• 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

Mithros said:
Holy fn crap.... Your argument for why Issa isn't lying is that Lerner is a
woman??????
Click to expand...


I have a argument for why Issa isnt lying and more to the point, why the Democrats are.

The Democrats have chosen to pass up a outstanding oppurtunity here.

Since there is nothing to all of this, and its just a " partisan motivated Witch Hunt", Lois Lerner could easily shut the whole thing down and make the GOP and Issa look like a bunch of fools by simply talking. Answering the questions.

It would provide a huge amount of Political Capital for the Democrats in a ELECTION YEAR.

Because they could build on the issue, on the fact they proved it was a made up partisan driven "witch hunt " and use that to attack the Republicans credibillity on a variety of issues.

Can you imagine the advantage that shutting down this investigation would give them in a ELECTION YEAR ?

MSNBC would be running it 24/7 right up to the elections. The Democrats could then say that the Republicans were anti-women as they turned Lerner into a victim.

But thats NOT what they're doing is it ?

You dont counter a "Witch hunt" with 24 Consecutive 5th ammendment pleas.

So the Democrats have chosen to instead of using this to their advantage by simply countering Issa's charges with honest answers ( because its all a partisan "witch hunt " ) to give the GOPs charges credibillity in a ELECTION YEAR.

So OF-COURSE the Democrats are Lying and OF-COURSE they actually used the IRS as a political tool.
 
What if...? said:
It establishes pretty clearly that the "Bolo" lists were simply a shortcut adopted when the big increase in applications appeared post CU.

The term "inappropriate", which has made it into so much of the hype, was the "a hammer is an inappropriate tool to cut a 3x4" inappropriate. Using a shortcut instead of actually reviewing each application was inappropriate. NOT that there was an inappropriate singling out of conservative groups for political purposes.

The WHOLE issue is about anonymous donations.

**** anonymous donations.
Click to expand...

Here is the latest Treasury Report.READ: The Inspector General report on the IRS targeting conservative groups
 
Fenton said:
You know how potentially damning this situation is based on the lefts continued mitigations and attempts to divert away from the real issue.
Click to expand...

I've always been curious as to why Leftists do this. They know they are lying and obscuring the issues and of course the rest of us know it too.. They did the same thing during the Cold War with the Russians, and you can see many of them siding with the Russians yet again in this Ukrainian incident, perhaps out of habit.

There was an interesting program on the brain where people responded differently to the same situations depending on where just a minor bit of pressure was applied to their brains. I believe the same things happens with the Left, that they just can't help themselves.The evidence is easily available.
 
Mithros said:
Holy fn crap.... Your argument for why Issa isn't lying is that Lerner is a woman??????
Click to expand...

This is the question I was responding to.
Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
Great! You've volunteered your unparalleled deduction skills!

Please explain why Issa said that Lerner had changed her mind and agreed to testify. Because I'm pretty sure she took the 5th again.

(and I know... such a convoluted conspiracy... involving exactly one person telling one lie in which exactly one person benifits... shocking!)
Click to expand...

There is a serious comprehension deficit among Leftists which, if the country is to survive, should be covered by the ACA. They can't do irony either.
 
Grant said:
I've always been curious as to why Leftists do this. They know they are lying and
obscuring the issues and of course the rest of us know it too.. They did the same thing during the Cold War with the Russians, and you can see many of them siding with the Russians yet again in this Ukrainian incident, perhaps out of habit.

There was an interesting program on the brain where people responded differently to the same situations depending on where just a minor bit of pressure was applied to their brains. I believe the same things happens with the Left, that they just can't help themselves.The evidence is easily available.
Click to expand...

I sincerely think there is something wrong with them. Phsycological, even congential.

They think everyone uses the same warped and superficial one dimensional thought proceses they use to disseminate information with.

They've reasoned that after 24 Consecutive 5th ammendment pleas that attacking Issa and offering up irrelevent diversions is a thoughtful and reasonable counter argument to the charge that the Obama administration used the IRS to target Conservatives and violate their civil rights.
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, and Watergate was just a two bit break in by people not connected to the President. On anonymous donations. Maybe if Obama's protectors hadn't changed the rules to put to rest all the nefarious out of country donations to the Obama campaign in 08 you libs, and maybe the country wouldn't have this problem.
Click to expand...

Watergate was nothing compared to this IRS thing yet the media were on that and Nixon 24/7. Now they largely ignore one of the biggest and potentially dangerous scandals in US history, which is a huge disservice to the American people and denigrates the reputation of the MSM even further. Even if the Democrats win, Lerner never testifies, and the whole thing stays covered up, how can that be good for the America people?
 
Grant said:
Watergate was nothing compared to this IRS thing yet the media were on that and Nixon 24/7. Now they largely ignore one of the biggest and potentially dangerous scandals in US history, which is a huge disservice to the American people and denigrates the reputation of the MSM even further. Even if the Democrats win, Lerner never testifies, and the whole thing stays covered up, how can that be good for the America people?
Click to expand...
Watergate was nothing compared to this IRS thing ...
Click to expand...
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
you cannot even tell us what the IRS 'thing' is, yet you pretend it is more significant than watergate
 
justabubba said:
you cannot even tell us what the IRS 'thing' is, yet you pretend it is more significant than watergate
Click to expand...

The "IRS thing" is the intentional harassment and delay of conservative 501(c)(4) applications in the run up to the 2012 election. Just because you haven't been listening doesn't mean people haven't been very specifically clear as to what the IRS "thing" is.
 
jmotivator said:
The "IRS thing" is the intentional harassment and delay of conservative 501(c)(4) applications in the run up to the 2012 election. Just because you haven't been listening doesn't mean people haven't been very specifically clear as to what the IRS "thing" is.
Click to expand...

the real scandal would have been if the IRS was not doing its job.
 
justabubba said:
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
you cannot even tell us what the IRS 'thing' is, yet you pretend it is more significant than watergate
Click to expand...

You haven't been paying attention nor, apparently, do you know anything about Watergate. Is a series of ha's intended to pass for snappy leftist repartee?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
the real scandal would have been if the IRS was not doing its job.
Click to expand...

Well good, then we agree, since applying tax law with a political bias is not the job of the IRS.
 
Ockham said:
Usually this about face requires "immunity", in this case for Lerner - I wonder if that was part of the deal.
Click to expand...

Maybe they mentioned the concept of Contempt of Congress to her. Frankly I'd like to see her ass frog-marched into the committee chamber. :lol:
 
What if...? said:
I have no problem with that whatsoever.

I want to know who politicians are beholden too.

And the SC says disclosure is perfectly Constitutional. Right in the CU decision.
Click to expand...

So you support the IRS taking illegal actions which abuse their power. Nice.
Would you maintain the same position had it be liberal groups who's donors names were released to conservative groups? . . . . . I didn't think so.

Some are saying that Lerner is taking the 5th so that she won't reveal the trail back to Holder and Obama. Others are saying that she's taking the 5th so she can get immunity before accepting blame for everything - whether true or protecting the president, I don't think we'll ever find out (maybe if she writes her memoirs and publishes them after she dies or something).

So yes, political theater and a Mexican stand off.

In all this political theater, no one seems to be talking about the real issue here. The real threat.

If this is allowed to pass without criminal prosecutions, the precedence will be set for all future administrations that the IRS is at their disposal to attack and antagonize political opponents, whether they be individuals or political groups.

With the likelihood increasing that the next administration will be a Republican one, are the Obama, Holder, Lerner defenders; are the conspiracy deniers really of the position that this use and abuse of the IRS power should be allowed to set precedence? Think back to the Nixon era. Wasn't Nixon also accused of use the IRS in this manner? (yes he was)

So, why such denials when the tables are turned?

The IRS has the power to inflict absolute hell and bankruptcy on any person or any group in the country, and should be, hell needs to be, 100% certifiable non-partisan in it's application of the powers that it has been granted in the name of the people.

This is the real issue in my view, far beyond Lerner, Holder and even Obama.
 
Grant said:
This is the question I was responding to.


There is a serious comprehension deficit among Leftists which, if the country is to survive, should be covered by the ACA. They can't do irony either.
Click to expand...

Misogyny is not the same as irony. Explaining the disconnect between Issa's claim that Lerner agreed to testify, and Lerner's immediate counter that she did not as "Lerner exercising her woman's prerogative" isn't irony.

A real example of irony is what happens when an individual that's paranoid about government lies places all their faith in a con artist; and completely ignores and excuses that con artist's baldfaced lies. So you're right; you're far better at irony than I am.... unfortunately for you.


I'm sorry, it's hard to imagine that even a small child would not recognize that Issa was lying when he said that Lerner agreed to testify last week. Left, right, center, wherever... Believing that Issa was telling the truth is akin to believing that pro wrestling is real. But please.. pretend away.
 
justabubba said:
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
you cannot even tell us what the IRS 'thing' is, yet you pretend it is more significant than watergate
Click to expand...

Of course it was worse. Because... because... because.... Obama. DUH!
 
eohrnberger said:
So you support the IRS taking illegal actions which abuse their power. Nice.
Would you maintain the same position had it be liberal groups who's donors names were released to conservative groups? . . . . . I didn't think so.

Some are saying that Lerner is taking the 5th so that she won't reveal the trail back to Holder and Obama. Others are saying that she's taking the 5th so she can get immunity before accepting blame for everything - whether true or protecting the president, I don't think we'll ever find out (maybe if she writes her memoirs and publishes them after she dies or something).

So yes, political theater and a Mexican stand off.

In all this political theater, no one seems to be talking about the real issue here. The real threat.

If this is allowed to pass without criminal prosecutions, the precedence will be set for all future administrations that the IRS is at their disposal to attack and antagonize political opponents, whether they be individuals or political groups.

With the likelihood increasing that the next administration will be a Republican one, are the Obama, Holder, Lerner defenders; are the conspiracy deniers really of the position that this use and abuse of the IRS power should be allowed to set precedence? Think back to the Nixon era. Wasn't Nixon also accused of use the IRS in this manner? (yes he was)

So, why such denials when the tables are turned?

The IRS has the power to inflict absolute hell and bankruptcy on any person or any group in the country, and should be, hell needs to be, 100% certifiable non-partisan in it's application of the powers that it has been granted in the name of the people.

This is the real issue in my view, far beyond Lerner, Holder and even Obama.
Click to expand...
wrong out of the gate
but prove me wrong instead
offer us a cite which shows the IRS employees engaged in illegal activity
a challenge offered to demonstrate your side has no idea what it is posting about
 
jmotivator said:
The "IRS thing" is the intentional harassment and delay of conservative 501(c)(4) applications in the run up to the 2012 election. Just because you haven't been listening doesn't mean people haven't been very specifically clear as to what the IRS "thing" is.
Click to expand...

You realize that you cannot have a conservative or a liberal 501c4 group. By definition, a liberal or conservative 501c4 group is POLITICAL and should instead file as a 527 PAC.

Guess what, you don't even need to apply to be a 501c4 group. You can just say that you're a 501c4 group and POOF.... You're automatically a 501c4 group.

These political groups applied to be 501c4 groups because if they were later deemed to not be a 501c4 group, they'd have to disclose their donors. And that's the short of it... A group of very rich people formed a bunch of shell organizations to influence elections anonymously. But they happen to support your side so you're fine with it. Disgusting.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
its the IRS's job to make sure all those applicants applying for anonymity were legitimate social welfare groups.
Click to expand...

And yet 100% of those audited were conservative groups. All liberal 501(C)(4)s sailed through the process without an audit.
 
justabubba said:
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
you cannot even tell us what the IRS 'thing' is, yet you pretend it is more significant than watergate
Click to expand...

You mean the sitting president using the heaviest handed departments in his control to silence political opposition through intimidation is much less actionable than a second rate burglary...yeah, that doesn't sound foolish at all...:lamo
 
j-mac said:
You mean the sitting president using the heaviest handed departments in his control to silence political opposition through intimidation is much less actionable than a second rate burglary...yeah, that doesn't sound foolish at all...:lamo
Click to expand...

the nixon tapes reveal alot more than that.
 
jmotivator said:
And yet 100% of those audited were conservative groups. All liberal 501(C)(4)s sailed through the process without an audit.
Click to expand...


your boy, issa, told his boy, the republican appointed IG, to exclusively focus on the conservative leaning 501c4 applicants
and that is what happened

we now know that progressive leaning 501c4 applicants were also screened out for further assessment


and significantly, issa excluded any democrats from his meeting with the IG during this 'bipartisan' investigation. issa concealed his effort to insist the focus be exclusively on conservative organizations
 
justabubba said:
your boy, issa, told his boy, the republican appointed IG, to exclusively focus on the conservative leaning 501c4 applicants
and that is what happened

we now know that progressive leaning 501c4 applicants were also screened out for further assessment


and significantly, issa excluded any democrats from his meeting with the IG during this 'bipartisan' investigation. issa concealed his effort to insist the focus be exclusively on conservative organizations
Click to expand...

Sure they were, but it wasn't even close to a 50/50 ratio.
 
Mithros said:
You realize that you cannot have a conservative or a liberal 501c4 group. By definition, a liberal or conservative 501c4 group is POLITICAL and should instead file as a 527 PAC.
Click to expand...

Of course you can have a politically ideological 501c4, you are being ridiculous. If their cause for organizing is one with a clear cut party line (like taxation, abortion, etc.) then they will be liberal or conservative ideologically and still be qualified as a 501c4. You can stomp your feet and hold your breath until your face turns blue, but promoting lower taxes and balanced budgets IS promoting social welfare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom