• 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!

IRS official Lois Lerner to take the Fifth

This explains much, about our differences that is. Off hand, I can't think of any television broadcaster I trust less than Laurence O'Donnell.:cool:

Check page 51 in the following IRS publication then. :cool:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p557.pdf

501(c)(4) - Civic
Leagues and Social
Welfare Organizations


Political activity. Promoting social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public of- fice. However, if you submit proof that your or- ganization is organized exclusively to promote social welfare, it can obtain exemption even if it participates legally in some political activity on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office. See the discussion in chapter 2 under Political Organization Income Tax Return.​


.
.
 
Check page 51 in the following IRS publication then. :cool:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p557.pdf

501(c)(4) - Civic
Leagues and Social
Welfare Organizations


Political activity. Promoting social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public of- fice. However, if you submit proof that your or- ganization is organized exclusively to promote social welfare, it can obtain exemption even if it participates legally in some political activity on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office. See the discussion in chapter 2 under Political Organization Income Tax Return.​

Yes. The problem was not the law, but its politically targeted application, and lying to Congress about it.:cool:
 
A jury can't infer guilt, but I can.
B
Also, pleading the 5th doesn't make her untouchable.

The biggest error on her part, was her opening statement, right before she took the 5th.
she's guilty of being incompetent, but that's not a crime. The fact is no organization doing political work should get 501 c(4) tax exemption status. See post 176 above.
 
Yes. The problem was not the law, but its politically targeted application, and lying to Congress about it.:cool:
As Lawrence O'Donnell pointed out there was a huge number of Tea Party organizations created in 2010.
 
Taking the 5th in and of itself is not a crime.

Nor can you infer guilt because she chose not to respond to the questions of Congress who are crooks themselves and who most of them should be in jail as well.

The 5th Amendment is one of the most important rights granted by the Constitution.

You cannot take a fundamental principle of the constitution and turn it against a citizen.

I want this thing to be investigated.

I want to know if there was wrong doing and if there is wrong doing on her part... then she should be prosecuted.

I just wanna show all of you so called "constitutionalists" how full of crap you truly are.

Inferring that silence in and of itself is admission of guilt.

How many people do you know who have invoked the 5th Amendment during a congressional investigation that were free of wrongdoing? As a government employee she should be compelled to comply. If her office contacted an American, that citizen would be compelled to comply.

No matter your prejudice, she appears to be guilty of something. Now she has to prove otherwise; or face the consequences of her actions (like being suspended to start with.)

Welcome to America.
 
I think the majority of Americans will think she is guilty of something or has something important to hide by her taking the fifth. I am not a lawyer, so I do not understand how an opening statement could stop someone from taking the 5th. I will just sit back and stay tuned in to see how all this works out.

That's what I'm going to do too.

But I can't help but wonder about how much all this influenced the 2012 election.
 
That's what I'm going to do too.

But I can't help but wonder about how much all this influenced the 2012 election.

I don't think it had much of an influence if any. I think the inept campaign Romney ran had more to do with his loss than any group being denied tax exempt status.
 
I guess we'll never know. What I would like to know is Harry Reid's source on Romney's taxes. Remember?
 
chicago trib editorial board, today:

IRS stonewalling makes the case for a special prosecutor - chicagotribune.com

With their stonewalling, claimed ignorance and convenient amnesia, Internal Revenue Service officials make it difficult for Americans to comprehend the depth, but also the official awareness, of their agency's evident assault on free speech. IRS targeting of conservative groups for extraordinary scrutiny, intrusive demands for information from them, and long delays in processing their paperwork, served two ends, unwittingly or by intent: to thwart the groups' fundraising by delaying their tax-exempt status, and to intimidate them from exercising their First Amendment rights.

Who put this sorry operation in motion? Was the IRS merely looking for ways to cope with more applications for its valuable tax-exempt imprimatur than its staff could process? Or was someone pushing the agency to hassle groups unfriendly to the government — or to the incumbent Democratic administration — as a presidential election approached?

Asking these questions isn't a coy suggestion that we have answers. We do, though, know that truthful responses from Lois Lerner could get all of us much closer to those answers. Same for Douglas Shulman and Steven Miller, past IRS commissioners who, unlike Lerner, haven't invoked a Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Shulman and Miller are testifying. But they just didn't know much, just can't remember much, about their agency's targeting operation.

Add to this the White House's evolving story of who knew what, when, about illicit IRS activity and you reach this scandal's two bedrock issues. One is the origin and extent of the targeting. The other is how high in the Obama administration knowledge of this operation reached before voters cast their ballots for the Nov. 6 election. On Friday the IRS inspector general testified that in June 2012, five months before the election, he told top Treasury Department officials of his probe into the targeting. Maybe the word stopped there. Certainly, nobody clued in rank-and-file citizens about IRS treatment of conservative groups that might have influenced their votes.

The context: Tea party and other conservative groups had assisted a Republican victory wave in the 2010 congressional election. Democrats understandably feared a repeat in 2012. That concern likely animated Democratic senators who, during the 2012 cycle, urged the IRS to examine the tax-exempt status of these groups, some of which had huge war chests. The White House, too, complained about big-money conservative groups.

At the same time, the IRS was assuring noisy Republican members of Congress that, contrary to complaints from the conservative groups, the agency wasn't subjecting them to inordinate scrutiny. That assurance was incorrect. Worse, even when they learned about the targeting, neither Shulman nor Miller corrected their previous denials to the Congress. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said at a Tuesday hearing: "Commissioner Miller, that's a lie by omission. ... Why did you mislead me and my colleagues?" To which Miller replied, "I did not lie, Sir."

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation of the targeting, and of whether IRS officials misled members of Congress who asked about it. But given the political overtones, many Americans won't be much interested in what one arm of the Obama administration concludes about the conduct of other arms — the IRS, the Treasury and possibly the White House.

The evasiveness of IRS officials makes the case for a special prosecutor to conduct this inquiry, much as then-U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald investigated (and convicted of perjury and other offenses) Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Given the gravity of this scandal and the we-saw-nothing attitude that IRS officials project, Attorney General Eric Holder should appoint a prosecutor, aka special counsel.

We've been skeptical of special prosecutors who succumbed to temptations of mission creep and vague deadlines. But there are times when only a special prosecutor has the independence and credibility to resolve a politically fraught matter.

With each day, the IRS fiasco only grows curiouser — as do the American people.

We don't begrudge Lerner her privilege under the Fifth Amendment.

We're equally concerned, though, about groups eager to invoke their First Amendment privilege — only to have their federal government push back.

don't you get lonely?

is that part of the reason why you're so angry?

party proud, progressives
 
IRS official on leave refused to resign, says GOP senator | Fox News

First she refused to testify. Now Lois Lerner, the IRS official at the center of the tax agency scandal, is refusing to resign, according to a top Republican senator.

Sources confirmed to Fox News earlier Thursday that Lerner, the head of the IRS division that oversaw the unit targeting conservative groups, had been placed on administrative leave, with pay.

But Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, claimed she was only put in that status after refusing to step down.

He said the commissioner was in his right to demand her resignation, and said taxpayers should not continue to pay her salary indefinitely.

“My understanding is the new acting IRS commissioner asked for Ms. Lerner’s resignation, and she refused to resign. She was then put on administrative leave instead,” Grassley said in a statement. “The IRS owes it to taxpayers to resolve her situation quickly. The agency needs to move on to fix the conditions that led to the targeting debacle."

Capitol Hill sources said Lerner, the director of exempt organizations, was placed on paid leave Thursday, amid calls from some lawmakers for her to be suspended or fired. In her absence, Ken Corbin, the current deputy director of the submission processing, wage and investment division, will take over her duties, according to an internal IRS memo obtained by Fox News.
 
I didn't want to but couldn't resist and clicked your link and am glad I did. I wasn't aware of Max Baucus's role in Shulman's appointment. Thanks.
 
Dems saw increasing energy on the Repub side in 2010 and initiated voter suppression actions for 2012.:cool:

Clearly now that this scandal has come to light Obama's legitimacy is in serious question

There was an obvious coordinated attempt to target the Tea Party and other groups to blunt their effectiveness for the 2012 election. I wouldn't expect the Hope and Change cult members to grasp this, but there are going to be far reaching consequences historically and politically for Democrats using the IRS like the Gestapo to harass and intimidate private citizens.
 
Clearly now that this scandal has come to light Obama's legitimacy is in serious question

There was an obvious coordinated attempt to target the Tea Party and other groups to blunt their effectiveness for the 2012 election. I wouldn't expect the Hope and Change cult members to grasp this, but there are going to be far reaching consequences historically and politically for Democrats using the IRS like the Gestapo to harass and intimidate private citizens.

More likely, now that the Republican party has chosen to make a huge deal of out nothing, the legitimacy of the Republican party is now in serious question.... Oh wait, it already WAS in serious question.

The mountain that has been made out of this molehill, if not such a tragedy given the huge distraction of our government resources from real problems, would make a sitcom of slap-stick that would make I Love Lucy look like a drama in comparison.

This is complete silliness, Cons... stop it and preserve what little dignity you still have.
 
If you think that this IRS scandal is nothing, then you are the one in denial.
 
I don't think it had much of an influence if any. I think the inept campaign Romney ran had more to do with his loss than any group being denied tax exempt status.

No group was denied tax exempt status... it is just groups that sought determination letters did not get them. You don't actually have to apply to be a 501(c)(4); you simply self-declare.
 
silliness, Cons

McCaskill Calls For Firing Of All Involved In IRS Targeting Scandal « CBS St. Louis

“I’m mad. It is un-American, it is wrong, and we have to make sure that this gets fixed,” Missouri’s senior senator said. “There’s a reason Lady Justice wears a blindfold in America. That is because in America, we don’t apply the law based on who you are, who you know, or what you believe. We apply the law equally.”

McCaskill went on to say that the targeting of one group based on political beliefs “infuriates” her.

“We should not only fire the head of the IRS, which has occurred, but we’ve got to go down the line and find every single person who had anything to do with this and make sure that they are removed from the IRS and the word goes out that this is unacceptable,” she said. “It is un-American, it is wrong, and it cannot occur again.”

McCaskill concluded by saying many groups claim to be charities while doing political work and that it is a problem which needs to be fixed “but not in a way that highlights one belief over another.”
 
Clearly now that this scandal has come to light Obama's legitimacy is in serious question

There was an obvious coordinated attempt to target the Tea Party and other groups to blunt their effectiveness for the 2012 election. I wouldn't expect the Hope and Change cult members to grasp this, but there are going to be far reaching consequences historically and politically for Democrats using the IRS like the Gestapo to harass and intimidate private citizens.

That could very well be the case.:cool:
 
No group was denied tax exempt status... it is just groups that sought determination letters did not get them. You don't actually have to apply to be a 501(c)(4); you simply self-declare.

Yeah, I saw that on Colbert too...Not sure if that is indeed the case...But let me just ask you something....

What possible relevance in determining someones tax exempt status could a question like, "How many times does your group pray together, and what is said in those prayers"?

How is that the IRS's business in determination?
 
More likely, now that the Republican party has chosen to make a huge deal of out nothing, the legitimacy of the Republican party is now in serious question.... Oh wait, it already WAS in serious question.

The mountain that has been made out of this molehill, if not such a tragedy given the huge distraction of our government resources from real problems, would make a sitcom of slap-stick that would make I Love Lucy look like a drama in comparison.

This is complete silliness, Cons... stop it and preserve what little dignity you still have.
No. You should understand that if you believe what you say, those of us on the right have little to lose politically. On the other hand, it does appear the left has much to lose - and you're losing it day by day. Sucks, I know, but having survived using such tactics, there's an elegant justice in watching you hang by them. I believe that's called "hoisted by your own petard". So, since you mentioned it, "Lucy! Looks like you have some 'splainin to do."
 
Back
Top Bottom