The world is bigger than the middle east where the current major religions dominate. And there were scattered tribes all over the world with differing belief systems. War and trade intermingled many as well as slavery of the conquered.

Indeed the history of man is one of differing belief systems and for fact Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian, and a perfect example of making religions through martyrdom, a common practice of that time. But as I said, the world is bigger than the middle east and goes back tens of thousands of years before recorded history of the region.

They have dated the pyramids both in Egypt and South America and Mexico back even further.

My point of course that man has evolved from what he was to now, and will continue to evolve into more than he is now. So spare me the absolute truth of your current belief because its subject to change later. This is not the early millennium of ancient long dead philosophy.

Jesus was a Jew? I did not know that.

So why aren't Christians Jews too?

Not for 'reasonable people" which is the legal term oft used. It seems to be exclusively the rightys that bring up these "marry your horse" or "marry a child" arguments, why is that?

I won't advocate for the horse. But there are groups like NAMBLA that would want to marry a child. The reason it is out there as part of the discussion is because it wasn't that long ago being gay was considered by the medical profession as deviant behavior. That is why Im say when you open pandoras box you don't know what your going to unleash. It IS a logical part of the argument.

But there are groups like NAMBLA that would want to marry a child.
A child cannot legally sign a contract.

A child cannot legally sign a contract.

I have already pointed out when I child can sign a contract. And by extension the fact that it isn't happening now doesn't preclude that it couldn't happen later. Im not saying that any of the things that could happen are going to happen overnight. But the door is now open for them to happen. Hence the pandora's box reference.

A child cannot legally sign a contract.

Laws change.

So why aren't Christians Jews too?

Really, you have to ask?

I just do not believe the FEAR of what could happen, and what if something can happen, overrides what is happening, and that a segment of the American population has been discriminated against and denied the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that all citizens are guaranteed in the Constitution.

They deserve, and have a right to be first class citizens with equal right under the law. Let the horse lovers, or child lovers make their own case whenever.

I just do not believe the FEAR of what could happen, and what if something can happen, overrides what is happening, and that a segment of the American population has been discriminated against and denied the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that all citizens are guaranteed in the Constitution.

They deserve, and have a right to be first class citizens with equal right under the law. Let the horse lovers, or child lovers make their own case whenever.

Actually they never were denied rights. They were denied a marriage license. Solely based on the definition of the law. There were still avenues available for them to gain the same rights as married couples enjoyed. They just wanted to skip that part. Also it leaves the doors wide open for attacking the church. So spare me the they couldn't have the same rights bs. They had enough political power and connections to elevate civil unions to the same status and they could have left marriage alone as far as the definition.

The promotion of marriage is in the states interest and is a compelling one. Its not just about religion. Although it appears your side wants to make it about only religion so that way you can still feel good about it.

Pandora's box has been opened and time will tell what comes of it.

The IRS Mistakenly Exposed Thousands of Social Security Numbers (http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/the-irs-mistakenly-exposed-thousands-of-social-security-numbers-20130708)

Must be some more of that "smarter government" we got with Obama.

Must be some more of that "smarter government" we got with Obama.Or another example of inadvertent data leaks that happen all the time in public and private enterprises.

Or another example of inadvertent data leaks that happen all the time in public and private enterprises.

No, read the story, it was incompetence. They used words like "unwitting" and "accidentally" but it was no accident.


Every so often, 527s have to file tax forms to the IRS, which then get added to a database. The database itself is hardly a secret; the IRS has been sending updated records routinely to Public.Resource.org and other public-interest groups, and it's a favorite among political reporters. But when the IRS told the group's founder, Carl Malamud, to disregard the Form 990-Ts included in the agency's January release, he took a closer look at the files in question.

After analyzing the breach, Malamud wrote a letter to the IRS pointing out 10 instances where a social security number was accidentally revealed on the government's website—just a small sample of the larger breach.

Just the day before, Malamud had filed another letter to the agency describing a problem with the 990-Ts. Of over 3,000 tax returns contained in the January update, 319 contained sensitive data the agency should have scrubbed,

You know what "scrubbed" means, it means they didn't do their job before uploading the files - GIGO - you get out of it what you put in.

It's always incompetence whenever there is a data leak/breach, or else they would never happen, whether it's lackadaisical programing that was exploited or a human error. That's part of my job to make sure that latter doesn't happen.

It's always incompetence whenever there is a data leak/breach, or else they would never happen, whether it's lackadaisical programing that was exploited or a human error. That's part of my job to make sure that latter doesn't happen.

No one, and I mean no one can foresee every possibility so it's not always incompetence. This was pure incompetence that cannot be brushed aside as another "nothing to see here" moment.

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, the IRS sucks... How come Issa is letting them get away with it?? He DOES have oversight.. He CAN subpoena witness's. He CAN put 'em in jail if they don't cooperate..

Why are you sniveling at me? Issa is YOUR guy.

excon

PS> On the other thread, tom is sniveling about the executive branch FAILING to investigate itself... Uhhh, that's WHY we have a sharp guy like ISSA...

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, the IRS sucks... How come Issa is letting them get away with it??? He DOES have oversight.. He CAN subpoena witness's. He CAN put 'em in jail if they don't cooperate..

Why are you sniveling at me?? Issa is YOUR guy.

excon

PS> On the other thread, tom is sniveling about the executive branch FAILING to investigate itself... Uhhh, that's WHY we have a sharp guy like ISSA....

And the moment he throws someone in jail you'll cry foul. That's how your side works.

You know what a constitutional crisis is ? It's called the Legislative branch trying to enforce it's contempt charges without the support of the executive branch. With the exception of a small security detail that scrubs the Kennedy family alcohol and drug abuse ,the only person the House has for enforcement is the Sgt at Arms . Yeah it would work real well to have him march to the White House and attempt to detain and arrest anyone there .

Hello again, Steve:
you know what a constitutional crisis is ?


And the moment he throws someone in jail you'll cry foul. That's how your side works.Side? SIDE?? I pay taxes too. Whether I like it not, Issa is MY guy too. IF the IRS is corrupt, I Want to know. IF Obama is corrupt, I Want to KNOW. IF BOTH are corrupt, THAT'S the Constitutional crisis. THEY'RE the one's creating it. My congressional representative ISN'T creating ANYTHING by investigating...

I don't understand you.. IF Obama is a CROOK, wouldn't you like to know?? Of COURSE, you want to know, but you cover up for Issa instead... Why you think THAT'S more important than a corrupt government, I'll NEVER figure out.

Excon

you know what a constitutional crisis is ? It's called the Legislative branch trying to enforce it's contempt charges without the support of the executive branch. With the exception of a small security detail that scrubs the Kennedy family alcohol and drug abuse ,the only person the House has for enforcement is the Sgt at Arms . Yeah it would work real well to have him march to the White House and attempt to detain and arrest anyone there .

What's he going to do, march into Holder's office and hold the ceremonial Mace (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mace_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives ) up in front of him?

Hello again, tom:
,the only person the House has for enforcement is the Sgt at Arms . Yeah it would work real well to have him march to the White House and attempt to detain and arrest anyone there .More coverup for Issa??

Look.. You and I BOTH know how it works.. The Sgt at Arms doesn't put ANYBODY from the White House in jail.. If SHE doesn't snitch, he put's Lois Lerner in jail. Then he puts the NEXT IRS employee in jail.. Then he puts the NEXT one in.

IF there's a connection to the White House, SOMEBODY over there will snitch, and then somebody else will... Then all Issa has to do is sit back and wait for Obama to resign.

But, HE won't do it because he KNOWS there's NO there, there. YOU know it too. That's why you tell me you're afraid of a constitutional crisis, when I know damn well you're not.. Frankly, if it got RID of Obama, I think you'd WELCOME it. Instead, you cover for Issa.

Excon

You and I both know that the so called inherent contempt power is, and pretty much has always been a dormant implied power. Anything further requires a criminal contempt charge ;and that requires the cooperation of the executive branch and possibly the judiciary .

I doubt most republicans would go along with such a spectacle.

I doubt most republicans would go along with such a spectacle.

Speaking of spectacles, the Dems on the oversight committee certainly put one on yesterday. And as Peggy Noonan says (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324448104578614220949743916.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop) it's now no wonder why they wanted this scandal to just go away. The finger was squarely pointed not at the rogue Cincinnati employees that were thrown under the bus,but right at one of Obama's two political appointees at the IRS in DC.


The IRS scandal was connected this week not just to the Washington office—that had been established—but to the office of the chief counsel.

That is a bombshell—such a big one that it managed to emerge in spite of an unfocused, frequently off-point congressional hearing in which some members seemed to have accidentally woken up in the middle of a committee room, some seemed unaware of the implications of what their investigators had uncovered, one pretended that the investigation should end if IRS workers couldn't say the president had personally called and told them to harass his foes, and one seemed to be holding a filibuster on Pakistan.

Still, what landed was a bombshell. And Democrats know it. Which is why they are so desperate to make the investigation go away. They know, as Republicans do, that the chief counsel of the IRS is one of only two Obama political appointees in the entire agency.

To quickly review why the new information, which came most succinctly in a nine-page congressional letter to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, is big news:

IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division revenue agent Elizabeth Hofacre, left, and retired IRS tax law specialist Carter Hull testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Capitol Hill on Thursday.

When the scandal broke two months ago, in May, IRS leadership in Washington claimed the harassment of tea-party and other conservative groups requesting tax-exempt status was confined to the Cincinnati office, where a few rogue workers bungled the application process. Lois Lerner, then the head of the exempt organizations unit in Washington, said "line people in Cincinnati" did work that was "not so fine." They asked questions that "weren't really necessary," she claimed, and operated without "the appropriate level of sensitivity." But the targeting was "not intentional." Ousted acting commissioner Steven Miller also put it off on "people in Cincinnati." They provided "horrible customer service."

House investigators soon talked to workers in the Cincinnati office, who said everything they did came from Washington. Elizabeth Hofacre, in charge of processing tea-party applications in Cincinnati, told investigators that her work was overseen and directed by a lawyer in the IRS Washington office named Carter Hull.

Now comes Mr. Hull's testimony. And like Ms. Hofacre, he pointed his finger upward. Mr. Hull—a 48-year IRS veteran and an expert on tax exemption law—told investigators that tea-party applications under his review were sent upstairs within the Washington office, at the direction of Lois Lerner.

In April 2010, Hull was assigned to scrutinize certain tea-party applications. He requested more information from the groups. After he received responses, he felt he knew enough to determine whether the applications should be approved or denied.

But his recommendations were not carried out.

Michael Seto, head of Mr. Hull's unit, also spoke to investigators. He told them Lois Lerner made an unusual decision: Tea-party applications would undergo additional scrutiny—a multilayered review.

Mr. Hull told House investigators that at some point in the winter of 2010-11, Ms. Lerner's senior adviser, whose name is withheld in the publicly released partial interview transcript, told him the applications would require further review:

Q: "Did [the senior adviser to Ms. Lerner] indicate to you whether she agreed with your recommendations?"

A: "She did not say whether she agreed or not. She said it should go to chief counsel."

Q: "The IRS chief counsel?"

A: "The IRS chief counsel."

The IRS chief counsel is named William Wilkins. And again, he is one of only two Obama political appointees in the IRS.

Let the misdirection begin.

In Delaware ,they accessed Christine O'Donnell's tax records on the day she announced her candidacy for Senate ;and handed them over to local officials . That same day, the IRS put a tax lien in her name on a house she no longer owned, arguing that O'Donnell owed the government $12,000.She provided documentation to the IRS to clear up the issue a number of times ;and the IRS managed to "lose " the documents each time. The IRS later said it had made a mistake due to a "computer glitch. " Yeah right ! No IRS intimidation there ! O'Donnell's opponents cited the bogus lien as evidence that she was financially irresponsible.

Sen Grassley, the ranking Republic on the Judiciary committee is looking into this ,but as we know ,the Dems will do nothing about it . Rep Issa can only do so much . But this is now also a Delaware state issue . Dem Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware is a member of the Judiciary committee also ,and should press his colleagues to appoint a prosecutor for an independent investigation .


Get this... although this was a case involving O'Donnell ;she cannot access the details to protect the privacy of the person who violated hers.Grassley's office has reached out to the Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees for help since the chairmen of both panels have special authority to see private taxpayer information.
Bet that goes no where .

Yeah yeah... I know... I got nothing yawn... no smoking gun and no chance to find it because it's perfectly OK for the Dems to stonewall and obstruct. The Treasury inspector general for tax administration has found at least four cases in which a candidate's or donor's tax information was accessed improperly.In one case, the investigator said the violation was willful and referred it to the Holder Justice Department, which declined to pursue the case. Nope... nothin there.

Proving the inefficiency of the IRS means nothing

proving the inefficiency of the IRS means nothing

Not inefficiency... that's a given... we're talking criminal activity .

Shrugg, it goes with the territory

Hello again, tom:

not inefficiency... that's a given... we're talking criminal activity .Yeah... The IRS sucks... When do the arrests start?

Yawwwwwn..

Excon

You know ex they won't

Hello again, tom:
Yeah... The IRS sucks... When do the arrests start?

Yawwwwwn..

excon

From my comment above :
Yeah yeah ..... I know ... I got nothing yawn... no smoking gun and no chance to find it because it's perfectly ok for the Dems to stonewall and obstruct. The Treasury inspector general for tax administration has found at least four cases in which a candidate’s or donor’s tax information was accessed improperly.In one case, the investigator said the violation was willful and referred it to the Holder Justice Department, which declined to pursue the case. Nope ...nothin there.

Hello again, tom:
In one case, the investigator said the violation was willful and referred it to the Holder Justice Department, which declined to pursue the case.As usual, you're carrying water for that schlump, Issa. Congress is NOT without power here. If they have evidence of corruption and a coverup, they can bring articles of impeachment, call the IG as their first witness, Lois Lerner as their second, and let the chips fall where they may...

Instead, they flap their gums..

YAAAWWWNNNN...

Excon

Hello again, tom:As usual, you're carrying water for that schlump, Issa. Congress is NOT without power here. If they have evidence of corruption and a coverup, they can bring articles of impeachment, call the IG as their first witness, Lois Lerner as their second, and let the chips fall where they may...

Instead, they flap their gums..

YAAAWWWNNNN...

excon

You know the white house is not cooperating, they've already shielded Holder in one investigation and the dems on the committee are obstructing. Without cooperation this is heading for a special prosecutor which will get you safely past the election which is all you care about. The truth and our rights will be the casualties.

Hello again, Steve:
You know the white house is not cooperating,More water carrying for Issa. Show me where, in the Constitution, it says that congress needs the presidents PERMISSION before it performs its DUTY..

Look.. I'm a citizen like you are. If the IRS AND my president, are corrupt, I Want to KNOW about it. I WANT congress to DO ITS JOB!! In fact, YOU'RE the ones who dancing around and flapping your gums instead of INVESTIGATING!!

Excon

They are investigating.

The left's standard response on the 'phony' IRS scandal is something like "equal opportunity targeting" of both conservative and liberal groups. Your stats of the day via NPR (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/30/207080580/report-irs-scrutiny-worse-for-conservatives). You do the math.

http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/07/30/7-30-13-irs-targeting-statistics-of-files-produced-by-irs-through-july-29-2-_wide-4a94ba3402b5f5a78972606de4939ffd44619375-s40.jpg

And Louis Lerner was supplying the FEC with the confidential tax information of applicants .SO now this targeting scandal goes beyond one Federal Agency. Multiple agencies are involved.

Look, something shiny!

Hello again,

Yeah, there's shenanigans going on at the IRS, all right. They SUCK. Lois Lerner likes big ones. Be fine with me if you throw her in jail along with the rest of 'em.

But, I'm waiting for a connection to the White House... Then, and ONLY then will it be a scandal.. Right now it's just right wingers flapping their gums about bad government. Guess they never ran into that before...

Do YOU ever wonder where those pallets of cash are?

Yawwwwwn.

excon

How high it goes is not the determining factor of what makes something a scandal. It doesn't have to get to the president to make this an intentional abuse of power against American citizens.

But I get it, as long as the cause is furthered libs can excuse all manner of abuses and really bad behavior.

Hello again, Steve:

If calling for them to be jailed, is excusing them for all manner of abuse, then our problem goes deeper than politics..

excon

Hello again, Steve:

If calling for them to be jailed, is excusing them for all manner of abuse, then our problem goes deeper than politics..

excon

I responded to this part, "But, I'm waiting for a connection to the White House... Then, and ONLY then will it be a scandal.. Right now it's just right wingers flapping their gums about bad government."

It was scandal from day one and intentional abuse of power for political purposes is not just "bad government." "Bad government" is sending the SWAT team to storm an animal shelter to euthanize Bambi. This has much more serious implications but since it's Obama it's just Wingers flapping their gums about another 'phony' scandal.

By the way, if there's nothing to see here then the Most Transparent Administration Ever should stop stonewalling and give the committee what they've asked for.

Issa Blasts Acting IRS Chief for Slow Pace, Will Subpoena Documents | National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/355052/issa-blasts-acting-irs-chief-slow-pace-will-subpoena-documents-andrew-johnson)

Hello again, Steve:

Issa Blasts Acting IRS Chief for Slow Pace, Will Subpoena DocumentsSo, he's finally going to get tough??

Bwa, ha ha ha ha ha.

Excon

I'll give Ex his due.. the Republican leadership needs to grow a spine. They should have created a select committee with subpoena powers and the power to convene a grand jury by now . All these 'scandals' are being "investigated" by Congressional staffers with other responsibilities where they should be investigated by professional prosecutors . There is too much stove piping and too much turf protection. Time to consolidate these investigations by Congress handing them over to a select committee that pressures the Justice Dept to appoint an independent prosecutor. Defund Holder's office and staff until they comply.

What are you smokin, Tom

Hello again, tom:

the Republican leadership needs to grow a spine.If I was the ranking member of House Oversight Committee, and I BELIEVED the administration was corrupt, I'd use EVERY tool I had at my disposal, and I'd have used them LONG before now.

However, if I KNEW there was nothing there, I'd do a little dance.

Excon

Hello again, tom:
If I was the ranking member of House Oversight Committee, and I BELIEVED the administration was corrupt, I'd use EVERY tool I had at my disposal, and I'd have used them LONG before now.

However, if I KNEW there was nothing there, I'd do a little dance.

excon
I don't think that's the issue. Issa is doing what he can. He needs Bonehead to end his resistance to the creation of a select committee empowered with the tools you say Issa has. The fact is that even something as narrowly defined as an Oversight committee still has many other issues to deal with.. A select committee empowered to singularly investigate the IRS ,or Benghazi ,or the WH targeting of the press ,or the NSA's abuse of power... all staffed with experienced investigators former prosecutors ,attorneys ,would move things along much better.

And bog everything down in years of evidence. One of the bureaucratic tools to avoid scrutiny is the inquiry. Haven't you fellows ever watched Yes Minister or Yes Prime Minister. British satire at its best but right on the money

And yet if there's nothing there they would stop stonewalling and turn over the un-redacted goods.

Here is video of Louis Lerner in 2010 discussing the political pressure brought to the IRS to stop the flow of money into the election process as a result of the Citizens United decision .


"the Supreme Court dealt it a huge blow, overturning a hundred year old precedent that said basically corporations can give directly in political campaigns."... "Everyone is up in arms because they don't like it".. "Federal Election Commission can't do anything about it; they want the IRS to fix the problem."... "So everybody is screaming at us right now 'Fix it now before the election. Can't you see how much these people are spending?'"
Lois Lerner Discusses Political Pressure on IRS in 2010 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH1ZRyq-1iM)

I wonder who was putting political pressure on the IRS . Not everyone objected to corporate spending . Maybe it was coming from the White House ? Maybe the emperor made it a point to mention it in his weekly radio address saying it would "open the floodgates" to special interest advertising in elections. Maybe it was the emperor who attacked SCOTUS openly during his SOTU address before a joint session of Congress?

Pounding his hand on his pedestal, the President emphasized again that simple bringing transparency to this kind of spending is about as common-sense as you can get:
President Obama on Citizens United: "Imagine the Power This Will Give Special Interests Over Politicians" | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/07/26/president-obama-citizens-united-imagine-power-will-give-special-interests-over-polit)

By the way ,Lerner illegally handed over confidential IRS taxpayer data to the FEC .That is probably why she took the 5th amendment in Congressional testimony. There is supposedly an on going criminal investigation . Does anyone think she did any of this stuff on her own ? Who was the quarterback ?

And this isn't even an election year

Yes it is as both the 2014,and the 2016 campaigns have started in earnest, and the media is craving the advertising dollar from politicians.

The right has to have as many scandals a they can to distract us from the non governing of the congress and keep the base all in a frenzy to keep the power they have and expand it further. Without them squealing for repeal of everything, their would be no news.

THe non governing it taking place in the White House and the obstruction tactics of Harry Ried... Chickenhawk.

Yes it is as both the 2014,and the 2016 campaigns have started in earnest, and the media is craving the advertising dollar from politicians.

The right has to have as many scandals a they can to distract us from the non governing of the congress and keep the base all in a frenzy to keep the power they have and expand it further. Without them squealing for repeal of everything, their would be no news.

Add opposed to mythical wars on women and lies about who's in control of two out of the branches of government.

Your words and actions are obvious and makes a sham of your denial on the assault on the rights of many so let people judge for themselves whether they trust you guys with their lives.

And as we see and have learned the obstruction of and by the minority can clog up the works so nothing gets done except hollering and screaming and blame. Its called gridlock, and has happened to both parties for years.

Hello tom:

Who was the quarterback ?Let me know when you find out...

Yaaaaaaawn!

By the way, if I was the head of Oversight Committee, I'd KNOW what Lois Lerner knows, because I wouldn't treat her with kid gloves... I wonder why Issa is doing that?

Excon

Your words and actions are obvious and makes a sham of your denial on the assault on the rights of many so let people judge for themselves whether they trust you guys with their lives.

And as we see and have learned the obstruction of and by the minority can clog up the works so nothing gets done except hollering and screaming and blame. Its called gridlock, and has happened to both parties for years.

You crack me up. Some day you should listen to yourself.

I am as amused as you are sometimes when you condone what your conservative state legislatures do and yet you say there is no war on women and minorities going on. Protecting the unborn, and being fiscally responsible by cutting food stamps and Medicaid is a sham, that we can all see through. Direct assaults on women and children.

That's being a bully when the strong pick on the weak.

I am as amused as you are sometimes when you condone what your conservative state legislatures do and yet you say there is no war on women and minorities going on. Protecting the unborn, and being fiscally responsible by cutting food stamps and Medicaid is a sham, that we can all see thru. Direct assaults on women and children.

That's being a bully when the strong pick on the weak.

Tal, it wasn't true the first time and it gets no closer to being the truth the more you repeat it.

Perhaps if the emperor would stop giving away multiple cell phones and billions to his cronies for cars no one wants, windmills to kill more endangered birds with impunity and a multitude of other failed green companies perhaps those who actually need those food stamps can be taken care of properly.

Nice embellishing to obscure the facts and effects of your own bully agenda, blame not giving the poor a proper safety net on Obama when you know good and well whether Obama was there or not you wouldn't be squealing and repealing the rights of others.

You take doing the right thing further right, ergo extremism, you bully.

The poor already had a safety net before Owebama, its called Medicaid, welfare (for those too lazy to work), food stamps and a number of other free handouts.

Nice embellishing to obscure the facts and effects of your own bully agenda, blame not giving the poor a proper safety net on Obama when you know good and well whether Obama was there or not you wouldn't be squealing and repealing the rights of others.

You take doing the right thing further right, ergo extremism, you bully.

That's just it, I don't do any such thing. I believe the free market, private charities, removing the government stranglehold of regulations and wasteful spending, personal responsibility, etc. go much further in reducing poverty and restoring dignity and pride than regulating every aspect of our lives (except abortion) and making people dependent on government.

Telling people they didn't build that, they're to dumb to know what's best for them and they can't make it on their own without their band of elite, benevolent Democrat benefactors that look down their nose on them and only care about their vote is bullying. I want to get out of the way so people can succeed, you want to stand firmly in front of them and ensure they can't do squat without your hand in it. I believe in freedom, you believe in indentured servitude.

P.S. A note from the loathsome nanny state mayor of NYC.


Chicago, he reminded, just sent pink slips to 2,100 teachers and school workers to help defray the costs of pensions.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg: NYC may be the next Detroit (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/7/mayor-michael-bloomberg-nyc-may-be-next-detroit/?utm_source=feedly)

It's not conservative policies forcing Chicago to leave children without teachers.

Hello tom:
Lemme know when you find out...

Yaaaaaaawn!

By the way, if I was the head of Oversight Committee, I'd KNOW what Lois Lerner knows, because I wouldn't treat her with kid gloves... I wonder why Issa is doing that?

excon

So the fact that Lerner is probably the subject of an FBI investigation doesn't excite you either .BTW DOJ criminal investigations are confidential .So how would Issa get the information you think he should get ? And don't give me that immunity bs. That won't go anywhere.

An IRS agent told the House Ways And Means Committee that the IRS still targets Tea Party groups and that no revisions to the guidelines have been made.
Below is the Ways & Means Committee transcript of the IRS official.




Committee: Today, currently, how do you analyze advocacy cases. If, for example, Tea Party of Arkansas came in today, how would you handle it?

IRS agent: Well, the BOLO list doesn't exist anymore.

Committee: Sure.

IRS: If a political advocacy case came in today, I would give it -- or talk about it to my manager because right now we really don't have any direction or we haven't had any for the last month and a half.

------

Committee: If you saw -- I am asking this currently, if today if a Tea Party case, a group -- a case from a Tea Party group came in to your desk, you reviewed the file and there was no evidence of political activity, would you potentially approve that case? Is that something you would do?

IRS agent: At this point I would send it to secondary screening, political advocacy.

Committee: So you would treat a Tea Party group as a political advocacy case even if there was no evidence of political activity on the application. Is that right?

IRS agent: Based on my current manager's direction, uh-huh.

IRS agent: Tax agency is still targeting Tea Party groups | WashingtonExaminer.com (http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-agent-tax-agency-is-still-targeting-tea-party-groups/article/2534044)

An IRS agent told the House Ways And Means Committee that the IRS still targets Tea Party groups and that no revisions to the guidelines have been made.
Below is the Ways & Means Committee transcript of the IRS official.





IRS agent: Tax agency is still targeting Tea Party groups | WashingtonExaminer.com (http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-agent-tax-agency-is-still-targeting-tea-party-groups/article/2534044)

The answer to your question is in the article you posted. Apparently the agency has not received any new guidelines when it comes to judging the status of tax groups.

"The wheels of the gods grind slowly, but they grind small"

What guidelines would be fair? The laws are different for what ever category you apply for and so far most initial application by grass roots groups are done without a lawyer to guide or advise them. If the interpretation of the law and guidelines are unclear and ambiguous, then what would you expect from the process seeing every group and their mama is trying to get an exemption for their activities AND hide where the money comes from.

Tal it's been more than well documented that specifically Tea Party and Christian groups were targeted ;received unfair scrutiny and had their applications denied or delayed indefinitely . It does not impress me that some liberal groups were also screened before they were approved. Show me the one that was put through the ringer like countless TP groups were .

Karl Rove didn't have a problem. I can't help it if you guys can't fill out a form. Nor be investigated on the most basic level. Or get a legal adviser before you apply. At some point you will have to face the fact of self created delays like we all did back in the day.

Its like shutting down the government thinking that's a good way to defund Obama Care. Lack of knowledge on procedural rules will bite you. The fervor of conservative principles clearly belies the constraint of the constitution you holler about.

Grassroots built on ideology still needs legal guidance. Gee Tom even government needs legal counsel, and sometimes it's inadequate.

Karl Rove didn't have a problem. I can't help it if you guys can't fill out a form. Nor be investigated on the most basic level. Or get a legal adviser before you apply. At some point you will have to face the fact of self created delays like we all did back in the day.

Its like shutting down the government thinking that's a good way to defund Obama Care. Lack of knowledge on procedural rules will bite you. The fervor of conservative principles clearly belies the constraint of the constitution you holler about.

Grassroots built on ideology still needs legal guidance. Gee Tom even government needs legal counsel, and sometimes it's inadequate.

Unbelievable.

Hello again, Steve:

UnbelievableYawwwn... Yeah... The IRS sucks. Obama needs to replace the whole shooting match.

But, a scandal, it's NOT.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
Yawwwn... Yeah... The IRS sucks. Obama needs to replace the whole shooting match.

But, a scandal, it's NOT.

excon

It's a scandal by their own ADMISSION, what do you not understand about that?

At least you don't blow it off as being the victim's fault like Tal does, which is what's unbelievable.

If you look deeper into your admission crap you would find the delays were for clarification on how to evaluate TParty (and a few hundred others) applications as there is no way investigate them. What's not been reported enough was that searching for their activities through a very reasonable on line search that everybody gets was the only investigative procedure they had for anyone.

I mean how would you verify what kind of group you were dealing with? How would know if they would qualify for exemption status and what status that would be given the various categories.

Tell me Mr. Victim, what you suggest that's better than Google to see if you are legit, or scam? Hell you can't even tell who is an honest citizen from a mass murderer until he shoots up a school. Its okay to stop and frisk the brothers but don't look to hard at a TParty application for exemption. Now releasing private information to ProPublica, THAT'S against the law.

Playing victim is par for the course with you conservatives when you get called on to explain yourself. And it's bogus, no matter how loud you holler.

Sorry I just don't believe all the conservatives facts, they seldom tell the whole truth or serve anyone but another true believer conservative.

But I bet it would be a scandal if they were going after liberal organisations. In fact they would consider it a scandal of epic porportions.

Naw, we liberals are use to being investigated and have lawyers to help fill out the forms. We are use to you wingers crying foul over everything too. And blaming everybody but yourself because of course you are always a victim.

If you look deeper into your admission crap you would find the delays were for clarification on how to evaluate TParty (and a few hundred others) applications as there is no way investigate them. What's not been reported enough was that searching for their activities through a very reasonable on line search that everybody gets was the only investigative procedure they had for anyone.

I mean how would you verify what kind of group you were dealing with? How would know if they would qualify for exemption status and what status that would be given the various categories.

Tell me Mr. Victim, what you suggest that's better than Google to see if you are legit, or scam? Hell you can't even tell who is an honest citizen from a mass murderer until he shoots up a school. Its okay to stop and frisk the brothers but don't look to hard at a TParty application for exemption. Now releasing private information to ProPublica, THAT'S against the law.

Playing victim is par for the course with you conservatives when you get called on to explain yourself. And it's bogus, no matter how loud you holler.

Sorry I just don't believe all the conservatives facts, they seldom tell the whole truth or serve anyone but another true believer conservative.

Dude, stop the denial and projection. Facts are not partisan and it all leads back to the IRS' admission of wrongdoing (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/right-wing-moving-further-right-2-0-a-742592-5.html#post3460706).


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Internal Revenue Service inappropriately flagged conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday.

Organizations were singled out because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups.

In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.

"That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.

"The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added.

You libs are the only people I know that can take an admission of guilt and deny anything happened. And is still happening as tom showed.

The facts also show she even lied in her admission of wrongdoing.


Lerner said the practice was initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati and was not motivated by political bias.

LIE!


After her talk, she told The AP that no high level IRS officials knew about the practice.

LIE!

Naw, we liberals are use to being investigated and have lawyers to help fill out the forms. We are use to you wingers crying foul over everything too. And blaming everybody but yourself because of course you are always a victim.

Tal, try eating the beef, not what comes out of the cow's a$$.

Hello again, Steve:

You libs are the only people I know that can take an admission of guilt and deny anything happened.

The facts also show she even lied in her admission of wrongdoing.You right wingers are the only people I know who can take a persons WORD that the IRS is guilty of wrongdoing, LINK it to the president, and then call that person a LIAR.

Makes NO sense to me.

Excon

Your opinions are noted along with your rhetoric. But you guys don't holler scandal when your own party leaders say they are using voter ID to elect republicans. You holler INTEGRITY.

I ain't eating your crap either.

Hello again, Steve:
You right wingers are the only people I know who can take a persons WORD that the IRS is guilty of wrongdoing, LINK it to the president, and then call that person a LIAR.

Makes NO sense to me.

excon

The President is the man in charge... that makes him the man responsible... you guys on the left kept whining Bush... Bush Bush... or Regan... Regan Regan... well according to YOUR rules... NOW its Obama.. Obama... Obama. Deal with it YOUR guy is in charge and its all HIS responsibility.

Hello again, Steve:
You right wingers are the only people I know who can take a persons WORD that the IRS is guilty of wrongdoing, LINK it to the president,

You keep saying that but I don't recall having ever linked it to Obama. Stick to reality.


and then call that person a LIAR.

Makes NO sense to me.

I don't know how it doesn't make sense to you, here are the lies again:


Lerner said the practice was initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati and was not motivated by political bias.


After her talk, she told The AP that no high level IRS officials knew about the practice.

We knew these were lies early on, and then came the testimony of one IRS lawyer Carter Hull who confirmed they were taking orders from Washington, not Cincinnati, and pointed the finger at IRS chief counsel William Wilkins, who is “one of the only two Obama political appointees in the IRS.”

So you still clinging to the already discredited lie it was just schmucks in Cincinnati and no high level officials knew about it? You're losing this argument, ex and your credibility with it.

Hello again, Steve:

I don't know why you always want me to spell things out... What made NO sense, and still doesn't, is that you BELIEVE her when she says the IRS did something bad, and you don't the rest of the time...

excon

The President is the man in charge.....that makes him the man responsible.....you guys on the left kept whining Bush...Bush Bush...or Regan ...Regan Regan....well according to YOUR rules....NOW its Obama..Obama...Obama. deal with it YOUR guy is in charge and its all HIS responsibility.

Good thing we had Clinton between the two Bush's or we really would have been in trouble. Now your mad because Obama can't clean up the second Bush's mess fast enough because you guys hid the mop and the bucket, and holler its all his fault.

And steadily making more messes, and too cheap to buy a new mop. Stop hollering victim, and grab a mop. Boy, you guys are lazier than poor people!

Good thing we had Clinton between the two Bush's or we really would have been in trouble. Now your mad because Obama can't clean up the second Bush's mess fast enough because you guys hid the mop and the bucket, and holler its all his fault.

And steadily making more messes, and too cheap to buy a new mop. Stop hollering victim, and grab a mop. Boy, you guys are lazier than poor people!!

Get over it... MORE people had jobs the day Bush left office than have jobs right now... or at any point since he first got elected.

BUSH did a far better job than Owebama has on everything.

Obama hasn't done much of anything right... he's screwed up almost everythiing he has touched... and his only real accomplishment he has Bush to thank for making possible... because the programs BUSH put into place Obama bellyached and whined about as a Senator... were what made it possible in the first place.

Obama acts like a immature little punk that isn't getting his way... and is throwing a perpetual temper tantrum.

I can tell from the other side of the computer you ain't saying that with a straight face. If you weren't so far right and had some skills those rocks would reach.

Quite hollering and grab a mop. No more excuses.

I can tell from the other side of the computer you ain't saying that with a straight face. If you weren't so far right and had some skills those rocks would reach.

Quite hollering and grab a mop. No more excuses.

Obama has been screwing things up for 4 years and 8 months... nothing is better now than it was the day he took office...

And the Millions of unemployed and the underemployed back me up on that. Because they had jobs when Bush was in office.

Apparently Obama's "phony scandals" aren't phony to Americans.


Benghazi. Snooping on reporters. The IRS and NSA. The White House dismisses them as phony and fake scandals. Americans do not.

A Fox News national poll released Thursday finds that 78 percent of voters think the questions over the administration’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi should be taken seriously. Just 17 percent call it a phony scandal.

The attack, on the anniversary of September 11, killed four Americans -- including the U.S. ambassador.

Meanwhile, 69 percent of voters say the National Security Agency’s electronic surveillance of everyday Americans is serious, while 26 percent call that a fake scandal.

By a margin of 59-31 percent, voters are also more likely to view the seizure of reporters’ phone records by the Justice Department as serious rather than phony.

And while the White House sees a Congressional investigation of the IRS targeting of conservative groups as a “distraction,” 59 percent of voters take it seriously. Some 33 percent agree with the administration that it’s fake.

In each of the four situations, voters across the partisan spectrum -- Republicans, independents and Democrats -- are more likely to say the situation should be taken seriously.

Democrats are most inclined to agree with the White House on the IRS scandal: 49 percent say it’s serious, while 42 percent call it a phony scandal.

Fully 70 percent of Democrats think the administration’s handling of Benghazi is a serious matter.

Overall, a 62-percent majority of voters believes the White House is trying to cover-up what happened in Benghazi, while 27 percent say the administration is being open and transparent. These views are mostly unchanged from May.

Nearly 9 in 10 Republicans (88 percent), two-thirds of independents (67 percent) and a third of Democrats (34 percent) think the administration is hiding something on Benghazi.

Read more: Fox News Poll: Phony scandals? Not to voters | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/08/fox-news-poll-phony-scandals-not-to-voters/#ixzz2bVZOkahD)

That's across the board, well beyond the margin of error - American voters aren't buying the "phony" narrative. We deserve answers!

That's across the board, well beyond the margin of error - American voters aren't buying the "phony" narrative. We deserve answers!
All of 1,007 registered voters with a margin of sampling error of ± 3 percentage points.

All of 1,007 registered voters with a margin of sampling error of ± 3 percentage points.

Yes I checked that ma'am. It's so beyond the margin of error it's a slam dunk that America is taking it seriously and not buying the "phony" meme.

78-13 on Benghazi including 70% of Dems
69-26 on NSA snooping
59-31 on seizing reporters phone records
59-33 on the IRS scandal with a near majority of Dems, 49-42
62-27 think the Admin is covering up Benghazi

Those are some serious numbers, all well beyond the margin of error.

Yes I checked that ma'am. It's so beyond the margin of error it's a slam dunk that America is taking it seriously and not buying the "phony" meme.

78-13 on Benghazi including 70% of Dems
69-26 on NSA snooping
59-31 on seizing reporters phone records
59-33 on the IRS scandal with a near majority of Dems, 49-42
62-27 think the Admin is covering up Benghazi

Those are some serious numbers, all well beyond the margin of error.
And what were the questions asked? And how were they phrased?

And what were the questions asked? and how were they phrased?

Follow the link.

Follow the link.
They had said some of them won't be released until after 6 p.m. It's later than that now, so will look.

They had said some of them won't be released until after 6 p.m. It's later than that now, so will look.

The survey was there when I posted.

Dr Ben Carson disclosed this week that he was recently the subject of an IRS audit. Prior to making an address critical of the emperor's policies while the emperor was in attendance ,the IRS never found the need to audit his returns . But somehow his name was picked out of the hat almost immediately after his address at the 61st Annual National Prayer Breakfast.. Carson said;
“I guess it could be a coincidence, but I never had been audited before and never really had any encounters with the IRS,” ..... “But it certainly would make one suspicious because we know now the IRS has been used for political purposes and therefore actions like this come under suspicion.”
Yeah I'm sure it's just one of those coincidences.

Don't you know that the state will use whatever tools it has at its disposal to stifle dissent?
What better way of shutting someone up than having them bogged down in a tax audit, or for that matter erecting barriers where there were no barriers before. Has it dawned upon you yet that you are in a police state

And what better way of controlling everyone by linking their heath care information with an agency like the IRS !

I don't understand your concern we have had these integrated links for years and it hasn't undermined our democracy, I carry a Medicarecard which entitles me to healthcare and this is linked to my tax file number and required details are downloaded into my electronic tax return as are the details of my Social Security income and Social Security Number, Bank Interest, share dividends, Health insurance payments. The ATO has my bank detail and refunds are automatically deposited. I'm waiting for the time when I don't have to lodge a tax return because the level of complexity is such it would take a long time to assemble the information for a tax return if this wasn't available

Have you read the accounts on this OP ? My concern should be self evident .

have you read the accounts on this OP ? My concern should be self evident .

You live in a society that is full of fear, thus your present dilemna. Our society operates on a different dynamic. Trust didn't come easy, but we do know you have nothing to fear but fear itself.

you live in a society that is full of fear, thus your present dilemna. Our society operates on a different dynamic. Trust didn't come easy, but we do know you have nothing to fear but fear itself.Same here. But the right-wing rhetoric is based on fear. Their threads here are perfect evidence of that.

Yes their sky is always falling, the rich never have enough and will never share

Something about the government targeting political opposition with tax audits and delays in approvals because of their political views that lends to this lack of trust . Maybe in your countries those type of tactics are SOP and a given. But, in a free nation that should be an unacceptable outrage.

yes their sky is always falling, the rich never have enough and will never share

I think that if it weren't for the obviouse leanings of our current press it wouldn't be an issue. Before when I was growing up the press had a great amount of respect and was considered nuetral. Fast forward to today's times and it seems that the press is little more then a puppet of only one side of the political machine. The feeling at least as far as I have been seeing is that we have lost our control over the checks and balances that have made this system work.

Within that loss is the brewing of a great mistrust by those that are willing to participate in a governmental process. Also there is a great divide between those trying to participate and those that are just being sheeple and following party lines without any independent thinking. That is where the sinking ship feeling is being derived from.

There is a reason you guys hate the lame stream media. They report the crazy positions and the crazy things you say. Go ahead keep throwing the red meat around, but don't be surprised when a hungry bear gets a whiff of it. When you don't push back on the lunacy you get more lunatics, and when you purge your own party of anyone that ain't crazy, you get more press on the lunatics that you push to the front of the crowd.

Blame the media, it hasn't changed, YOU have. You have created a climate of fear within your own party. You outlaw debate and compromise and replace it with hollering, and rock throwing and hell bent on destroying anything you don't approve of, even your own.

And if you think this is mainstream America, you're crazy.

Hello again, tom:

.. in a free nation that should be an unacceptable outrage.In a FREE nation, one MAKING such complaints ought be able to PROVE them, instead of just flapping their gums. Alas and alack, that's ALL we have here.

Excon

There is a reason you guys hate the lame stream media. They report the crazy positions and the crazy things you say. Go ahead keep throwing the red meat around, but don't be surprised when a hungry bear gets a whiff of it. When you don't push back on the lunacy you get more lunatics, and when you purge your own party of anyone that ain't crazy, you get more press on the lunatics that you push to the front of the crowd.

Blame the media, it hasn't changed, YOU have. You have created a climate of fear within your own party. You outlaw debate and compromise and replace it with hollering, and rock throwing and hell bent on destroying anything you don't approve of, even your own.

And if you think this is mainstream America, you're crazy.

Did you have your coffee this morning? If you can't see the problem then maybe your just part of it? If the media was so impartial then wouldn't they have followed through on any number of scandals that have been in the forefront of this administration? Had a republican been in office rest assured that their treatment of the scandal would have been a vile one. But with this administration its swept under the rug time and time again.

The problem with your form of compromise is that it hurts the very people you claim to be helping. Why should anyone compromise on that?

Hello again, dad:

If the media was so impartial then wouldn't they have followed through on any number of scandals that have been in the forefront of this administration? OR, in the alternative, they DID investigate, and found NO scandal at all.

I believe I've mentioned on these pages exactly WHAT Daryl Issa COULD do, IF he really wanted to INVESTIGATE.. IF the matter IS serious, (and I believe using the IRS to target your political enemy IS serious), then there are PLENTY of tools available to the congress. It HAS oversight, and it has the POWER to use it - IF they wanted to. Our founders did NOT leave the congress TOOTHLESS.

I KNOW why they don't. The MEDIA knows why they don't. You should too.

Excon

What wing rhetoric is based on fear? I don't recall righties warning Romney was going to take your tampons away.

Romney lost by 5 million fraudulent votes. AFTER you kicked a few million off the voter rolls. You guys FAILED again, and still blamed US.

You outlaw debate and compromise and replace it with hollering, and rock throwing and hell bent on destroying anything you don't approve of, even your own. ...
Speaking of the emperor...

Something about the government targeting political opposition with tax audits and delays in approvals because of their political views that lends to this lack of trust . Maybe in your countries those type of tactics are SOP and a given. But, in a free nation that should be an unacceptable outrage.

Fear works against freedom. When you spend so much time being fearful then the inevitable consequence is that you impose limitations on that freedom.

Fear works against freedom. When you spend so much time being fearful then the inevitable consequence is that you impose limitations on that freedom.
It works that way in religion too. That's when fences are built.

It works that way in religion too. That's when fences are built.

Exactly.

Very perceptive.

What a bunch of BS . For 8 years I heard stories of Bush setting up FEMA concentration camps . Was that "fear " justified ? Here we have documented cases of the IRS auditing political opponents and denying applications of political opponents and I'll say it again... it's an outrage!

Exactly.

Very perceptive.
I lived for years inside those fences.

what a bunch of BS . For 8 years I heard stories of Bush setting up FEMA concentration camps . Was that "fear " justified ? Here we have documented cases of the IRS auditing political opponents and denying applications of political opponents and I'll say it again ....it's an outrage ! .


I am not saying that fear isn't justified and I am not saying that outrage isn't justified under the circumstance. My statement was in relation to the fear factor, nothing else. What I said was:

Fear works against freedom. When you spend so much time being fearful the inevitable consequence is that you impose limitations on that freedom.

On this basis, how is my comment B.S. Your point about the circumstances being played out is irrelevant to the point I am making. Care to refute this?

So you made a statement out of context to the discussion then ?

so you made a statement out of context to the discussion then ?

I understand what the OP has posted. However, you responded to accusations by a number of people who pointed out that fear and distrust is an issue in the debate. Nowhere that I can see in these responses do these people say that fear and distrust is not justified. I was responding to these comments by linking them to your comments about freedom.

I hope this clear it up.

Only by implication is it linked... they would not have made those comments except to respond to my complaint about the IRS ;and they reduced it to a "sky is falling" charge without any merit . We are told by the adm and their flunky praetorian press that 'there's nothing there ' .So I understand their strategy of marginalizing legitimate issues when their emperor is involved . But know I see through it.

Hello again, tom:

But know I see through it.The problem with Ted Cruz and the right wing press, is they really DON'T believe the crap they spew. They just hope YOU do - and YOU do.

Certainly, if the leadership of the Republican party agreed with you, they'd use ALL the tools available to them, and actually GET to the bottom of it.. But, they, like me, KNOW there's no there there, and a REAL investigation would REVEAL that... Instead, they try to make as much political hay as they can.

I'm surprised you buy into it. You don't really think congress is TOOTHLESS, do you? Tell me, am I wrong about issuing subpoenas?? Am I wrong about giving Lois Lerner use immunity, so she can TELL what she knows?? Am I wrong about JAILING her if she doesn't comply??

You say, that would start a Constitutional crisis... So.. Isn't USING the IRS for political purposes ALREADY a Constitutional crisis??

Excon

Hello again, tom:
The problem with Ted Cruz and the right wing press, is they really DON'T believe the crap they spew. They just hope YOU do - and YOU do.

Certainly, if the leadership of the Republican party agreed with you, they'd use ALL the tools available to them, and actually GET to the bottom of it.. But, they, like me, KNOW there's no there there, and a REAL investigation would REVEAL that... Instead, they try to make as much political hay as they can.

I'm surprised you buy into it. You don't really think congress is TOOTHLESS, do you?? Tell me, am I wrong about issuing subpoenas??? Am I wrong about giving Lois Lerner use immunity, so she can TELL what she knows??? Am I wrong about JAILING her if she doesn't comply???

You say, that would start a Constitutional crisis... So.. Isn't USING the IRS for political purposes ALREADY a Constitutional crisis???

excon

Congress is not toothless but it is not the executive branch either . To get to the bottom of it requires either executive cooperation or a court intevention . You know it and I know it .
Even with Congress being held over-whelming by the Dems ,it took well over a year to conclude Watergate... and even then it only happened when the Repubics in Congress walked into the White House and told Nixon that they could no longer support him . You know and I know that never has an impeachment resulted in a conviction by the Senate .
So don't tell me about Congressional power . They have oversight and the power of the purse ,that's it.

only by implication is it linked ...they would not have made those comments except to respond to my complaint about the IRS ;and they reduced it to a "sky is falling" charge without any merit . We are told by the adm and their flunky praetorian press that 'there's nothing there ' .So I understand their strategy of marginalizing legitimate issues when their emperor is involved . But know I see through it.


Tom, think about the logical implications of what you have said. Here is your quote again in part:

"Maybe in your countries these type of tactic are SOP and a given.But, in a free nation that should be an unacceptable outrage"

Apparently in your country these tactics are SOP as well .The implication is that "other" countries are not free nations because of these tactics. Therefore...

I'll let you fill out the rest

Duh . Yes if the ruling party can use the force of the law and the agencies of the government for political purposes ,then there is no real liberty.

Hello again, tom:

duh . Yes if the ruling party can use the force of the law and the agencies of the government for political purposes ,then there is no real liberty.It's TRUE! I don't want a corrupt government.. But PROOF is required before TRUTH can be determined.. One side flapping their gums, is NOT truth.

Excon

Hello again, tom:
It's TRUE! I don't want a corrupt government.. But PROOF is required before TRUTH can be determined.. One side flapping their gums, is NOT truth.

excon

Finally we got excon to admit that Obamas side has been doing nothing but lying to the American public.

That's the problem with hollering about everything, and no solid proof of anything. Nobody believes you.

Funny how that doesn't stop your side from hollering about everything still, though.

That's the problem with hollering about everything, and no solid proof of anything. Nobody believes you.

Funny how that doesn't stop your side from hollering about everything still, though.

Hope you are standing in front of a Mirror when you say that... because it applies to you and your side too.

Hello again, tom:
It's TRUE! I don't want a corrupt government.. But PROOF is required before TRUTH can be determined.. One side flapping their gums, is NOT truth.

excon

One name refutes all your arguments... Lois Lerner . Remember ,the Dems had nothing on Nixon until John Dean started "flapping his gums" ,and the court ordered him to release his tapes. But I'm willing to bet that didn't stop you from making the accusations before the smoking gun proof.

Well if you think that Lois Lerner is John Dean, make her talk. I would if I were Issa.

Really ? How would you do that when she pleas the 5th ? Don't tell me immunity.. that won't compel her to talk. John Dean turned out to be a lefty who was more than willing to talk.

Hello again, tom:

Don't tell me immunity.. that won't compel her to talkUhhh, YES it will. She talks, or goes to jail. You shouldn't get your law from FOX News.

Excon

Until Issa figures it out, you got nothing. Guess she ain't a righty willing to talk. Guess you guys can't prove she knows anything to talk about. If you did she would be indicted already before a grand jury.

Like Ex says, you guys got nuthin'. Now what? More hollering, more scandals?

Really... I guess if you go before Congress your 5th amendment rights are waived against your will. I can't imagine what news agency you got that from.

Until Issa figures it out, you got nothing. Guess she ain't a righty willing to talk. Guess you guys can't prove she knows anything to talk about. If you did she would be indicted already before a grand jury.

Like Ex says, you guys got nuthin'. Now what? More hollering, more scandals?

And which Federal prosecutor working for Holder will do the indictment ?

Hello again, tom:

I guess if you go before Congress your 5th amendment rights are waived against your will.In a sense, yes.

The reason WHY we have 5th Amendment rights in the first place, is so you can't be compelled to INCRIMINATE yourself.. But, if you've been promised that you WON'T be prosecuted for ANYTHING you say, NOTHING she could say WOULD incriminate her.

It's ELEMENTAL law. As a tool, it's been around for a LONG, LONG time. Hannity doesn't know that stuff. I do.

Excon

and which Federal prosecutor working for Holder will do the indictment ?

You have to have evidence first. Got any? Naw, you don't, just partisan suspicions and accusations.

You have to have evidence first. Got any? Naw, you don't, just partisan suspicions and accusations.

I have video evidence .
Lois Lerner Discusses Political Pressure on IRS in 2010 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH1ZRyq-1iM)

duh . Yes if the ruling party can use the force of the law and the agencies of the government for political purposes ,then there is no real liberty.

Very good. So its potential is universal. On this basis we can amend your original statement from "maybe in your countries" to "in all countries".

I'm speechless.

Hello again, tom:
In a sense, yes.

The reason WHY we have 5th Amendment rights in the first place, is so you can't be compelled to INCRIMINATE yourself.. But, if you've been promised that you WON'T be prosecuted for ANYTHING you say, NOTHING she could say WOULD incriminate her.

It's ELEMENTAL law. As a tool, it's been around for a LONG, LONG time. Hannity doesn't know that stuff. I do.

excon

And why should she be given immunity ? We are told that DOJ is currently pursuing investigations into IRS misconduct. I don't believe it ,but that's what we're told . So why would Congress give immunity to someone who may not be able to implicate anyone else ? That would be plain stupid. Be patient . She'll come around when she sees she's the only one thrown over the bus .

Hello again, tom:

and why should she be given immunity ? If you want legal information, ask ME. FAUX News isn't where you should go..

Look. The reason immunity is given, is because the prosecutors want BIGGER fish. I thought you wanted to nail Obama, or Holder, or SOMEBODY bigger than peon Lois Lerner. I thought this was about Obama targeting HIS enemy's.

I guess not.

You say she'll come around... DUDE!! She's retiring to Miami Beach to enjoy her will earned pension. Why, in Gods name, would she EVER come forward to exchange THAT life for a prison cell? DUDE, again!

Excon

Hello again, tom:
If you want legal information, ask ME. FAUX News isn't where you should go..

Look. The reason immunity is given, is because the prosecutors want BIGGER fish. I thought you wanted to nail Obama, or Holder, or SOMEBODY bigger than peon Lois Lerner. I thought this was about Obama targeting HIS enemy's.

I guess not.

You say she'll come around..... DUDE!!! She's retiring to Miami Beach to enjoy her will earned pension. Why, in Gods name, would she EVER come forward to exchange THAT life for a prison cell?? DUDE, again!!

excon

You can end the constant reference to FOX .it's an irrelevant and bogus dig . I stand by the rest of my comment your didn't link to. "We are told that DOJ is currently pursuing investigations into IRS misconduct. I don't believe it ,but that's what we're told . So why would Congress give immunity to someone who may not be able to implicate anyone else ? That would be plain stupid. "
She'll come around if she sees that she's the one thrown under the bus ; the sacrificial lamb .

Back to Watergate... you know it and I know it that nothing would've happened to Nixon without the appointment of an independent prosecutor. There will be no accountability from the White House now as long as Holder is Att Gen. He has already declined to enforce the law against the Black Panthers in Philadelphia when they didn't even contest the charges. He has refused to investigate vote fraud allegations.He has refused to prosecute schemes to defraud federal entitlements . He has stonewalled Congress on the Fast and Furious . He declined to prosecute the IRS for leaking confidential taxpayer information on conservatives.
Her lawyer is telling her there is no way Eric Holder will authorize prosecutions that could shine a light on what really happened at the IRS. So long as she can outright refuse to cooperate with any proposed deal by Congress she will.

Edit . Yes I have more .
An immunity from Congress would not protect her from prosecution based on evidence already in the record .It would not protect her from prosecution for perjury . But Congress itself has no power to prosecute her. Congress can only refer the matter to DOJ.

Looks like you guys have glitch of your own to overcome. Well its been 5 years and how many allegations of scandal and misconduct? You still got nothing. No wonder you think he is an emperor. No wonder the government is shut down even though the sequester level spending has been agreed to.

You want absolute destruction of your hated enemy, and victory over issues just won't do.

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started running yet... Holders days are numbered... as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started running yet... Holders days are numbered... as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

That won't happen either . American administrations do not go after criminal charges against previous ones. They have to be nailed in office. What we have here is a real constitutional crisis because the emperor has a Att General who will not perform his sworn duties.

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started runing yet.....Holders days are numbered...as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

Is that a promise to turn your loony's in?

Looks like you guys have glitch of your own to overcome. Well its been 5 years and how many allegations of scandal and misconduct? You still got nothing. No wonder you think he is an emperor. No wonder the government is shut down even though the sequester level spending has been agreed to.

That's no glitch, it's a total lack of transparency, obstruction and refusal to do their worn duties by the regime.


You want absolute destruction of your hated enemy, and victory over issues just won't do.

And the irony still goes going right over your head.

FYI, you guys can pretend there's no "there" there all you want, it ain't over. Lerner and co. used private email accounts to transmit personal, protected, taxpayer data.


Senior Internal Revenue Service officials—including one at the heart of the IRS “targeting” scandal—violated agency policies and possibly federal records laws by using private email to send confidential taxpayer information, the GOP-led House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said in a letter.

In a Sept. 30 letter to IRS Acting Commissioner Daniel Werfel obtained by the Free Beacon, Oversight Chairman Darrel Issa (R. Calif.) said an investigation revealed a “troubling pattern” of at least four top IRS officials using their private email addresses to relay confidential tax information.

“This not only raises the prospect of violations of the Federal Records Act but it also raises data security concerns and violates internal IRS policies,” Issa wrote to Werfel.

The committee discovered the emails while investigating the ongoing IRS scandal that began earlier this year when an official admitted that the agency targeted conservative groups during the 2012 election.

Lois Lerner, who headed the IRS’ tax-exempt division at the heart of the scandal, is one of the officials named in Issa’s letter.

Issa said the committee’s investigation produced more than 1,600 pages of emails and documents housed in Lerner’s nonofficial email account related to IRS business, including nearly 30 pages of confidential taxpayer information. Included in the material was a summary of an application for tax-exempt status the IRS instructed Lerner’s legal counsel to redact.

Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment rights and refused to testify before the Oversight Committee earlier this year. She retired last month while an internal IRS probe was still ongoing, guaranteeing her a federal pension.

Among the other three officials named by Issa were IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who stepped down following last year’s election.

Issa wrote that Judith Kendell, the senior technical adviser of the Exempt Organization Division, did not notify the IRS of work emails housed on her private account, despite a request by the agency to employees.

“According to the IRS, you did not inform the IRS that you had such documents housed in your non-official email,” Issa wrote. “The discovery of these documents suggest that you were not forthcoming to the IRS about documents related the Committee’s investigation in your personal possession.”

Issa said the committee’s findings suggest “such use is a systemic problem throughout the IRS.”

“This is also a concern to the committee because federal taxpayer information cannot be shared on nonsecure, nonofficial systems,” he wrote.

IRS policies prohibit employees from sending confidential taxpayer information through non-official channels. Federal statutes also strictly prohibit the IRS from releasing taxpayer information.

Additionally, federal employees are prohibited from using private email accounts to conduct official business, unless they copy their official accounts on such messages to ensure they are properly recorded.

- See more at: Darrell Issa: IRS Officials Sent Private Data Over Personal Email Accounts | Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/darrel-issa-irs-officials-sent-private-data-over-personal-email-accounts/#sthash.eKnIPjdm.dpuf)

No wonder Lerner took the fifth. But I get it, you true believers are OK the IRS violating the law as long as it's conservatives being targeted and an admission of guilt = no evidence, oddly enough.

Very good. So its potential is universal. On this basis we can amend your original statement from "maybe in your countries" to "in all countries".

So that's what it's all about ? More quibbling nonsense .

Is that a promise to turn your loony's in?

What loonies? OlonieBaba and his den of thieves?

so that's what it's all about ? more quibbling nonsense .

Yes it is. It is the type of quibbling nonsense that invariably allows you to paint yourself into a corner.

Fine ; I don't have the inclination to debate how many angels fit on the head of a pin .

fine ; I don't have the inclination to debate how many angels fit on the head of a pin .

Well, why do you respond? Some people are starting to realize it is better to ignore my questions.

I'm speechless.

Well, don't be. Say something.

Well, why do you respond? Some people are starting to realize it is better to ignore my questions.

Because I think you may have something interesting to contribute

because I think you may have something interesting to contribute

My apologies for the comments I made earlier about painting you into a corner.

Who is Sarah Hall Ingram ? Hint the smoking gun moves closer to the White House.

Hello again, tom:

Let me know when it gets there. Yaaaaawn.

excon

It's closer than you admit. She's the reason why the WH will no longer post the Visitor's log.

Hello again, tom:

it's closer than you admit. You have NEVER listened to me.. IF Obama IS a crook, I WANT him in JAIL. I have NO problem with the congress going AFTER him. But, I'm NOT interested in the chase. I'm interested when they CATCH him.

Until then, YAWWWN.

Excon

Hello again, tom:
You have NEVER listened to me.. IF Obama IS a crook, I WANT him in JAIL. I have NO problem with the congress going AFTER him. But, I'm NOT interested in the chase. I'm interested when they CATCH him.

Until then, YAWWWN.

excon

None of you libs were interested in the chase for that criminal Bush, or Cheney, or Rumsfeld, or that evil Gonzales guy who dared fire some attorneys. Bwa ha ha!

Who is Sarah Hall Ingram ? Hint the smoking gun moves closer to the White House.

White House, IRS exchanged confidential taxpayer info | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/09/white-house-irs-exchanged-confidential-taxpayer-info/)


Ingram headed the scandal-ridden IRS office responsible for overseeing tax-exempt nonprofit groups before leaving to head the agency’s office in charge of Obamacare implementation

Tal yeah ;she headed the office that was targeting conservative and religious groups . She also visited the WH over 150 times in that period ,and exchanged emails with the WH that contained confidential taxpayer information. She was then rewarded with healthy bonuses and a promotion to head what will be the most intrusive and abusive division the IRS will ever construct.

Just 51,000 people completed Obamacare applications during its first week, according to MailOnline, The target for the 6 month open enrollment period is 7 million for the program to be financially feasible. At this rate, they will come up 5 million short.
Administration sources: Obamacare website received just 51,000 completed insurance applications | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452537/Administration-sources-Obamacare-website-received-just-51-000-completed-insurance-applications.html)

Just 51,000 people completed Obamacare applications during its first week, according to MailOnline, The target for the 6 month open enrollment period is 7 million for the program to be financially feasible. At this rate, they will come up 5 million short.
Administration sources: Obamacare website received just 51,000 completed insurance applications | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452537/Administration-sources-Obamacare-website-received-just-51-000-completed-insurance-applications.html)

Getting short of material Tom you reported this in another thread, how does it relate to the IRS scandal

getting short of material Tom you reported this in another thread, how does it relate to the IRS scandal

The IRS are in control of part of Obamacare. They are the ones that will be giving out fines (oops I mean taxes) and monitoring the healthcare people receive.

Not that anyone cares...

Kimberley Strassel: All the President's IRS Agents - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303801304579409420120090960?mod=WS J_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB1000 1424052702303801304579409420120090960.html%3Fmod%3 DWSJ_Opinion_LEADTop)

Hello Steve:
Not that anyone cares...I care. If my president is a crook, I want him IMPEACHED.. But, I'm not worried. The founders of this great nation of ours, in order to keep a check on the executive, gave congress oversight, and they weren't kidding. Apparently, you're trying to convince me they WERE kidding..

So, since YOU say the president is acting ILLEGALLY, and the Republican lead House Judiciary Committee does NOTHING about it, I'm left with the thought that there's NOTHING to do anything about. So, they run their mouths instead...

Particularly, if Issa BELIEVED that Lois Lerner can reveal the SMOKING GUN that Obama IS targeting his political enemy's, all he has to do is give her immunity... Then she'd be COMPELLED to tell what she knows..

WHY doesn't Issa do that? Why does he flap his gums instead? Why do you?

excon

Obviously you agent curious as to what she's hiding or that the IRS is still being used to silence the regime's enemies.

LOL, Speech, that's quit the joke, silencing the NOISE on the right! NOBODY can stop you guys from hollering! NOBODY! You guys sure don't let the facts stop you!

Hello again, Steve:

Obviously you agent curious as to what she's hiding or that the IRS is still being used to silence the regime's enemies.That's exactly the WRONG conclusion about what I said...

So, lemme try again... IF my president is a CROOK, I want him impeached. You THINK that I'm being facetious. Apparently, you think I'm FINE when a Democrat violates the law, but I'd only go after a Republican... Uhhh, uh, uh... After ALL these years, you STILL don't know what I'm about... But, that's NOT who I am. Lemme say this one more time.. If my president is a crook, I want him impeached..

But, I don't THINK he is a crook, because the COPS on the BEAT (Daryl Issa) are giving him a pass. That tells me ONE thing. That there's NOTHING to bust him over...

Apparently, YOU think it means something else... Oh, I've heard it before... Issa can't do anything because HOLDER won't appoint a special prosecutor... BS! Issa can't do anything because he doesn't know what she's going to say. (???) BS!!! Issa can't do anything because the Democrat controlled senate won't follow suit... BS! Issa can't do it because the Republicans don't want Joe Biden... BS! It's ALL pure BS!

So, let's go back to the top.. I DO want to know what Lois Lerner knows. To think I don't, is tantamount to accusing me of treason... Other than HATING my country, WHY wouldn't I want to know if my president is a crook???

Well, let me tell you again. As a tax paying American, I WANT TO KNOW IF MY PRESIDENT IS A CROOK... The PERSON who is in charge of the committee, who IS my protection against crooked presidents, does NOTHING. That would be NOTHING... Why aren't you yelling at HIM??? He's the one who doesn't want to know what Lois Lerner knows....

Over to you, winger.

excon

Treason? That's quite a stretch. Too partisan to be bothered by this, probably so. But if as this column said the IRS is holding conservative groups - or any other - hostage to "deals" outside the purview of the law that limits their rights unlike other groups, and I have no doubt they are, that should bother you as an American. It is a rogue agency and Dems won't be in power forever.

as far as I'm concerned ,Lerner should've been charged with contempt when she started to make a statement ,effectively waiving her 5th Amendment protection ,before she plead the 5th .If it were me ,I'd haul her back in ;pepper her with questions while she repeatedly pleas the 5th ,before finding her in contempt of Congress. Btw ,that's exactly what is going to happen. Then what will happen ? A criminal contempt charge requires the cooperation of the Justice Dept ....no ? Yes it does. So to say BS because we claim Holder has to do his job is BS itself. Did the Justice Dept persue charges of contempt against Holder ? No . Anyway ;the next best thing would be a civil contempt case. And that would happen in a court system where Harry Reid pulled the nuclear option so the emperor could get his judges appointed (especially Justice Patricia Millett to the DC circus) .

Looks like Lerner wants to avoid contempt charges.

Issa: Former IRS official Lerner will testify - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2014/03/issa-former-irs-official-lerner-will-testify-184278.html?hp=r6)

Hello again,

Then I PROMISE you - absolutely PROMISE that she won't divulge any smoking gun. But, will that STOP you from flapping your gums? Nahhh.

excon

PS> By the way, it's NOT contempt charges she's avoiding. I know that because your crack investigator, Daryl Issa DIDN'T file any.

Hey , I'm just reporting what I heard on the news, that part of it is to avoid contempt of Congress charges. Let the testimony begin.

Issa said that Contempt charges are on the table if Lerner doesn't cooperate. GOP revives focus on Lois Lerner - Rachael Bade and John Bresnahan - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/lois-lerner-irs-contempt-republicans-104019.html) If she doesn't reveal a smoking gun that's because she's falling on her sword.

Give her immunity and get your smoking gun. You aren't saying she gets in big trouble if she doesn't make one up are you?

Why give her immunity ? She MAY be the biggest fish ... I doubt it ;but it is possible. The point is that she directed the operation in the IRS .Why let her off the hook ?

Hello again, tom:
Why give her immunity ? She MAY be the biggest fishShe may NOT be either. I thought you were after bigger fish. If SHE'S the biggest fish you can get, that means there's NO scandal. NONE. ZIPPO. NARY A ONE...

Oh, there's bad bureaucrats. But, who's surprised at that?

excon

I'm after the truth ,but not at the expense of letting the bad actors off the hook.

The only reason the TP groups are getting their status restored is because the IRS is running scared over what is going to happen when the truth is revealed. It's too late for the 2012 elections ...the damage is already done... the emperor's regime restored.
But ,the nation cannot allow such extensive abuse of powers to go unpunished. If it was your side that was the victim ,you'd be howling about it and demanding the same extensive investigation we are.

Hello again, tom:

If it was your side that was the victim ,you'd be howling about itSIDE??? I'm a taxpayer... THAT'S who's side I'm on.

I'm a businessman. I'm ALSO a politically active liberal. I've been audited MANY times over the years. It started under Republican H.W. Bush. I asked them WHY I was being audited. They didn't tell me. I suppose I COULD say I was a victim - that I was targeted... But, I'm not into fantasy.

What you wingers are calling "targeting", is the IRS simply auditing tax returns, which is what it does. Lois Lerner will say NOTHING other than that.

excon

no it isn't ;it is denying them due process by denying them certification just because they have a different political position than the emperor. As a business man you could still conduct your business ...right ? These groups were denied their right to conduct their business .

Hello again, tom:

These groups were denied their right to conduct their business .Nahhh... They were audited.. When the audit was complete, and they proved what they were claiming, they were given their exemption.. In fact, the only group to be DENIED its tax exemption, was a LIBERAL group (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/15/1209257/-Liberal-groups-received-same-IRS-letter-that-ignited-Tea-Party-nbsp-outrage).

excon

Not only are they still not allowing these groups to conduct "business," they've formalized the abuse (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303801304579409420120090960?mod=WS J_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB1000 1424052702303801304579409420120090960.html%3Fmod%3 DWSJ_Opinion_LEADTop) as I noted before.


About a month after the IRS inspector general released his bombshell report about IRS targeting of conservative groups last May, Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel unveiled a "plan of action" for correcting the mess. One highlight was that targeted groups would be offered a new optional "expedited" process for getting 501(c)(4) status.


The deal, which received little public attention, boiled down to this: We'll do our job, the IRS said, if you give up your rights. Those taking part in the "expedited" process had to agree to limit to 40% the amount of spending and time (calculated by employee and volunteers hours) they spend on political activity. Current 501(c)(4) rules allow political spending up to 49%, and have no "time" component. The clear point of the "deal" was to use the lure of 501(c)(4) approval to significantly reduce the political activity of targeted conservative groups going forward.



Where is their authority hold people hostage to such "deals"?

Hello again, tom:
Nahhh... They were audited.. When the audit was complete, and they proved what they were claiming, they were given their exemption.. In fact, the only group to be DENIED its tax exemption, was a LIBERAL group (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/15/1209257/-Liberal-groups-received-same-IRS-letter-that-ignited-Tea-Party-nbsp-outrage).

excon

Oh yeah, they 'targeted' a whopping 3 liberal groups I believe while around 500 conservative groups were targeted (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/14/lawmakers-say-irs-targeted-dozens-more-conservative-groups-than-initially/), some of which STILL have not received an answer after even more scrutiny . And don't forget, this all began with Lerner apologizing for targeting conservatives so spare me the bullsh*t.

No it started with the money flooding the campaigns of politician which have been a problem a long time. No body wants to put their name on it either.

I'll give you a name . George Soros.

Hello again,

I dunno the FULL story, (I'm watching it now) but your crack investigator BLEW it once again.. Lois Lerner IS pleading the 5th. Who, other than your crack investigator, thought she wouldn't??

Then Issa and the Republicans walked out...

Watch this space...

excon

Yep, she did it again then Elijah Cummins blew a gasket and called Issa "un-American," which obviously is the liberal meme of the week. Obviously there isn't even a "smidgeon" of corruption involved.

Hello again, Steve:

Obviously there isn't even a "smidgeon" of corruption involved.Again, IF my president is corrupt, I want him IMPEACHED.

Look.. If you're NOT embarrassed by Issa, I'm embarrassed FOR you. This was SUPPOSED to be the big reveal.. IT was SUPPOSED to be Issa's BIG gotcha moment.. He SUPPOSEDLY KNEW that she was GOING to testify.. He SUPPOSEDLY was IN communication with her lawyer...

NONE of that happened.. Issa fell FLAT on his face....

IF there ever WAS a smidgeon of corruption involved, Issa BLEW his chance to find out. Now, we'll NEVER know if Obama is a crook or not.

Is that gonna STOP you from asserting he is???? Bwa, ha ha ha ha.

excon

Shame we took a year to arrive at the same place as we were. Wonder who pays for this waste of time?

Hello again, Steve:
Again, IF my president is corrupt, I want him IMPEACHED.

Look.. If you're NOT embarrassed by Issa, I'm embarrassed FOR you. This was SUPPOSED to be the big reveal.. IT was SUPPOSED to be Issa's BIG gotcha moment.. He SUPPOSEDLY KNEW that she was GOING to testify.. He SUPPOSEDLY was IN communication with her lawyer...

NONE of that happened.. Issa fell FLAT on his face....

IF there ever WAS a smidgeon of corruption involved, Issa BLEW his chance to find out. Now, we'll NEVER know if Obama is a crook or not.

Is that gonna STOP you from asserting he is???? Bwa, ha ha ha ha.

excon

Yes obviously you wanna know. I refer you back to this post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/irs-scandal-749229-68.html#post3625581) of tom's.

Well storming out of the hearing didn't get us closer to anything.

Storming out? The only one who didn't remain calm and in control was Cummins. It ain't over, this email from Lerner was tweeted by Greta today, "Tea Party Matter very dangerous":

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bh-SgQMCYAAzC6m.png:large

Obama takes a swipe at SCOTUS over Citizens United, the IRS ADMITTEDLY targeted TP groups "inappropriately" and then Lerner is warning about legal implications?

Nah, nothing remotely fishy here.

Hello again, Steve:

I refer you back to this post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/irs-scandal-749229-68.html#post3625581) of tom's.Yeah, I saw that post. I didn't comment on it then, or maybe I did. Nonetheless, the claim is patently WRONG. Even on a cursory view, it falls flat. Think about it.

The fact IS, you can claim your 5th amendment rights on a question by question basis. Otherwise you would have to refuse to give your name in case a question far down the line might incriminate you. You cannot be expected to predict what questions you might be asked, which might require you to claim the fifth.

excon

Dershowitz: IRS official Lerner 'can be held in contempt' of Congress | TheHill (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/301557-dershowitz-irs-chief-lerner-can-be-held-in-contempt-of-congress)

Hello again, tom:

I did NOT say she couldn't be held in contempt. I simply said that opening your mouth ONCE does NOT mean you waived your 5th Amendment rights...

IF she's held in contempt, the issue will swirl around whether making an opening statement is "shutting off the spigot". Issa will LOSE again. You simply CANNOT be compelled to be a witness against yourself. Nothing could be clearer. Does it bother me that Dershowitz disagrees with me? Nahhh.

Look... I dunno WHAT'S so damn important about making SURE Lois Lerner goes to the slam... REALLY... You're DOING this to get to Obama, aren't you??? NOBODY wants Lois Lerner... You want the BIG cheese. How come Issa WON'T give her immunity??? HOW COME???

excon

Here's my issue . I have a major problem with using the regulatory and enforcement branches of goverment to stifle political opposition. You should be outraged too .

Hello again, tom:

I have a major problem with using the regulatory and enforcement branches of goverment to stifle political opposition.You should be outraged too .I AM. But, Lois Lerner HAS NO political opposition. She's a bureaucrat. IF the president ORDERED her to do it, like you're suggesting, I'd want to KNOW. But, until there's a smoking gun, I DON'T know. You DON'T either. Until I DO, I refrain from flapping my gums about it. You guys? Not so much.

excon

Your argument is flawed, we're not flapping our gums about getting to Obama - you are. We're "flapping our gums" about a federal agency abusing its power to silence one side. They are STILL doing so as I pointed out the other day. I want it stopped, and I would want it stopped if the shoe were on the other foot. You, not so much apparently.

Hello again, Steve:
They are STILL doing so as I pointed out the other day.

In this great nation of ours, we have this thing called CHECKS and BALANCES... It's REAL important stuff. EVERY American is invested in it. Without it, we turn into a DICTATORSHIP... UNFORTUNATELY, that power is vested into the Republican House of Representatives, and falls to the House Oversight Committee, chaired by Republican Daryl Issa...

If that ONE guy is a DUFUS, we ALL lose. And, he's a dufus of the highest order.

So, I ask you, Steve, if they're STILL doing it, where is the COP on the BEAT???? Why isn't HE stopping it? Don't TELL me he needs Obama's permission, or Eric Holder won't act right, so the IRS can get away with anything...

Nahhh... ISSA is the COP on the BEAT, and if the IRS is doing stuff, HE'S the guy who's letting 'em.

So, let me say this again, for the 1,000th time. If my president is a CROOK, I want him OUT OF THERE. If the IRS is DOING what you say they're DOING, I want them OUT OF THERE.

Why is Issa letting 'em get away with it????

excon

Hello again,

Since the blowup yesterday, and my BLASTING Issa, I've heard NOTHING from our resident right wingers... Is it because I'm SOOO off base that you can't find the words? Or, is it because I'm right on, and you, like me, feel cheated by the committee??

excon

I want Issa to get tougher, but I'm willing to wait a bit and see what happens. I know there's a problem, Lerner ADMITTED and apologized for it and I know the IRS is STILL doing it. Do you want it stopped, or is all you and Cummins worried about is does it go to the president?

Or like Debbie the liar do you believe it's SETTLED and Lerner LOST her job (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/03/05/wasserman_schultz_on_irs_scandal_gop_trying_to_pol iticize_a_settled_matter.html) over it? Lerner RETIRED and not one person has been held to account.

I think Issa isn't getting tougher because Speaker Bonehead won't give him the marching orders to do so (He likes the fact that the TP was targetted too).
But why doesn't the emperor announce publically that he will not tolerate a cover-up of the scandal like Reagan did during Iran-Contra ? Why doesn't he insist that he will not tolerate anyone obstructing the Congressional and FBI investigation like GW Bush did during Plamegate ? Why doesn't he tell Louis Lerner that she should NOT take the 5th to cover for anyone other than herself. Why doesn't the adm release the documents that House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp has requested ? Why doesn't the emperor direct his White House to cooperate ? If it was just "boneheaded decisions " without a "smidgeon of corruption " as the emperor contends ;then why does his adm stonewall ? Why did Lerner plea the 5th twice (the 2nd time after assuring Issa that she would testify) . I'd NEVER give her immunity after yesterday's stunt. There is no way that anyone above her would be held responsible . All she'd have to say is ;'yeah it was my idea ....I thought of the plan and directed it myself.' No one believes that. Come to think of it ;her silence is more reminiscences of the Mafia omerta as they took the 5th during Congressional investigations .

Why, Why, Why, Obama? you sound like Tom Jones, Why Why Why Obama?

Meanwhile...

Cynical Dems kill bill prohibiting IRS political favoritism - Liberty Unyielding (http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/03/06/cynical-dems-kill-bill-prohibiting-irs-political-favoritism/)

Chairman Darrell Issa has released seven questions Lerner has refused to answer.

1. In October 2010, Lerner told a Duke University group: “The Supreme Court dealt a huge blow, overturning a 100-year-old precedent that basically corporations couldn't give directly to political campaigns. And everyone is up in arms because they don't like it. The Federal Election Commission can't do anything about it. They want the IRS to fix the problem.”

Who exactly wanted the IRS to “fix the problem” caused by Citizens United?

2. In February 2011, Lerner e-mailed her colleagues in the IRS: “Tea Party Matter very dangerous. This could be the vehicle to go to court on the issue of whether Citizens United overturning the ban on corporate spending applies to tax-exempt rules. Counsel and Judy Kindell need to be in on this one please. Cincy should probably NOT have these cases.”


Why did Lerner think the Tea Party cases were “very dangerous”?

3. In September 2010, Lerner e-mailed subordinates about initiating a “c4 project,” but wrote: “we need to be cautious so it isn't a per se political project.”

Why was Lerner worried about this being perceived as a political project?

4. Michael Seto, manager of EO Technical in Washington, testified that you ordered Tea Party cases to undergo a “multi-tier review.” He testified: “[Lerner] sent me email saying that when these cases need to go through multi-tier review and they will eventually have to go to Miss Kindell and the chief counsel's office.”

Why did Lerner order the Tea Party cases to undergo a “multi-tier review”?

5. In June 2011, Lerner requested that Holly Paz obtain a copy of the tax-exempt application filed by Crossroads GPS so that her senior technical advisor, Judy Kindell, could review it and summarize the issues for Lerner.

Why did Lerner want to have the Crossroads GPS application?

6. In June 2012, Lerner was part of an e-mail exchange about writing new regulations on political speech for 501(c)(4) groups “off-plan” in 2013.

Doesn't this “off-plan” effort from 2012 contradict Administration assertions that new regulations were written in response to the 2013 TIGTA report?

7. In February 2014, President Obama stated that there was not a “smidgeon of corruption” in the IRS targeting.

If this is true, why do House Democrats believe that Lois Lerner has a well-founded fear of criminal prosecution that allows her to claim the Fifth Amendment in refusing to testify?

Maybe we could have gotten closer to the answers if Issa had allowed questions from somebody other than himself.

Maybe if she spends some time sitting in a jail cell we'll get those answers too.

Maybe we could have gotten closer to the answers if Issa had allowed questions from somebody other than himself.

So she would have unplead the 5th for Cummings?

Maybe we could have gotten closer to the answers if Issa had allowed questions from somebody other than himself.
Why ? You think that she suddenly would've waived the 5th ? I don't think so. Cummings didn't want to ask questions .He wanted to pontificate ....and in a way ,he succeeded in deflecting the compliant media's attention to the " injustice " of having his mike shut off .

That's Issa's story straight from Fox and his interviews. You can be partisan in your thinking but to say he can censor his own committee is against the rules of procedure in the house and deplorable. By rule once he was recognized Cummings had 5 minutes to state his question his way. Everyone on the committee has, even fellow republican members.

It's a committee hearing not a show for one member. I mean Issa took his turn didn't he?

Barney Brings Down the Gavel - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MszfkyOl8w)

At least Barney Frank takes time to explain why the dumb questions are rejected, unlike the blatant attempts at censorship by Issa.

well when Cummings has the gavel ,he can bang it . Isn't that what you always tell us .It's all about the raw power of having the majority ? Cummings had nothing to contribute except to assist in the stonewall. In a way he succeeded because all the compliant press (the 5th column .... oops I mean the 4th estate which has been asleep at the wheel for the last 5 years ) has reported is about the poor "racist " treatment of Cummings .

well when Cummings has the gavel ,he can bang it . Isn't that what you always tell us .It's all about the raw power of having the majority ? Cummings had nothing to contribute except to assist in the stonewall. In a way he succeeded because all the compliant press (the 5th column .... oops I mean the 4th estate which has been asleep at the wheel for the last 5 years ) has reported is about the poor "racist " treatment of Cummings .

Rep. Cummings got the twofer when Rep. Issa recognized him. He either got to pontificate for 5 minutes, abusing the rules, or he got to distract from Lerner not answering again by arranging to be treated the way Waxman treated Issa.

yeah forgot about that ..the time Waxman threatened to have Issa physically removed from a hearing .

So Issa has been a boob for a long time huh?

So Issa has been a boob for a long time huh?

Deflecting from your own point. Issa didn't have the right to speak while the hearing was open but Cummings did after adjournment? That's some warped logic.

Issa spoke his peace, and adjourned, denying anyone else from speaking. Further the transcripts of the house investigations in their totality, not misleading snippets or excerpts have been long released and paint Issa as a partisan hack as an investigator.

Issa: GOP-led IRS targeting probe may be at 'dead end' - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/politics/irs-political-war/index.html)


To Cummings, the issue involved allowing Democrats on the panel to have a say.
"We were basically shut out completely," he told reporters, criticizing Issa and Republicans for repeatedly distorting the panel's findings through "cherry picking information, of sending just a few lines from various transcripts."


http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pdf

At the heart of the controversy, is the law which is different from the adopted regulation but the law clearly trumps the regulation which was never codified by the congress. There is the law so show me were any group applying for such status can with hold the identity of private funding or engage in state local or federal politics, or be investigated by the IRS.

I know you aren't much for reading but the extra data is important to understand the investigation into any corporate tax shelter, and makes conservatives claim of being victims utter NONSENSE.

IRS Political Bias Hearing - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/irs-political-bias-hearing-2013-6)


To qualify for tax exempt status such groups have to show they are not directly backing a political candidate but they are allowed to campaign on general "civic issues".
However a further 226 other political groups were also placed in the same review whose affiliations were not immediately apparent from their name alone, which is often the case among liberal campaign groups. It remains unknown how many of these were in fact Democrat-leaning groups, partly because individual names cannot be publicly released under IRS confidentiality laws.
The IRS did reveal there had been an explosion in groups of all political persuasion seeking to qualify for this type of tax exemption after a relaxation in campaign finance rules meant this would also allow them to keep the identity of their donors secret. In total 3,357 applications were made in 2012 compared with 1,735 in 2010 before the law changed.

Issa spoke his peace, and adjourned, denying anyone else from speaking. Further the transcripts of the house investigations in their totality, not misleading snippets or excerpts have been long released and paint Issa as a partisan hack as an investigator.

Issa: GOP-led IRS targeting probe may be at 'dead end' - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/politics/irs-political-war/index.html)


The chairmen runs the show, the only witness refused to testify, what possible question would Cummings need to ask? It's adjourned, get over it.


[I know you aren't much for reading but the extra data is important to understand the investigation into any corporate tax shelter, and makes conservatives claim of being victims utter NONSENSE.

No, at the heart of the controversy is an admission of wrongdoing, unfairly targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny and holding their approvals hostage to arbitrary agreements such as swearing "under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood. And they're STILL doing it. The IRS is NOT a political tool of the White House.

Hello again, Steve:

No, at the heart of the controversy is an admission of wrongdoing,Nahhh... It WAS. Now, it's the INCOMPETENCE of the committee to find out what that wrongdoing was, OR to STOP it from happening.. That's THEIR job, and they FAILED. It's NOT Cummings fault... Your crack investigator is a BUST.

IF my president is a crook, we'll NEVER know.

excon

The victim card doesn't seem to be working out for you guys.

No, you don't get to change the story.

My version has always been different from yours. I take it you haven't found your version in the written law in the provided link.

My version has always been different from yours. I take it you haven't found your version in the written law in the provided link.

My version is the facts.

now we know why Elijah Cummings was so anxious to wrap up the IRS hearings and to declare "move on ...nothing there " . Turns out he was up to his eyeballs in involvement ,and may have been the prime mover behind the scenes .

New IRS emails released by a Congressional committee investigating the scandal reveal that Cummings was working in close coordination with the IRS to target conservative groups ... especially one named 'True the Vote ' .

Cummings asked 3 times that the House Oversight Committee investigate 'True the Vote ' ,and evidently had his staff make similar requests for the IRS tax-exempt division ,headed by Louis Lerner ,to do their own investigation.He specifically requested "copies of all training materials used for volunteers, affiliates or other entities" .
Less than a week later ,the group received from the IRS a requests that were almost identical to the requests from Cummings staff ,for "a copy of their volunteer registration form," "the process you use to assign volunteers," "how you keep your volunteers in teams" and "how your volunteers are deployed ... following the training they receive by you."
The emails show that Lerner became personally involved in gathering this information for Cummings . The group later received visits from the IRS and other government agencied like ATF . One of Lerner's deputies, Holly Paz, forwarded the organization's 990 forms to Cummings and his staff .
http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/FN-31.pdf
Wednesday ,Committee Chair Darell Issa and 5 other committee members sent Cummings a letter accusing him of “surreptitiously” contacting the IRS to request information about True the Vote.

Although you have previously denied that your staff made inquiries to the IRS about conservative organization True the Vote that may have led to additional agency scrutiny, communication records between your staff and IRS officials – which you did not disclose to Majority Members or staff – indicates otherwise,” ...“As the Committee is scheduled to consider a resolution holding Ms. Lerner, a participant in responding to your communications that you failed to disclose, in contempt of Congress, you have an obligation to fully explain your staff's undisclosed contacts with the IRS.

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014-04-09-OGR-Chairmen-to-EEC-True-the-Vote.pdf

Yesterday ,the Committee held Lerner in contempt of Congress.... (about time) . Here I thought that Cummings grandstanding at the hearings was in order to shield Lerner and the White House. Could it be that his reason was to end the investigation before it reached him ?

update ..... remember those 18 min gaps in the Nixon tapes ? Well the IRS now claims they "lost " Lois Lerners emails for the period between January 2009 – April 2011. That's over 2 years !!!! . But not all of them mind you . They managed to retrieve the inter-agency emails . Then only ones "lost " are the ones from Lerner and outside agencies or groups, such as the White House, Treasury, Department of Justice, FEC, or Democrat offices. You know ,the ones that prove she coordinated her persecution of the TP and religious groups with the White House and Democrat Senators .
Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said he was stunned that it took more than a year into the investigation for the IRS to inform Congress that it didn't have those emails. Why is he surprised ? He is in over his head . Speaker Bonehead a long time ago should've appointed a select investigative committee staffed with former prosecutors .

It took them over a year to find and erase all traces of them on the servers and backups... all those things they are legally required to keep under the law..

wouldn't a good forensic investigation retrieve them if Congress had the hard drive impounded ?

Not simply a drive... but archival backups which could be tape, optical or a few other formats. (archival backups wouldn't be on a hard drive that could faill electronically).. in theory... it could be determined if they were altered via forensics. However there are tricks that can be employed by someone determined to alter them and knows what all the look for that can alter timestamps and everything.. basically recreating the backups minus the important emails. Done by someone who really knows what they are doing and has the time dedicated to do it on a stand alone server set up using the desired date and time not the real one. That alters the timestamps on the actual saved files to appear believable and in order with the email dates..

But knowing the quality of the people in the rest of the administration... I don't think they have anyone that could do it that's willing to go to jail for the cause. Altering those backups would be a felony. But you really can't discount the level a true beliver would stoop to.


Remember how long it took t before they produced a birth certificate... and they still came up with a document number and form that hadn't even bee issued yet the year he was born. And the fight and name calling to prevent its authenticity from being scrutenized by an unbiased third party?

It was all a stall tactic. If they had handed them right over immediately... nobody could claim it was plausible they were altered.

Wy dont we just ask the NSA. They have all the emails. ANd yes it is possible to rebuild whats "lost" if you know what to look for and how to unstack it. Plus it is no easy to alter in untracable fashion a video jukebox.

As Rep. Stockman put it so cleverly, "Barack Obama has brought us Jimmy Carter's economy and Richard Nixon's excuses." He then went on to ask the NSA for the metadata on the email account.

The NSA ? There's a chance they would cooperate . The Holder Justice Dept is another issue. Had they been doing their job we would already have all the answers .

THey are "Claiming" they were lost in a "Server Crash" what a steaming mountain (not simple a pile) of bovine excrement. These are from 2 years ago and they have been dragging their feet for the last year of it.

THose are backed up... and they are backed up frequently. I would think they are backed up daily if not in real time. Backups are there in case the server DOES crash... thats WHY backups exist. Despeite the fact legally they are REQUIRED to keep these emails in case they need to be accessed for reasons such as those why they are needed now.

Everyone up the ladder is spewing lies... and anyone who knows anything about IT even if they don't know the law in this instance... knows any size business that's not totally inept... backs up everything. Backups after they are taken are NEVER kept online, EVER, so they are availible if and when needed. And won't be lost in a catasrophic failure.

Watch to see how many idiots actually believe that story (lie actually) in the coming days, weeks and months.

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen testified in March that the e-mails were not immediately available because they were safely stored offline. Was he lying then or is the IRS lying now ?

THe IRS is lying... backups ARE physically stored offline in a building separate from the servers, often not even in the same city or state. In case of a severe fire, earthquake or act of terrorism. Usually in the case of government stuff.....in underground storage locations, in MD between Frederick and the PA state line....I know what town they have most of them, just not exactly where that I could drive up to them (but I do know to within several geographic miles). I don't remember where I came upon this information so I'm being intentionally vague.

ah secret stuff about more secret stuff about more secret stuff, it's no wonder you guys take so long to do anything

No... that standard practice for any corporation too. And the Government is actually legally Required to keep them...

Yes offsighting backups is normal but putting them all in one site is stupid and someone not being able to say where they are or how he comes to know where they are is just plain dumb. All this secret stuff is giving me a headache, I need more coffee

Obama Administration's Claim that Lois Lerner's Emails Are “Lost” Is Ludicrous

Obama Administration's Claim that Lois Lerner's Emails Are “Lost” Is Ludicrous | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/06/obama-administrations-claim-that-lois-lerners-emails-are-lost-is-ludicrous.php)#!

That article describes an IMAP environment. Lerner could have had the equally popular POP3 setup where the emails do leave the server and live on the suer's computer. The article omits that distinction, I'm not sure why. But typically an organization does indeed have backup files, the only variable is how long they need to save them (how far back) for compliance and disaster recovery/business continuity.

ya ya ya ya

IMAP, pop3 or whatever, there's no way her emails were lost unless it was intentional. They exist somewhere, it's time to stop stalling or time to waterboard someone. This is pure bullsh*t.

IMAP, pop3 or whatever,Stupid facts and education, they get in the way don't they when you want to emotionally stir things up.

Its also a crime to use other forms of unofficial email to conduct government business or to AVOID being accountable. So its impossible that their email was configured in such a way the communications were not on a server and not backed up and archived... as is legally required in case of a criminal investigation as this is.

Yes email can be configured in other ways where it isn't... but this is one of those cases where legally its PROHIBITED from being set up in order to avoid electronic records being made or kept.


Democrats are known for being lawbreakers and constantly in contempt... Hillary with filegate, Eric Holder with different situations... Obama with Benghazi, the IRS and got knows how many others... somehow they feel the Law doesn't apply to them.

Sure a server could crash... but servers are always backed up... and in this case is LEGALLY required to be backed up... and those backups are offline and can't crash. They aren't even kept on-site...

does circularity ever end or is it destined to go around and around forever?

Let those crack scandal investigators find their own evidence to match their assumptions.

THey already have the proof of wrongdoing... the records were subpeoned... and surprise surprise... only these ones that were asked for were somehow missing. That in itself is a crime... they couldn't have accidentally been deleted... the system is designed to prevent "accidents".

THey are hiding them refusing to turn them over, or they broke the law by deleting them to cover up a crime... either case is crime people can and should go to prison over.

If there was no crime...then way are all of ONLY the suspected peoples emails missing.....not everyone elses.....backups aren't made person by person, they are of everyone mapped to a specific server.