• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Expand I.R.S. Inquiry, With Eye on White House

As for the the more statement regarding more or less applications...IRS official Lerner stated

"[W]e saw a big increase in these kind of applications, many of which indicated that they were going to be involved in advocacy work," Lerner said.

Which means they started getting applications from a lot of political groups who were claiming to fit 501(c)(4) status and were spending their money on thing political in nature and not meeting the laundry list of things you can do to meet 501(c)(4) status.

Except by their own admission, the spike didn't occur until 2012, which was 18 months after they started their "special" process. In 2009 and 2010, there were 1700 applications. In 2012, it was 3600.
 
Yes, unless you are poor at math, the GWB administration when this occurred was several years ago. Sounds like you were unfamiliar with the IRS action back then. So are you are outraged at the actions of the IRS during Bush as you are now? An honest question.

An honest question?

My wife is a member of All Saints Church in Pasadena, or I should write was. I am very familiar with their actions, and the actions of the IRS back then.

The Progressives at Salon wrote of what, less than 10 times of when the IRS was questioning "liberal groups", versus hundreds and hundreds that we know about over the last few years of the Obama Administration.

And you ask if I was as outraged then as I am now?

What a lame question.
 
An honest question?

My wife is a member of All Saints Church in Pasadena, or I should write was. I am very familiar with their actions, and the actions of the IRS back then.

The Progressives at Salon wrote of what, less than 10 times of when the IRS was questioning "liberal groups", versus hundreds and hundreds that we know about over the last few years of the Obama Administration.

And you ask if I was as outraged then as I am now?

What a lame question.
So were you outraged then?
 
Oh goodness. It looks like Obama ain't gonna get reelected. Oh wait...

Well this will sure put a dagger in all the bipartisan support he has had. Oh wait...
 
An honest question?

My wife is a member of All Saints Church in Pasadena, or I should write was. I am very familiar with their actions, and the actions of the IRS back then.

The Progressives at Salon wrote of what, less than 10 times of when the IRS was questioning "liberal groups", versus hundreds and hundreds that we know about over the last few years of the Obama Administration.

And you ask if I was as outraged then as I am now?

What a lame question.

27 groups were subjected to unessassary questions. 13 of them were conservative groups.
 
I figured you were being facetious and sarcastic.

Obama should come clean and IF he broke the law, or anyone in his cabinet broke the law then they should suffer the consequence, just like us lowly Citizens.

The problem is unlike Nixon, he won't remove himself for the benefit of the Country. He's not that kind of man as we, the Conservatives have been saying for years now.

We'll see what he does.

Richard Nixon didn't remove himself for the benefit of anybody but Richard Nixon. He knew he'd be impeached and removed, so he got out while the getting was good. He knew that he no longer had the support of Republicans in Congress, so he skedaddled. Is that really the party line? That he stepped aside for the good of the country? :lamo :lamo Oh God, you guys will buy anything...:lamo
 
Oh goodness. It looks like Obama ain't gonna get reelected. Oh wait...

Well this will sure put a dagger in all the bipartisan support he has had. Oh wait...

If it goes down the Nixonian path, he won't even have the support of his own party. When it comes down to choosing between Barack Obama and Harry Reid, Harry's gonna pick Harry every time.
 
The Treasury Department’s inspector general told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 he was investigating the Internal Revenue Service’s screening of politically active organizations seeking tax exemptions, disclosing for the first time on Friday that Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=2&

Ok enough is enough is this not proof enough for impeachment

The NYT taking down BHO. Oh, the humanity!:eek:
 
Not that what the IRS did was right....but where were all of you who are "outraged" over this, when the IRS was targeting left-wing groups during the Bush years?

When the IRS targeted liberals - Salon.com

I find it hilarious that based on a few isolated allegations that were never proved true, you play the "but they did it too" equivalence game and try to write this whole scandal off as no big deal and business as usual.... LMAO
 
nyt, from the op:

The inspector general gave Republicans some fodder Friday when he divulged that he informed the Treasury’s general counsel he was auditing the I.R.S.’s screening of politically active groups seeking tax exemptions on June 4, 2012. He told Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin “shortly after,” he said. That meant Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.

lisa myers, nbc news, on coffee joe this morning:

[The IRS commissioner] has known for at least a year that this was going on and that this had happened. And did he share any of that information with the White House? But even more importantly, Congress is going to ask him, why did you mislead us for an entire year? Members of Congress were saying conservatives are being targeted. What's going on here? The IRS denied it. Then when -- after these officials are briefed by the IG that this is going on, they don't disclose it. In fact, the commissioner sent a letter to Congress in September on this subject and did not reveal this. Imagine if we -- if you can -- what would have happened if this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different.

NBC: Why Did IRS Mislead Congress For An Entire Year? | RealClearPolitics

yesterday the prevaricating potus was asked by bloomberg news...

he could NOT state unequivocally that he didn't know about the criminal behavior that was going on in this irs

Bloomberg TV: “Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your counsel’s office found out on April 22nd?”

President Obama’s response: “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the Inspector General report before the IG report had been leaked to the press."

U.S.-Turkey Relations - C-SPAN Video Library

moments later he added: "in terms of the white house and reporting, i think that, you know, you've gotten that information from mr carney and others... you know, i, i promise you this---the minute I [emphasis his] found out about it then my main focus is making sure that we get the thing fixed"

politico:

Though the White House counsel’s office was informed of the IRS probe in late April, Obama has insisted that he only learned about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups through media reports last Friday. But he wouldn’t say definitively that the White House was unaware of the targeting before then.

Obama pushes back on IRS, AP, Benghazi - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

which is all pretty ugly and all, y'all...

except what you don't seem quite yet to be appreciating is we've only just begun

irs hearings and headlines are going to be a permanent part of your little dp experience into perpetuity

we're gonna subpoena, we're gonna depose, we're gonna go special prosecutor

and sander levin aint gonna be able to say a word against us

listen to max trainwreck baucus (do you hate HIM yet?)

It's broader than the current focus. And I think it's important that we have the hearings, and I think that will encourage other information to come out that has not yet come out. I suspect that we will learn more in the next several days, maybe the next couple three weeks which adds more context to all of this," added Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

Democrat Baucus warns: More to come out on IRS scandal | WashingtonExaminer.com

we've already learned quite a lot (which you can't for a whit refute---tho you'll continue to talk, it's what you do...)

1. nyt: "obama admin knew of irs scandal 5 months before election"

2. politico: "he wouldn't say definitively that the white house was unaware of the targeting before then [april 22]"

stay tuned
 
i can also tell you (and i will, cuz i've always liked you) that the white house has been especially super persnickity about that general counsel referenced above in the nyt quote

i will try to get that link to you if i come across it, to tell you the truth i can't right now even remember the gentleman's name

doesn't alter the truth of what i can hear testify to you---the white house has specifically denied that irs general counsel knew

i can also link you to politico saying that the white house has only 2 nominees at irs, a commissioner and a general counsel

politico's point in that particular piece was that obama does not have the power to fire this ms lerner, the lady who's not good at math, who's probably going to go to jail

mr miller today put himself in serious legal jeopardy, as you probably already know

stay tuned

here ya go, he's william wilkins, watch him:

Obama spoke soon after the IRS began defending some of its senior leadership, releasing a statement Wednesday saying that its chief counsel, William Wilkins, was not among those who participated in a meeting of agency employees to discuss the targeting of conservative groups. The inspector general’s report suggested that a “chief counsel” had been at an Aug. 4, 2011, meeting on the issue, but the IRS said that the lawyers who attended were actually “several layers below Wilkins.”

Obama: Acting IRS chief Steven Miller resigns - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

the other claim is here: IRS scandal: What we still haven't learned/Politico
 
Last edited:
one more thing for now

the gop is now gonna slow down

on benghazi, on the ap, on this irs...

we're gonna play clock

don't wanna look like lynchers, let the headlines hang him

if you wanna know how i know, i'll tell ya that too

i just looked at sean hannity's face

stay up, take care, pay your taxes...
 
Not that what the IRS did was right....but where were all of you who are "outraged" over this, when the IRS was targeting left-wing groups during the Bush years?

When the IRS targeted liberals - Salon.com
I’m not sure this is analogous with the current issue. Those in the Salon article ALREADY HAD their tax exempt status. They were being investigated, rightly, for actions that could have caused the revocation of this status. None did and there was an IG investigation then that found no ‘wrong doing’. As I’m sure you are aware the current issue is the application/approval process of organizations. One could argue that if these were approved expeditiously the IRS could have potentially brought investigations similar to the ones in Salon…if applicable.

(but we digress)
 
We'll see what he does.

Richard Nixon didn't remove himself for the benefit of anybody but Richard Nixon. He knew he'd be impeached and removed, so he got out while the getting was good. He knew that he no longer had the support of Republicans in Congress, so he skedaddled. Is that really the party line? That he stepped aside for the good of the country? :lamo :lamo Oh God, you guys will buy anything...:lamo


How would you know what Richard Nixon's motivation's were ?

Your'e in here defending a President who is either a hundreds times more corrupt than Nixon ever was or he's so incompetent and disconnected that he could be surrounded by massive amounts of corruption and incompetence and NOT have a clue.

But no one save for a blind Obama apologist beleives that for minute.

His General Counsel knew 3 weeks knew of the IG's report 3 weeks before Obama publicly stated he learned about it like all of us.

Do you actually believe they chose not to fill him in on the IRS's deliberate targeting of Conservative groups ?

That for 3 weeks they decided to leave the President of the United States in the Dark.

That they didn't tell him about the IRS leaking donor list from Conservative non-profits to Progressive activist and Democrat politicians ?

It's not US that will "buy anything " .

For example I know Obama and Jay Carney are lying through their teeth. I know Hillary is just as much of a low life scum bag as her husband as she told the Father of the Navy Seal " we will arrest and prosecute the man who made that video "

You can chose to keep being lied to, personally I have to much self respect to put up with a politician lying to my face to cover their ass
 
I’m not sure this is analogous with the current issue. Those in the Salon article ALREADY HAD their tax exempt status. They were being investigated, rightly, for actions that could have caused the revocation of this status. None did and there was an IG investigation then that found no ‘wrong doing’. As I’m sure you are aware the current issue is the application/approval process of organizations. One could argue that if these were approved expeditiously the IRS could have potentially brought investigations similar to the ones in Salon…if applicable.

(but we digress)

Bingo.:2wave:
 
one more thing for now

the gop is now gonna slow down

on benghazi, on the ap, on this irs...

we're gonna play clock

don't wanna look like lynchers, let the headlines hang him

if you wanna know how i know, i'll tell ya that too

i just looked at sean hannity's face

stay up, take care, pay your taxes...

They're taking Charles Krauthammer's advice.

I know the GOP is in the process of protecting NEW whistle blowers that have come forward on the IRS scandal.

The GOP will keep going as long as it takes to prosecute those who ordered the harrasment of Conservative PAC groups and prosecute those who leaked donor list.

If it goes to the WH which I suspect it does then they should hold those people responsible.

I don't think they will let up personally, not with new information coming out daily.
 
The Treasury Department’s inspector general told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 he was investigating the Internal Revenue Service’s screening of politically active organizations seeking tax exemptions, disclosing for the first time on Friday that Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=2&

Ok enough is enough is this not proof enough for impeachment

may I suggest you take representative Levin's suggestion seriously. Here is what he said:
Taken aback, the ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, modified his prepared remarks to warn, “If this hearing becomes essentially a bootstrap to continue the campaign of 2012 and to prepare for 2014, we will be making a very, very serious mistake.”

So Treasury was told there was an IG investigation going on in the IRS. If there is a connection to the White House or President Obama it will come out sooner or later. But so far, there is no smoking gun and you are way ahead of yourself.

What should happen is both parties use this to rein in the IRS. They have way too much power and are really not answerable to anyone. President Obama can only fire two people who work for the IRS, all the rest are civil servants which in order to be fired they have to go through a very lengthy process and everything must be well documented. One party by itself is not enough to curb some of the power the IRS has, it will take both party and to make this a partisan battle is a mistake all Americans will have to live with as the end result will be an even more powerful IRS.
 
How would you know what Richard Nixon's motivation's were ?

Your'e in here defending a President who is either a hundreds times more corrupt than Nixon ever was or he's so incompetent and disconnected that he could be surrounded by massive amounts of corruption and incompetence and NOT have a clue.

But no one save for a blind Obama apologist beleives that for minute.

His General Counsel knew 3 weeks knew of the IG's report 3 weeks before Obama publicly stated he learned about it like all of us.

Do you actually believe they chose not to fill him in on the IRS's deliberate targeting of Conservative groups ?

That for 3 weeks they decided to leave the President of the United States in the Dark.

That they didn't tell him about the IRS leaking donor list from Conservative non-profits to Progressive activist and Democrat politicians ?

It's not US that will "buy anything " .

For example I know Obama and Jay Carney are lying through their teeth. I know Hillary is just as much of a low life scum bag as her husband as she told the Father of the Navy Seal " we will arrest and prosecute the man who made that video "

You can chose to keep being lied to, personally I have to much self respect to put up with a politician lying to my face to cover their ass

Actually with Nixon, Goldwater had a meeting with him and inform Nixon his goose was cooked. He could only round up 20 votes in the senate to avoid impeachment, Nixon needed 34. Whatever else Goldwater told Nixon, he decided to resign. Without Watergate, Nixon may have ended up rank up there in the near great category. Nixon established the EPA, OSHA, the Endangered Species Act, Imposed wage and price controls. He was very outspoken for affirmative action and his drug policy included funds for education. He opened the door to Red China and began detente with the Soviet Union. He also put an end to the Vietnam War.

Nixon accomplished a lot during his presidency, but he will always be remembered for Watergate and none of the above.
 
may I suggest you take representative Levin's suggestion seriously. Here is what he said:
Taken aback, the ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, modified his prepared remarks to warn, “If this hearing becomes essentially a bootstrap to continue the campaign of 2012 and to prepare for 2014, we will be making a very, very serious mistake.”

So Treasury was told there was an IG investigation going on in the IRS. If there is a connection to the White House or President Obama it will come out sooner or later. But so far, there is no smoking gun and you are way ahead of yourself.

What should happen is both parties use this to rein in the IRS. They have way too much power and are really not answerable to anyone. President Obama can only fire two people who work for the IRS, all the rest are civil servants which in order to be fired they have to go through a very lengthy process and everything must be well documented. One party by itself is not enough to curb some of the power the IRS has, it will take both party and to make this a partisan battle is a mistake all Americans will have to live with as the end result will be an even more powerful IRS.

Levin is wrong. He is making it political by claiming that if this or if that. By not continuing to speak out the story will eventually die out, just as the Levin and the Dems want.

And it should effect the mid term elections as well as the next Presidential race anyway. The Dems deserve to be thrown out of office. There has never been this much corruption in any American government for the past 100 years. Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon were nothing compared to this.
 
Back
Top Bottom