• 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!

Lois Lerner does about-face, will give Hill testimony on IRS scandal

I don't see how anyone could know that, unless the details are known, which they are not because she is taking the 5th.

Look at the questions.
 
Obama's only half black.

So, if he boarded a bus in Louisiana in 1960, he only had to sit halfway back? Right.

(PS - I hope you realize that being concerned with such things is considered racist...)
 
Last edited:
I've heard no screams of racism over the garbage being thrown at Mr. Obama over Ukraine, j-mac, since you're into names.

I didn't say there was. That is just you trying hard to twist my words so you can attack them...What I am saying is that should there be a sudden spine to be found in congress these days, and a special prosecutor, or even a select joint committee formed to really get to the bottom of this, that call of 'racism' will be heard right out of the box by liberals like you that have nothing to actually defend him on. It's predictable.

Saying Obama can't be found guilty on IRS hasn't stopped Senators Graham, McCain and Cruz to start with from calling Obama weak and feckless.

Who said he can't be found guilty? We must first get to the truth. That's something that Obama, and his liberal minions have blocked since the start...That isn't the action of an innocent person, that is not the "most transparent administration in history" as he promised. Yet, that is fine with you because either you are such a dupe that you just follow blindly, or such a partisan that you will not admit the truth. Now, I don't think you are dumb enough to be a dupe, so that only leaves dishonest.

And I've heard no leftie say it is racism.

Really? And I would have thought that a tv somewhere around you plays MSNBC non stop...From June of last year:

On the Martin Bashir show Wednesday, the host actually said that Republicans are using the acronym "IRS" as the latest dog whistle in their "war against the black man in the White House"

Read more: MSNBC's Bashir: IRS Investigation a Racist Republican Attack on 'Black Man in White House' | NewsBusters

Then while we are at it, let's take a look a month earlier in May, at an interview with Julian Bond on MSNBC, I'll even use a self described black news source, even with the name calling editorializing they do....

"Meanwhile, Julian Bond, chairman emeritus of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), offered an alternatively refreshing view about the IRS targeting of Tea Party-affiliated groups earlier Tuesday morning on MSNBC.
Bond said he didn’t think the federal government is wrong for signaling out the conservative groups for extensive reviews given that they are “overly racist.”
Back in 2006, the NAACP was the subject of its own controversial review from the Internal Revenue Service, after they criticized then-President George W. Bush during the 2004 presidential campaign. Ultimately, the IRS ruled that the nation’s oldest civil rights organization “continued to qualify” as tax-exempt. In an interview with The Washington Post, Bond said of the investigation: “It was an enormous threat” and noted that had the IRS revoked its tax exempt status it “would have reduced our income remarkably.”
Bond went further, suggesting that the investigation was politically motivated and the end result ”meant that they thought they had harassed us enough and they could stop.”
So is there a double standard in Bond giving the IRS free reign to target groups whose views oppose his?
Bond told MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts, “I don’t think there’s a double standard at all. I think it’s entirely legitimate to look at the Tea Party.
“I mean, here are a group of people who are admittedly racist, who are overtly political, who tried as best they can to harm President Obama in every way they can,” Bond explained.
“[The Tea Party] is the Taliban wing of American politics and we all ought to be a little worried about them.”
When asked if he thought that his comments were “a little harsh,” Bond quipped, “The truth hurts.”

IRS Tea Party Investigation: Julian Bond Defends IRS Targeting of Tea Party Groups | News One

Anti-American, you bet, but not racist .

I remember a time (since y'all so love to bring up G.W. Bush at every turn) when you progressives would lose your damned mind if we called you "anti American".... Remember this little diddy from Hillary?



So spare me your crybaby "it's not fair" meme....You libs started this discourse, now you reap it.
 
For some reason, those who call themselves "Conservative" are unwilling to admit that the only groups which had their 501(c)(4) exemptions pulled were liberal ones, not a single conservative, "patriot" or "tea party" organisation had their exemptions revoked.

For some reason, the fact that Rep Issa held multiple secret meetings with the IRS Inspector General without divulging those meetings to his Democratic colleagues seems to have slipped past those ranting about Lois Lerner.

I wonder why those things aren't being mentioned by certain commenters - nah, I don't really wonder why. Far too many know the TRUTH and any actual facts which contradict the TRUTH are to be ignored.
 
This your government officials abusing the constitution. Government officials should be stripped of the right to refuse to speak. The 5th amendment should only be granted only to citizens as it was originally intended. All politicians lie, it's integral to the job and we all know it. The tragedy of America is how the citizens of the left and right argue in defense of their side when their official is on the hot seat. If the citizens would call a skunk a skunk regardless of affiliation we would be much better off.
 
This your government officials abusing the constitution. Government officials should be stripped of the right to refuse to speak. The 5th amendment should only be granted only to citizens as it was originally intended. All politicians lie, it's integral to the job and we all know it. The tragedy of America is how the citizens of the left and right argue in defense of their side when their official is on the hot seat. If the citizens would call a skunk a skunk regardless of affiliation we would be much better off.


One problem: Lois Lerner is not a government official
 
For some reason, those who call themselves "Conservative" are unwilling to admit that the only groups which had their 501(c)(4) exemptions pulled were liberal ones, not a single conservative, "patriot" or "tea party" organisation had their exemptions revoked.

For some reason, the fact that Rep Issa held multiple secret meetings with the IRS Inspector General without divulging those meetings to his Democratic colleagues seems to have slipped past those ranting about Lois Lerner.

I wonder why those things aren't being mentioned by certain commenters
- nah, I don't really wonder why. Far too many know the TRUTH and any actual facts which contradict the TRUTH are to be ignored.


ooo ooo ... I know I know ... call on me ... because not everyone reads Kos or democraticunderground ... and most of whoever does read them realizes what they are by the smell ... the rest simply repeat it.

Was that right?

It's a lot like how the story about John Roberts defending a murderer got spread yesterday when the Senate said uh-uh to Adigbele.
The usual suspects grasped for the Roberts story and repeated it ... relevance be damned.
 
If not, then this will only be yet another leftist thinking that they are smarter, and can muddy the issue further.

Given Darryl Issa and the other idiots on that committee, being the smartest guy in the room is pretty easy...
 
So, if he boarded a bus in Louisiana in 1960, he only had to sit halfway back? Right.

(PS - I hope you realize that being concerned with such things is considered racist...)

So... what you are saying is that your evaluation of race is really no different than that of a Louisianan bus driver in 1960?
 
How do you know all this when the main player keeps pleading the fifth?

easy question. thanks for that!


i know this because your side has come up empty in its quest to find something scandalous


but prove me wrong and tell us what you actually have
 
This your government officials abusing the constitution. Government officials should be stripped of the right to refuse to speak. The 5th amendment should only be granted only to citizens as it was originally intended. All politicians lie, it's integral to the job and we all know it. The tragedy of America is how the citizens of the left and right argue in defense of their side when their official is on the hot seat. If the citizens would call a skunk a skunk regardless of affiliation we would be much better off.

another from the very wrong right wing, protesting someone asserting their Constitutional rights to the point they now claim those rights should not exist

what is it with the Constitution hating reich wing?
 
If you watched the meeting, he didn't even give Cummings a chance to say anything.
No he sat there and stared at Cummings while Cummings ranted his statement which wasn't a question before cutting him off. Cummings when off the deep end and didn't actually ask a question.
 
If they offer her amnesty, then she will no longer be able to plead the 5th, right? If she can't be incriminated, then the answers can't incriminate her, anyway, that's how it looks to me. Maybe there is something in the law I don't know about.

So, why not give her amnesty and then ask the questions again?
Because then she might take sole responsibility and then we wouldn't be able to prosecute anyone for their crimes.
 
No he sat there and stared at Cummings while Cummings ranted his statement which wasn't a question before cutting him off. Cummings when off the deep end and didn't actually ask a question.

again, cummings did tender a question
he asked why the committee would not listen to the proffer from lerner's attorney
but by that time issa had exited and was hitting the juice
 
Because then she might take sole responsibility and then we wouldn't be able to prosecute anyone for their crimes.

and without her testimony, you will not be able to prosecute anyone
that really sucks for your side
 
again, cummings did tender a question
he asked why the committee would not listen to the proffer from lerner's attorney
but by that time issa had exited and was hitting the juice

No, he did not ask a question of Lerner. He asked a question of the committee not the same thing. He was supposed to be asking questions of the witness, not his fellow "judges".
 
Because then she might take sole responsibility and then we wouldn't be able to prosecute anyone for their crimes.

What crimes?
 
No, he did not ask a question of Lerner. He asked a question of the committee not the same thing. He was supposed to be asking questions of the witness, not his fellow "judges".

Not if the questions are committee related to procedures.
 
and without her testimony, you will not be able to prosecute anyone
that really sucks for your side
What does ones "side" have to do with anything? You would think EVERY side would want to make sure there is no wrongdoing going on in the nations most powerful bureaucracy, and denounce the fact that the key figure in the whole thing refuses to talk for fear of incriminating herself. The idea that you would defend this person simply because she happenes to be on your team is very short sighted and foolish.
 
What does ones "side" have to do with anything? You would think EVERY side would want to make sure there is no wrongdoing going on in the nations most powerful bureaucracy, and denounce the fact that the key figure in the whole thing refuses to talk for fear of incriminating herself. The idea that you would defend this person simply because she happenes to be on your team is very short sighted and foolish.

I agree that every side should be outraged at wrongdoing; namely the unlawful creation of political groups under the guise of social welfare 501c4's for the sole purpose of anonymously contributing unlimited amounts to campaigns.

Any political group, Tea Party or otherwise, is free to form a tax exempt 527 group. They're also free to simply declare themselves to be 501c4's without any need for pre-approval by the IRS. The only reason to get pre-approval for a 501c4 is if you think your group is questionable and don't want to risk exposing your donors.
 
So... what you are saying is that your evaluation of race is really no different than that of a Louisianan bus driver in 1960?

No, I am saying the idea that someone making the point that Obama is "half-black" is both ludicrous and racist...
 
Back
Top Bottom