• 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 supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases [W:127]

Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

Hey, free speech give you the right to say almost anything, that doesn't mean it's correct. And I'm not the one drinking the Koolaid, it's the partisan folks on the right drinking it. You might have the motive and means to seal merchandise from a store, that doesn't mean you are a suspect unless you are watch Perry Mason.

Hard evidence, Hard evidence.
you use means motive and opportunity as tools to steer you in the right direction to gather that hard evidence. you don't waste your time looking for evidence where there is no means or opportunity. If you can prove that Obama didn't have the means motive or opportunity then and only then should his name be struck of the list of possible involvement
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

I think its his responsibility is to make sure all the departments under him do their job ethically. What happened at the IRS appears to me to be nothing more than a giant screw up, especially since the manager is a self described conservative Republican. He should remove anyone who has put politics in their job.

IRS targeting linked to Republican staffer - Toledo Blade

the so called Republican is a Republican because the proven liar Cummings says he is?
 
IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases


what was it liar Cummings said again?
"Washington's involvement in the IRS scandal were "unsubstantiated,"

What was it that Issa said?
"Washington was involved"

by the way Holly Paz is a registered Democrat who donated $4,000 to the Obama campaign in 2008

So, how does "she was personally involved in scrutinizing some of the earliest applications from tea party groups seeking tax-exempt status" put her in the middle of the time-frame and actions of the targeted sweeps that the IRS investigation is talking about?

Neither you nor this clip you cut and pasted tie the two together in any way or provide a time frame that would.
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

you use means motive and opportunity as tools to steer you in the right direction to gather that hard evidence. you don't waste your time looking for evidence where there is no means or opportunity. If you can prove that Obama didn't have the means motive or opportunity then and only then should his name be struck of the list of possible involvement
Gibberish.
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

the so called Republican is a Republican because the proven liar Cummings says he is?

The manager is a conservative Republican because he said so under oath according to the transcripts.
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

the so called Republican is a Republican because the proven liar Cummings says he is?

The way you cling so tightly to this sinking ship... well, its so manly of you!
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

Why are progressives shocked that their own people in positions of power were discriminating against their opposition??

You do it every damn day even to the point of epic violence...

You just recently mobbed a mans home... Yet you're in denial discrimination is happening?

You guys will self-immolate over wars and commit suicide in order to frame "rednecks", riot, squat or takeover buildings yet subtle non-violent discrimination is some surprise to you?

The denial by the "left" is simply amazing..... You're willing to throw fits like 5-year-olds in the middle of streets and destroy property and attempt to seize anything and everything and act in a childish manner, however those in government who share the same ideas as you - even those in government that know the way of action is through legislation won't discriminate against those they absolutely hate???
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

Despite any faults you feel Bush may have had he was a tested leader with a record that one could inspect, and it was felt both times that he was a superior candidate to either Gore or Kerry. In retrospect I think the people were right

If George Bush were to run against Barrack Obama now, purely on their records, Bush would most likely win.

As I said, you don't hold him accountable for ANYTHING.
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

So your thought is that Obama is not held responsible for anything because you believe Bush wasnt? How many different ways do you want me to shred that? If you really want to discuss it, start a new thread.

No, my point is that the right wants to hold Obama responsible for EVERYTHING while they gave Bush a free pass. Kinda hard to take those on the right seriously.

Back to the topic at hand---if you believe that the President cannot possibly be responsible for everything that occurs, that would be a good argument for two things: stronger oversight and less government. Internal investigations and IG inspections arent getting the job done and the stonewalling that has been occurring just makes the administration look guilty.

I have no problem with more oversight and less government. However, what "appears" to you to be guilty is of little consequence, either put up some evidence or look like stupid conspiracy nuts.
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

No, my point is that the right wants to hold Obama responsible for EVERYTHING while they gave Bush a free pass. Kinda hard to take those on the right seriously.



I have no problem with more oversight and less government. However, what "appears" to you to be guilty is of little consequence, either put up some evidence or look like stupid conspiracy nuts.

What?

Yeah maybe republicans gave Bush a free pass but conservatives and libertarians gave Bush extra **** and absolutely disagreed with him on many issue especially the Patriot Act which Obamabots in congress learned to love and abuse - not to mention the war.

Obama gets absolute loyalty out of 99% of progressives when Bush got about 60 or maybe 70% that viewed themselves as conservative or republican...

It's funny how the left in their rags portrays the "right" as a split party (and they're absolutely correct) however when you make arguments you attempt to portray us as completely in cohesion.... Which way is it and which lie you want to tell?
 
Re: IRS supervisor in DC scrutinized tea party cases

No, my point is that the right wants to hold Obama responsible for EVERYTHING while they gave Bush a free pass. Kinda hard to take those on the right seriously.

I have no problem with more oversight and less government. However, what "appears" to you to be guilty is of little consequence, either put up some evidence or look like stupid conspiracy nuts.

I keep saying it and you guys keep missing it. It doesnt matter whether he knew or not. If he did, hes corrupt. If he didnt, the department is corrupt. Either way its time to clean house at the IRS.

And I wasnt even posting here when Bush was in office. So you assuming you know what I think about Bush makes for a stupid post.
 
So, how does "she was personally involved in scrutinizing some of the earliest applications from tea party groups seeking tax-exempt status" put her in the middle of the time-frame and actions of the targeted sweeps that the IRS investigation is talking about?

So tell me why they are hiding the 'oh so innocent' Holly Paz, and Lois Lerner? :roll: I swear, progressive defense at this point wouldn't hold up in a 4th grade principles office, much less in the adult world.
 

Did you even read the transcript ?

Plus didn't he refer just ONE group back to Washington ?

It doesn't add up. He supposedly submitted one case back to Washington.

Jay Sakulow alone is representing over 60 different groups plus he has signed letters from Carter Hull and Lois Lerner that prove the targeting was micro-managed from Washington.

He's not the only attorney representing Conservative groups that were targeted either.

First off we know that the Democrats in Washington have no problems being the lying POS they are and have even justified perjury.

I have no doubt this guy was visited by the Obama administration and told to lie under oath.

They know without a real AG, not a lying POS like Holder that nothing will happen to this guy.

Plus it's Elijah Cummings who is everything you guys wished George W Bush was.
 
Not buyin' it Pete....

He's desperately trying to come to terms with what the Democrats did to these people.

To the point of creating his own reality.
 
Back
Top Bottom