• 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 higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show[W:249]

Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Yeah, I need to bring home my secretary to make sure I don't post something that is somewhat incoherent...

Oh ****, my wife reads this site too. Too late to delete. I love you honey... :2wave:
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Yeah, I need to bring home my secretary to make sure I don't post something that is somewhat incoherent...

Oh pshaw ... no worries ... but tell me more about that secretary thing.
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Oh pshaw ... no worries ... but tell me more about that secretary thing.

Move back one post... :3oops:
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

There seems to be this big hang-up on whether or not conservative groups were unfairly targeted by the IRS. It's got both "sides" buzzing and that is what the national attention is focused on. But as is the norm, while everyone is focused on the right hand, nobody recognizes what the left hand is doing...

INFORMATION LAUNDERING. If there really is a scandal here, this is what it is.

Citizens United was a potentially game changing ruling by the SCOTUS a few years ago. Any google search of "IRS scandal" will yield countless articles from every source under the sun and the majority of those articles will reference this ruling as part of the story. But the funny part is that NONE of those articles actually take the time to digest what's sitting right in front of their faces. How does the DNC counteract the financial support given to the RNC by corporate America? Simple. They expose that corporate sponsorship by counter ads and through media pundits. Citizens United changed that by allowing 501c4 non-profits to engage in the political process WITHOUT revealing their donors. Big problem if you're running for Representative of a district and your opponent is getting support from several different 501c4s and those 501c4s are getting a bunch of corporate support for ads and other activity to benefit "their guy".

It really is unfair to Democrats and they knew the implications of this ruling the instant it went down. Remember the 2010 State of the Union Address when Obama ripped the, seated front and center, Supreme Court? This was the ruling that he ripped them for. The game changed as a result of this ruling. Because there was now a pipeline for corporate America(and really any entity in the world, right, left, or anywhere in between) to donate to the political process with anonymity, the strategy of "exposing the funding" was rendered moot.(at least as 501c4s were concerned)

This brings us to the process of becoming a 501c4. Anyone that wants to file this way can but they have to fill out an application and get approval. What is being focused on so intensively right now is the way that those applications were handled. Many applicants are claiming they were subjected to undue delays, required to provide excessive amounts of detailed information, and a number of other "discriminatory" charges. It is my belief that the truth is dangling right in front of everyone's face and it just isn't registering. All information about donors is contained right in those applications. Many of those applications had not yet been approved but the applicants were free to operate as 501c4s until they were denied. So, if there's some group out there like "citizens for liberty"(fictitious example) running adds against same sex marriage there isn't a damn thing "the other side" can do about it. They might SUSPECT that the funding for those adds is coming from some large "right wing" source but because the group running the add is a 501c4, OR HAS APPLIED as a 501c4, they can't get conformation from the IRS about the funding source.

Before Citizens United, 501c4s had to provide a separate list of donors for political activity. Citizens United changed that. I believe a strategy was taken by "those sympathetic to the cause" to provide the information that was legally available before Citizens United to "those who sought it". That information could then be taken and spread out in a variety of different ways on the internet until it gained enough traction that mainstream media outlets would pick it up. What came from an illegal "leak" is suddenly laundered. INFORMATION LAUNDERING. You could ALMOST say that this was justified because this information was freely available prior to the Citizens United ruling. But justified or not, under the eyes of the law IT IS ILLEGAL.

Mark my words, THIS is the ballgame on the IRS scandal.
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Have honey give me a call ... I'll back you up.

Thanks bubba, but this is something I'll need to address...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

I don't think he's a boogie man either. You do seem to be blind to his actions though.

I placed you on a personal ignore once, but you have somewhat overcome the reason for that. Hopefully, we can avoid a recurrence...

not at all blind to his faults ... you know that ... although the problems I have with him are by and large not the same ones you have ... I think calling him a Marxist is silly at best, but a cheap shot to undermine him at worst ... but you have every right to do that and I realize that there is nothing I can do about that ... on the other hand, I wish you were right ... that's how apart we are on that Paul ...

I didn't overcome anything Paul, you just decided to engage me again, for whatever reason ... but I doubt that I will engage you much in the near future given your recent posts ... they're unlike anything you used to post and I find it disturbing ... even when we differed, most of the time you were reasonable ...

have a good one ... I'm off to a wedding ...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

not at all blind to his faults ... you know that ... although the problems I have with him are by and large not the same ones you have ... I think calling him a Marxist is silly at best, but a cheap shot to undermine him at worst ... but you have every right to do that and I realize that there is nothing I can do about that ... on the other hand, I wish you were right ... that's how apart we are on that Paul ...

I didn't overcome anything Paul, you just decided to engage me again, for whatever reason ... but I doubt that I will engage you much in the near future given your recent posts ... they're unlike anything you used to post and I find it disturbing ... even when we differed, most of the time you were reasonable ...

have a good one ... I'm off to a wedding ...

You need to come visit. We're just up the road a piece...

bj, we can have rational discussions about many subjects, but the President and his actions don't seem to fit into that category when on a political website. I wish your son and his new bride much happiness in their future together.

Be well, and we'll chat again. ROLL TIDE ROLL...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

You need to come visit. We're just up the road a piece...

bj, we can have rational discussions about many subjects, but the President and his actions don't seem to fit into that category when on a political website. I wish your son and his new bride much happiness in their future together.

Be well, and we'll chat again. ROLL TIDE ROLL...

I'll tell my son and his future wife that someone who has many differences with their dad (yeah, I guess I'll finally get the daughter I always wanted) sincerely wished them happiness and that can only be good luck ... I expect that this will be one of my most emotional weekends ever ... I still remember carrying him around like a football ... hard to let go, but if that's what it takes to get grandkids, so be it ...

thanks for the note ...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

I'll tell my son and his future wife that someone who has many differences with their dad (yeah, I guess I'll finally get the daughter I always wanted) sincerely wished them happiness and that can only be good luck ... I expect that this will be one of my most emotional weekends ever ... I still remember carrying him around like a football ... hard to let go, but if that's what it takes to get grandkids, so be it ...

thanks for the note ...

It's not the end bj. It's a new beginning...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Jack, please ... holding documents back?

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has continued to release only select portions of committee interviews with key Internal Revenue Service staffers despite calls to make the full transcripts public.

In recent days, the California Republican has allowed reporters from local and national news outlets to review portions of his panel's investigative work into the IRS targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. The move looks like a rebuke to the ranking Democrat on his committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.), and even some Republican lawmakers, who have publicly worried that selective leaking imperils the integrity of the investigation.

...

IRS Investigation: Darrell Issa Releases More Partial Transcripts Despite Calls For Full Accounts (UPDATE)

He'll release it all when it's appropriate.:cool:
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Obviously a leak. Nothing to tie it to Issa.:cool:
Well it's either him or one of the other Republicans on the committee.
 
Last edited:
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

He'll release it all when it's appropriate.:cool:


meanwhile he was releasing bits and pieces to make it look bad for the WH ... Don't you ever get tired of being on the side of sleaze? Take care Jack ... I won't be on for a while ... by the time I get back on I hope you will have cleaned up your act ...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Well it's either him or one of the other Republicans on the committee.


Why do you say that?
You must think it's damning.
Other folks have read it and said there's nothing there.
So which is it?
Maybe Paz did it herself so as to seem like she was cooperating and at the same time make it harder for Obama's goons to do a pre-emptive strike on her.
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

meanwhile he was releasing bits and pieces to make it look bad for the WH ... Don't you ever get tired of being on the side of sleaze? Take care Jack ... I won't be on for a while ... by the time I get back on I hope you will have cleaned up your act ...

No sleaze so far except in the IRS.:mrgreen:
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

No sleaze so far except in the IRS.:mrgreen:

I'm surprised you think of the IRS folks as sleaze Jack ... After all, this is CIA stuff ... You and I know about the other sleaze whose actions you have tried to justify in the past ... can't be done Jack ...
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

I'm surprised you think of the IRS folks as sleaze Jack ... After all, this is CIA stuff ... You and I know about the other sleaze whose actions you have tried to justify in the past ... can't be done Jack ...

Unworthy of response. Actions on behalf of the nation are not to be equated with actions on behalf of a political party.:peace
 
Last edited:
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

Unworthy of response. Actions on behalf of the nation are not to be equated with actions on behalf of a political party.:peace

obviously not that unworthy since you responded ... but in response to your supposed non-response, if the actions are genuinely done on behalf of the nation and not on behalf of a select few in that nation perhaps ... but they can both be sleazy without having to equate them ... :prof
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

obviously not that unworthy since you responded ... but in response to your supposed non-response, if the actions are genuinely done on behalf of the nation and not on behalf of a select few in that nation perhaps ... but they can both be sleazy without having to equate them ... :prof

It was actually a two phase reply. First the "unworthy" characterization, and then I succumbed to temptation and added the second sentence. It was an unworthy comparison. In this country, governed by democratically elected leadership, a lawful order equates to action on behalf of the nation. No ifs, ands or buts.:cool:
 
Re: IRS higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

It was actually a two phase reply. First the "unworthy" characterization, and then I succumbed to temptation and added the second sentence. It was an unworthy comparison. In this country, governed by democratically elected leadership, a lawful order equates to action on behalf of the nation. No ifs, ands or buts.:cool:

technically yes, and that is to often unfortunate, especially when it leads to unnecessary wars rarely fought by the people making the decision and their children, but by people who already have a very small portion of the wealth and even less power ...
 
Back
Top Bottom