• 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 targeting linked to Republican staffer

mpg said:
"consistent" as in all Tea Party groups being treated like each other, but not "consistent" as in being treated like liberal groups
Click to expand...

Evidence? Nobody has even asked this question or looked into it. For all we know the GOP operative who targeted the tea party also targeted progressive groups.
 
In the 27 months that the Internal Revenue Service put a hold on all Tea Party applications for non-profit status, it approved applications from similar liberal groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," these groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.
Click to expand...

USAToday: RS gave liberals a pass; Tea Party groups put on hold

irs internal review---independent of tigta: "significant problems," "substantial bias"

Internal IRS probe cited same problems with approach to conservative groups in May 2012 - The Washington Post

that is, the irs says the irs discriminated

why do you think doj launched its criminal investigation?

if you're not familiar with nancy j marks, you really don't know the story

but that won't stop you from prejudging

knock yourself out
 
The Prof said:
USAToday: RS gave liberals a pass; Tea Party groups put on hold

irs internal review---independent of tigta: "significant problems," "substantial bias"

Internal IRS probe cited same problems with approach to conservative groups in May 2012 - The Washington Post

that is, the irs says the irs discriminated

why do you think doj launched its criminal investigation?

if you're not familiar with nancy j marks, you really don't know the story

but that won't stop you from prejudging

knock yourself out
Click to expand...

No stats here and no comparison between applications approved and disapproved.

Try again. This time with feeling.
 
the gray lady (nyt), february:

501c4 ofa is "an extension of the administration stocked with alumni of obama's white house and campaign teams devoted solely to the president's second term agenda," "whose goal is to harness its resources in support of obama's priorities," "not unlike the super pacs obama once deplored," whose half million dollar donors are invited to attend white house quarterly meetings

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/u...ess-agenda.html?pagewanted=1&%2359&%2359&_r=0

that's some pretty prices social welfare
 
The Prof said:
the gray lady (nyt), february:

501c4 ofa is "an extension of the administration stocked with alumni of obama's white house and campaign teams devoted solely to the president's second term agenda," "whose goal is to harness its resources in support of obama's priorities," "not unlike the super pacs obama once deplored," whose half million dollar donors are invited to attend white house quarterly meetings

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/u...ess-agenda.html?pagewanted=1&%2359&%2359&_r=0

that's some pretty prices social welfare
Click to expand...

And so how did the GOP operative fit into this? Oh, yeah, he told us under oath. He basically run the targeting program. Go figure!
 
how did the GOP operative fit into this
Click to expand...

depends on if he ponied up the half mil

LOL!
 
Lutherf said:
Why do you have such a problem with holding the government accountable for their actions? The current administration has plead ignorance to the IRS issue, the Benghazi issue and the wiretapping of reporters as well as F&F before that. The stuff that they have admitted to and defended includes collecting personal information on ALL American citizens. Don't you find that to be the least bit troubling?

The two houses of Congress are the people's representatives. They are supposed to be accountable to the people and part of that accountability is taking reasonable actions to insure that government isn't treading too heavily on the toes of law abiding citizens. In light of the current situation I welcome these investigations. At least they're investigating something that matters instead of steroids in baseball.
Click to expand...

Why are you so obsessed with finding something to blame Obama on? The hackery is so obvious that you have to bring up unrelated issues in a thread about the IRS, even though it turns out it had nothing to do with Obama.

So in spite all your blather about accountability, I'm not at all surprised that you don't want to hold Issa, and the other republicans in congress, accountable for all the lies they have told because I've known from the get-go that your blather is dishonest.
 
Lutherf said:
Dude, the TIGTA report shows how that "grouping" was accomplished and although grouping all the applicants that had "Tea Party" or "Patriot" in their name or talked about Constitutional overreach may be consistent that doesn't mean that it wasn't targeting based on political ideology.
Click to expand...

Dude, the testimony from the self described conservative republican shows that the treatment those group received had nothing to do with their political ideology. What you claimed was a lie.
 
sangha said:
Dude, the testimony from the self described conservative republican shows that the treatment those group received had nothing to do with their political ideology. What you claimed was a lie.
Click to expand...

So your position is that this low to mid-level guy is telling the whole story while his supervisors and the IG were all just making up stuff?

And with regard to your other comment....I'm talking about government. Right now this is the Obama administration's baby but wrong is wrong no matter who is doing it.

I find it fascinating that you seem to consider all other Republicans to be liars but this one guy who says something you like is OK.:roll:
 
why can't obama say exactly when he learned what his cos and white house counsel knew, that his irs was engaged (according to the irs and doj) in discriminatory practices against the president's most pointed political opponents?

ron fournier, longtime associated press dc bureau chief, editor of the elite natl journal and regular msnbc contributor:

At last Thursday's press conference, Obama chose his words about the IRS scandal very carefully. "I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press." Even though he was asked about the overall malfeasance, he specifically said he didn't know about the report. That parsing alone raises questions about the level of candor coming from the White House.
Click to expand...

Is The White House Obscuring the Truth? - NationalJournal.com

roger simon's professional leftists and journolisters, proud print partners of msnbc in the morning:

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.
Click to expand...

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

cnn and nbc urge obama to come clean

has he? will he?

stay tuned
 
It's unfortunate that the left needs a Republican in office before they can don their ceremonial garb's of accountabillity.

You guys have one guy, who's political affiliation cannot be proved, who sent back ( To Washington) one case, and now Issa is lying ?

There are letters signed by Lois Lerner ( who took the Fifth under questioning ). IRS agents in Cinci have told NBC that there was a task force in Washington for targeting the Conservative groups, that final decisions were made in Washington.

Conservative groups were sent lettersbfrom the IRS with Treasury Dept return addresses on them.

Cinci IRS agents have stated that the orders came from " Management " in Washington, not some mid-level employee who's a " Conservative Republican."
 
Lutherf said:
So your position is that this low to mid-level guy is telling the whole story while his supervisors and the IG were all just making up stuff?

And with regard to your other comment....I'm talking about government. Right now this is the Obama administration's baby but wrong is wrong no matter who is doing it.

I find it fascinating that you seem to consider all other Republicans to be liars but this one guy who says something you like is OK.:roll:
Click to expand...

Dude, the self-described conservative republican has already explained where the idea to investigate the applications of Tea Party groups originated, and it has nothing to do with Obama, or anyone in the White House.

And as far as republicans, or anyone else, being liars - When they say something that makes them look bad, and absolves their enemies of wrongdoing, I assume they're telling the truth.
 
It's unfortunate that the left needs a Republican in office before they can don their ceremonial garb's of accountabillity.

You guys have one guy, who's political affiliation cannot be proved, who sent back ( To Washington) one case, and now Issa is lying ?

There are letters signed by Lois Lerner ( who took the Fifth under questioning ). IRS agents in Cinci have told NBC that there was a task force in Washington for targeting the Conservative groups, that final decisions were made in Washington.

Conservative groups were sent letters from the IRS with Treasury Dept return addresses on them.

Cinci IRS agents have stated that the orders came from " Management " in Washington, not some mid-level employee who's a " Conservative Republican."

How desperate are you people to first take Elijah Cummings word for anything and second, to ignore all of the other evidence that contradicts the IRS's initial story ?

Why didn't Lois Lerner just say this was a mid-level Republican doing this instead of lying and then taking the Fifth ?
 
Lutherf said:
So your position is that this low to mid-level guy is telling the whole story while his supervisors and the IG were all just making up stuff?:
Click to expand...

It's under penalty of perjury. Are you saying a conservative republican is risking jail to protect Obama?

That's what happens to a brain on Obamaphobia.
 
Fenton said:
It's unfortunate that the left needs a Republican in office before they can don their ceremonial garb's of accountabillity.

You guys have one guy, who's political affiliation cannot be proved, who sent back ( To Washington) one case, and now Issa is lying ?
Click to expand...

He testified under penalty of perjury. And it's easy to prove party affiliations. It's as simple as asking coworkers if the guy ever talked about them.

So now the tea bagger position is the guy is risking jail to protect Obama?

BWHHAHHAHAHAH! Oh the conservative brain on Obamaphobia.
 
sangha said:
Dude, the self-described conservative
republican has already explained
where the idea to investigate the applications of Tea Party groups originated, and it has nothing to do with Obama, or anyone in the White House.

And as far as republicans, or anyone else, being liars - When they say something that makes them look bad, and absolves their enemies of wrongdoing, I assume they're telling the truth.
Click to expand...

But his account contradicts the reality and other accounts that say there was a task force in Washington.

Sorry, you guys are putting a of your hopes on one guy who returned one case to Washington.

Who's political affiliation cannot be proven. It cant be proven he wasn't '' visited " prior to being deposed.

Sorry, if that story had any credibillity then why didm't Lerner lead with it instead of lying about "rogue agents" ?
 
head of joaquin said:
He testified
under penalty of perjury. And it's easy to prove party affiliations. It's as simple as asking coworkers if the guy ever talked about them.

So now the tea bagger position is the guy is risking jail to protect Obama?

BWHHAHHAHAHAH! Oh the conservative brain on Obamaphobia.
Click to expand...

LOL !!!!!

Now the Libs have regained their faith in testimony under Oath ? It ofcourse only means anything when it suites your ridiculous fantasies.

LOL !! You people are pathetic. Where were you when Holder lied ? When he was held in contempt ?

If his testimony is true why didn't Lerner lead with that story ? She didn't because it hadn't been created yet.

Jeesus Christ, Hillarious...

IF he commited " perjury " who's job would it be to file charges and hold him accountable ??

Unbelievable, you have one guy who so conviently has to be a " Conservative Republican" , not just a Republican mind you a " CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN".

Lol...you people will believe anything, I can see how you got snowed into voting for BO now.
 
sangha said:
Dude, the self-described conservative republican has already explained where the idea to investigate the applications of Tea Party groups originated, and it has nothing to do with Obama, or anyone in the White House.

And as far as republicans, or anyone else, being liars - When they say something that makes them look bad, and absolves their enemies of wrongdoing, I assume they're telling the truth.
Click to expand...

I may as well be talking to the wind on this but what the guy said was that he's the one who started this grouping. That's fine and I have no reason to believe that it isn't true but that doesn't mean that it isn't inappropriate targeting. Furthermore, when this inappropriate targeting (all kinds of people at the top level including Cummings agree that it was inappropriate) was discovered nothing was done about it. THAT is where the problem lies.

People in large organizations make bad decisions all the time but proper accountability means that those decisions will be discovered and corrected. Since nobody in the chain of command - right up to Schulman - did anything to fix this problem that leads us to a very limited number of conclusions:
1. They didn't see it as a problem
2. They recognized the problem but chose not to address it
3. They condoned the practice

If they didn't see it as a problem that that, in and of itself, is a pretty doggone big problem.

If they recognized the problem and chose to do nothing then that's a conspiracy.

If they condoned the practice then they were willfully engaged in using the IRS for acts of political intimidation or influence.
 
Lutherf said:
I may as well be talking to the wind on this but what the guy said was that he's the one who started this grouping. That's fine and I have no reason to believe that it isn't true but that doesn't mean that it isn't inappropriate targeting. Furthermore, when this inappropriate targeting (all kinds of people at the top level including Cummings agree that it was inappropriate) was discovered nothing was done about it. THAT is where the problem lies.
Click to expand...

That was dishonest.

You claimed that the targeting was based on political ideology. His testimony, which you now claim you have no reason to not believe, was that the targeting had NOTHING to do with political ideology.

And so now that your dishonest whine has been debunked, now you're going to claim that the "real" problem is how nothing was done about it (even though the fact that there was an investigation, and the head of the IRS has resigned proves that something *was* done about it)


People in large organizations make bad decisions all the time but proper accountability means that those decisions will be discovered and corrected. Since nobody in the chain of command - right up to Schulman - did anything to fix this problem that leads us to a very limited number of conclusions:
1. They didn't see it as a problem
2. They recognized the problem but chose not to address it
3. They condoned the practice

If they didn't see it as a problem that that, in and of itself, is a pretty doggone big problem.

If they recognized the problem and chose to do nothing then that's a conspiracy.

If they condoned the practice then they were willfully engaged in using the IRS for acts of political intimidation or influence.
Click to expand...

And those problems have been investigated and corrected, and people have been forced to resign, so all of your "concerns" have been addressed. Yet, you continue to express poutrage that nothing has been done about this

It must be hard to see your dreams of this being pinned on Obama get shattered. But don't worry - I'm sure the republicans in congress will come up with a new faux scandal next week. And I'm just as sure that you'll never try to hold *them* accountable for all the lies they've told and all the taxpayer money they're wasting with their sham investigations.
 
sangha said:
That was dishonest.

You claimed that the targeting was based on political ideology. His testimony, which you now claim you have no reason to not believe, was that the targeting had NOTHING to do with political ideology.

And so now that your dishonest whine has been debunked, now you're going to claim that the "real" problem is how nothing was done about it (even though the fact that there was an investigation, and the head of the IRS has resigned proves that something *was* done about it)




And those problems have been investigated and corrected, and people have been forced to resign, so all of your "concerns" have been addressed. Yet, you continue to express poutrage that nothing has been done about this

It must be hard to see your dreams of this being pinned on Obama get shattered. But don't worry - I'm sure the republicans in congress will come up with a new faux scandal next week. And I'm just as sure that you'll never try to hold *them* accountable for all the lies they've told and all the taxpayer money they're wasting with their sham investigations.
Click to expand...

If the terms "Tea Party" and "Patriot" along with interests in limiting government overreach were the criteria while "organizing", "Progressive" expanding government were not part of those criteria then it was ABSOLUTELY targeting based on political ideology. That guy may not think so but he's wrong.
 
Lutherf said:
If the terms "Tea Party" and "Patriot" along with interests in limiting government overreach were the criteria while "organizing", "Progressive" expanding government were not part of those criteria then it was ABSOLUTELY targeting based on political ideology. That guy may not think so but he's wrong.
Click to expand...

I see. So now the guy who you claimed you had not reason to not believe, is now a person you don't believe

Just like how the "real problem" was how the IRS targeted people based solely on political ideology, until the "real problem" became how nothing was done about the problem (even though things were done to resolve the problems). :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom