama, but given this? It has to be somebody in the WH, at the very least. 2 people from 2 difference major entities, just don't think up and do this kind of thing on their own. They do not. It goes against every organzational and cultural norm. As I said: that's not how bureaucracy operates in the wild. Linking 2 departments, operating together, on this agenda? Busted! Or, somebody's going to need to explain this, for days, to get me to buy it. Edited February 7, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 A brave man. Bill Henck: Inside the IRS A strong woman. The most dangerous woman in America An interesting plan. Targeting the IRS http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/targeting_the_irs.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 From the Wall Street Journal: More at link: http://online.wsj.co...65161576171176? That's your friggin smoking gun??? Good lord! Smoking guns can't be "appears to say," "might suggest" or "could, while high on glue fumes be interpreted as..." What a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Not even a smidgeon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) That's your friggin smoking gun??? Good lord! Smoking guns can't be "appears to say," "might suggest" or "could, while high on glue fumes be interpreted as..." What a joke Yep, and the fun part is: this is what most of you think. Perfect. Dude, read what I wrote above. Try to comprehend. All a smart lawyer has to do is ask "When did Lois Lerner and you decide to set 4c policy on your own, without guidance or approval from above?" I don't expect you to get the ramifications of that question, but, I am fairly certain their lawyers will. Then, it's CYA time. Which is also known as rat time. A special prosecutor WILL be named, right after the 2014 elections. I would bet the house on it. There's no reason to do it now, and let the Ds play the "Ken Starr" card. Not unless something comes out that is a sure winner. Barring that, you can bet the Rs will drag this out so that as much of it gets on Hillary as possible. It's just smart politics. And, the guys in charge, Ryan, Gowdy, the chairman from Ohio? Guess what: Smart lawyers. Edited February 8, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 She waived her right to the fifth amendment when she made her opening statement. You can't say, like she did, I'm innocent and did nothing wrong then refuse to testify but taking the fifth. It doesn't work that way. Before you start using the Constitution as an argument learn a little about it first. I've heard other right winger say this too, part of the right wing echo chamber. It's not only wrong it's inanly stupid. Yep, and the fun part is: this is what most of you think. Perfect. Dude, read what I wrote above. Try to comprehend. All a smart lawyer has to do is ask "When did Lois Lerner and you decide to set 4c policy on your own, without guidance or approval from above?" I don't expect you to get the ramifications of that question, but, I am fairly certain their lawyers will. Then, it's CYA time. Which is also known as rat time. A special prosecutor WILL be named, right after the 2014 elections. I would bet the house on it. There's no reason to do it now, and let the Ds play the "Ken Starr" card. Not unless something comes out that is a sure winner. Barring that, you can bet the Rs will drag this out so that as much of it gets on Hillary as possible. It's just smart politics. And, the guys in charge, Ryan, Gowdy, the chairman from Ohio Gue what: Smart lawyers. Ya ya, more "I bet" and "there will be" nonsense. Who are the victims here? How were they injured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I've heard other right winger say this too, part of the right wing echo chamber. It's not only wrong it's inanly stupid. On the upside, the news coming out everyday...from job numbers to economic downturn to Obamacare failures...is so consistently bad for this WH and progressives in general, that it has has essentially knob-gobblers like you to do nothing more than hang around the IRS thread referring to right wing echo chambers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) I get that some are Democrats and are very loyal to their team, but to look objectively at the whole IRS story and still believe that there was no coordinated political effort to target conservative groups is to be in total denial of reality. Every once in a while you have to be big enough to admit when your "team" sucks. The "team" in control of the White House and the Senate is really sucking on many issues. Edited February 8, 2014 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts