And some still amazingly call themselves "grassroots" organizations, i.e. MoveOn & Organizing For America - while these true grassroots movements get the jackboot from the feds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
|
And some still amazingly call themselves "grassroots" organizations, i.e. MoveOn & Organizing For America - while these true grassroots movements get the jackboot from the feds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
How do you tell the true grassroots Tparty from the ones subverted by corporate donors for elections? You know how Army did? Are you saying all those groups with TPARTY as a name are unaffiliated?
They all look alike to me.
This was no misinterpretation of tax law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The fact is the IRS ONLY targeted small groups as I said before. They don't all look alike to the jackbooted thugs at Gestapo central.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Getting back on track again, I repeat, "this is about a jackbooted government agency violating our trust, our rights in targeting political enemies. Not only that but they avoided the power players that can afford to defend themselves, which would have exposed this conspiracy - they used the full force of the U.S. government to harass and intimidate the little guys for daring to be concerned about the direction the country was headed and covered it up until after the election.
This is as clearcut an example of betrayal by our government as it gets, it cannot be excused and shame on anyone that tries."
I use "misintepretation" very loosely. "Exclusively" was changed to "primarily." Why hasn't anyone complained before now?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Why complain WG when the goal is hide the money?
I have no idea what you're talking about and I'm not interested in diversions, there is nothing unclear about this other than how high did it go?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Quote:
I repeat, "this is about a jackbooted government agency violating our trust, our rights in targeting political enemies. Not only that but they avoided the power players that can afford to defend themselves, which would have exposed this conspiracy - they used the full force of the U.S. government to harass and intimidate the little guys for daring to be concerned about the direction the country was headed and covered it up until after the election.
This is as clearcut an example of betrayal by our government as it gets, it cannot be excused and shame on anyone that tries."
So you don't care that the wording of the tax code has been slyly changed to allow a broader interpretation of what a tax-deductible charity is?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Again, I have no idea what you're talking about. If you want to discuss your wording thingy feel free to start a new thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Quote:
"this is about a jackbooted government agency violating our trust, our rights in targeting political enemies. Not only that but they avoided the power players that can afford to defend themselves, which would have exposed this conspiracy - they used the full force of the U.S. government to harass and intimidate the little guys for daring to be concerned about the direction the country was headed and covered it up until after the election.
This is as clearcut an example of betrayal by our government as it gets, it cannot be excused and shame on anyone that tries."
The Washington Examiner is reporting that the lower level IRS employees in Cincinnati are now leaking in self-defense. “Everything comes from the top.” No kidding . The Obots won't get away with this blame the low level op this time.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/anonym...rticle/2530001
Actually, Tea Party Groups Gave the IRS Lots of Good Reasons to Be Interested | Mother Jones
Quote:
In 2010, an ethics complaint and lawsuit against King Street Patriots alleged illegal political activity, and last year a Texas judge agreed, ruling that the organization was not a nonprofit but in fact was operating like a political action committee and illegally helping the GOP.
I could go on but the article speaks for itself and that's obvious the TParty bears a closer scrutiny when it comes to tax dollars. The big groups have lawyers, the smaller grassroots one do NOT and appear to have a problem navigating the system.Quote:
More than one aspect of TheTeaParty.net/STI's forays into politics might have triggered a closer look from the IRS. Its founders initially set up the group as both a 501(c)(4) and a political action committee that it registered with the FEC—as a single entity. That was a clear violation of the non-profit rules on political activity, as Backer himself acknowledged to me. (The group eventually shut down the PAC.) In 2012, when the group sought to create a "leadership fund" in hopes of collecting unlimited campaign contributions, it ran afoul of federal campaign finance rules; it ended up suing the FEC, arguing that the agency should be prevented from enforcing those laws against it (and it lost).
They lose in court too, when they sue. What does that tell you?
Huh? So you're against equal protection and for jackbooted thuggery by our government? You're defending the big money groups and dismissing the little guy's concerns? What?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Why does the IRS' ADMITTED betrayal of the American people not pi$$ you off? There are no excuses, no justifications for this Tal. None.
I can't believe this ! Even the Emperor claims to be outraged at this .
Coincidence ? According to White House visitor logs ;the head of the IRS employees Union ;the National Treasury Employees Union(NTEU)Colleen Kelley, visited the White House at 12:30pm on March 31,2010.
Now according to the IG report of the IRS one day later ,on April 1 - 2 ,2010 'The new Acting Manager, Technical Unit, suggested the need for a Sensitive Case Report on the Tea Party cases. The Determinations Unit Program Manager Agreed'.
The NTEU PAC endorsed President Obama in both 2008 and 2012, and gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 2010 and 2012 election cycles to anti-Tea Party candidates.
Coincidence? Uh, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
They say the official reason for the visit was unrelated . But that doesn't mean unofficial marching orders weren't exchanged.
The marching orders have a mysterious way of metastasizing to other agencies.
That would be the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality her business also received a visit from in 2012 based on an alleged complaint they couldn't provide details for. I doubt that was a coincidence either.Quote:
Over the weekend, True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht discussed with Huckabee how, after applying for tax-exempt status in 2010, she’s had 17 different interactions with several different federal agencies, including the FBI, IRS, OSHA, Commission on Environmental Quality, and the ATF.
IRS Official Lois Lerner to Take the Fifth - ABC NewsQuote:
Lois Lerner, the top IRS official who is at the center of the controversy for the targeting of tea party and other conservative groups, will refuse to answer questions at a congressional hearing Wednesday and invoke her Fifth Amendment rights, ABC News has learned.
She is set to appear before the House Oversight Committee. Congressional aides said today that they received a notice from Lerner’s lawyers that she would not answer their questions because it is now part of a criminal investigation.
That was inevitable given Speaker Bonehead asking who would go to jail over the scandal . But the truth will come out because the ops in the Cincinnati office are not going to take the fall for following instructions.
She wants to avoid embarrassment or burden? Wonder if she was ever concerned about the embarrassment or burden to the citizens that were being targeted?? Probably not . They were just these crazy people in funny tri-cornered hats.Quote:
“She has not committed any crime or made any misrepresentation, but under the circumstances she has no choice but to take this course,” according to a letter that her lawyer, William Taylor, sent to Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the committee, which was first reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Taylor asked that Lerner be granted a reprieve from appearing before the committee, saying it has “no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her.” A congressional aide told ABC News that she is still expected to appear Wednesday.
You just can't make this stuff up - the woman that gave concerned citizens an IRS rectal exam can't be burdened. By the way, did you know she has a history of doing the same thing at the FEC? Page 2 is quite interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
So you are saying she is someone's attack dogQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The best response to Lerner taking the fifth on Twitter:
@Popehat IRS Official to Reaffirm Importance of Constitutional Rights
Hello again,
Lest anyone think otherwise, I'm as pissed off at the IRS as anybody. The difference between me and my right wing friends is, I'm willing to let the evidence do its work.
All pleading the 5th will do is CONFIRM to the general public that criminal activity went on even if it didn't.. Or, maybe it did.
excon
Remember .she's not good at math. She counts the 5th ;but forgets the 1st .Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Anyone who testifies before congress about anything in this partisan atmosphere and has already been threatened with jail should plead the fifth, and have a lawyer on board. Guilty or not.
The simple fact that these things happened before the election, and the administration denies ANY knowledge, should turn on every warning light in the country as to the agenda of this administration. We have received nothing but lies since day one of this group of traitors, Osama Bin Laden dead and buried at sea? Bull stuff. I do not believe for one minute that this went down like they say. It was to boost Obama's ratings. The unemployment rate dropping like a lead weight from month to month when there still are no jobs, another lie. Benghazi, a lie, Fast And Furious, a lie. Nothing but lies yet the Democrats stand behind the carpetbagger day in and day out. It is no wonder that the United States has become the laughing stock of the World.
That's funny, it was just yesterday that I said this:Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Glad to see you're on board with that. The facts say that there was a directive from management, not just some rogue underlings taking it on themselves to stir up trouble. The facts say these low-level employees were thrown under the bus and they aren't going down quietly. In fact, one of them spoke to National Review on things already known from the IG's report which seem to have been overlooked by the media:Quote:
Dude, you never take advantage of opportunities? Yeah, you do, the difference between us is I don't make sh*t up, I follow the facts where they take me
What we don't know yet is exactly how high up this goes, but it goes to Washington and at the very least some Democrats have some culpability in this in the very public suggestions that these groups need scrutiny.Quote:
From the outset, Internal Revenue Service lawyers based in Washington, D.C. provided important guidance on the handling of tea-party groups’ applications for tax-exempt status, according to both IRS sources and the inspector general’s report released in mid May.
Officials in the Technical Unit of the IRS’s Rulings and Agreements office played an integral role in determining how the targeted applications were treated, provided general guidelines to Cincinnati case workers, briefed other agency employees on the status of the special cases, and reviewed all those intrusive requests demanding “more information” from tea-party groups. At times, the Technical Unit lawyers seemed to exercise tight control over these applications, creating both a backlog in application processing and frustration among Cincinnati agents waiting for direction.
An IRS employee who asked not to be identified tells National Review Online that all members of the agency’s Technical Unit are based in Washington, D.C. A current list of Technical Unit managers provided by another IRS employee shows that all such managers are based at the agency’s headquarters on Constitution Avenue in the District of Columbia, and the IRS confirmed, in a testy exchange with National Review Online, that the Technical Unit is “based in Washington.”
According to the IRS source, who is based in Cincinnati, complex cases are routinely elevated to the Technical Unit for guidance. Many of the questions that agents sent to groups most likely came “from Tax Law Specialists — lawyers — in D.C.,” the Cincinnati employee explains. “With tea-party cases, questions from the Tax Law Specialists were way too aggressive,” he says. The Washington Post described these lawyers as parsing “the murkier, more complex applications” — including those of tea-party groups.
This account comports with the one laid out in the inspector general’s report, although this aspect of the report has been neglected in much of the press coverage. On May 17, 2010, according to the IG report, Determinations Unit specialists in Cincinnati handling tea-party applications were instructed to “send additional information request letters to the Technical Unit for review prior to issuance.” Ten days later, the Technical Unit “began reviewing additional information request letters prepared by the Determinations Unit.”
The IG report indicates this became a source of frustration, and specialists in Cincinnati pressed for a streamlined approach. “Why does the Technical Unit need to review every additional information request letter when a template letter could be approved and used on all the cases?” they asked via e-mail. The Washington unit rejected this approach and, in February 2011, was developing individualized letters itself. According to the IG report, an update from the Technical Unit acting manager to the Determinations Unit manager indicated, “Letters were being developed and would be reviewed shortly.”
So, what exactly about this pi$$es you off, ex? Just curious.
So this is only a Republican thing, eh, the IRS' behavior doesn't bother Democrats?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, Steve:
That they targeted people for their politics, IF they did. By this lady taking the 5th, it looks more and more like they did.Quote:
So, what exactly about this pi$$es you off, ex?
After all these years, you should know that I support the rights of people I vehemently disagree with, simply because I fear if I don't, I'll be next. I don't like the Tea Party. But, if they're eligible for a tax deduction, then they're ELIGIBLE for a tax deduction...
This takes NOTHING away from my argument that the IRS should NEVER be put in the position of having to make these decisions in the first place. That's the fault of congress.
Excon
I can wait for what the investigation uncovers unlike repubs who have drawn their own conclusions and only want facts that lead to that conclusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I swear I posted this before and it's gone...Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
On the first part, fair enough. On the second part, that's another discussion.
I have a question though, does it bother you that the government machine was used to influence the election, or does just voter ID get under your skin?
Funny how so many lefties have a sudden fondness for waiting. Did you guys get something for that restless leg syndrome?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You will be happy to hear that Max Baucus and his Finance Committee are about to hold hearings on the IRS scandal. Evidently the outrage is bipartisan... except on this board. Even Harry Reid is on board.
So, the lady that wanted present and future member names and speech content, and the content of prayers of conservative groups who couldn't be burdened to answer a few questions did plead the fifth. Right after proclaiming her innocence and giving her side of the story. Well that was a ballsy move.
You got to give these IRS guys like Lerner and Miller credit, they're perfect for the job of being government a$$holes.Quote:
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa said embattled IRS official Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights and will be hauled back to appear before his panel again.
The California Republican said Lerner's Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination was voided when she gave an opening statement this morning denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.
Read more: IRS scandal hearing: Darrell Issa says Lois Lerner lost her rights - POLITICO.com
Issa let her off easy . She should've been grilled for hours and answer every unanswered question of her role in this 10 different ways with "I plead the 5th" . Hopefully he will correct that mistake when he hauls her back to testify... this time under oath. Maybe she and Steven Miller can plant some questions with the Dem members of the committee that she can actually answer .
Darrell Issa: Lois Lerner lost her rights - POLITICO.com Print ViewQuote:
Legal experts are questioning whether Lerner's Fifth Amendment protections dissolved once she began talking on Wednesday, as Issa argues.
“I don't think a brief introductory preface to her formal invocation of the privilege is a waiver,” said Stan Brand, who was the general counsel for the House of Representatives from 1976 to 1983 and works on ethics issues.
He said the bigger problem for Lerner may be that she has made herself available to Congress in the past.
“The more serious question is whether any of her earlier congressional appearances before other committees constituted a waiver,” Brand said. “That in turn may depend on whether any of those appearances were 'compelled' — that is, pursuant to a subpoena.”
He said the committee may ultimately pursue a contempt charge if Lerner continues to refuse to talk.
“Bottom line,” Brand said, “I think we will hear no more from Ms. Lerner” unless she is provided immunity.
Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the Oversight committee, said he didn't think Lerner waived her fifth amendment protections.
“I don't think her counsel would have allowed her to give a statement knowing that the very purpose of him being here — for her to assert her fifth amendment rights — would be damaged if she made a statement,” he told reporters.
Lerner's decision to speak at all immediately triggered a dust-up among lawmakers who were confused about whether she gave up her Fifth Amendment protections when she made the opening statement.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a former federal prosecutor, said Lerner lost her rights the minute she started proclaiming her innocence, and that lawmakers therefore were entitled to question her. Cummings — himself a former lawyer — said congressional hearing rules were not like those of a courtroom.
During the incident, Issa did not flat-out say whether Lerner had indeed waived her rights but instead tried to coax her into staying by offering to narrow the scope of questions.
By the afternoon, Issa was taking a harder stand.
“The precedents are clear that this is not something you can turn on and turn off,” he told POLITICO. “She made testimony after she was sworn in, asserted her innocence in a number of areas, even answered questions asserting that a document was true … So she gave partial testimony and then tried to revoke that.”
He said he was not expecting that.
“I understand from her counsel that there was a plan to assert her Fifth Amendment rights,” he continued. “She made a statement, so counsel let her effectively under the precedent, waive — so we now have someone who no longer has that ability.”
Hello again, Steve:
Uhhh, no she didn't.. You don't LOSE them. That's why they're called RIGHTS. At ANY time during questioning she can invoke the 5th..Quote:
Darrell Issa: Lois Lerner lost her rights - POLITICO.com Print View
You'd THINK that congressmen would KNOW the law wouldn't you?
Excon
Now why would you think that? After all you have to pass it to know what's in it? And even then they don't know what's in itQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
Again, I posted this once and it's gone.
Waive and lose are different words, Issa said waive, Politico said lose.
Hello again, Steve:
You don't LOSE your rights - EVER. That's why we call 'em RIGHTS! A congressional hearing is different than court.. In court, you don't have to take the stand... In a hearing, if you've been subpoenaed, you MUST appear, but you may invoke your 5th Amendment rights ANYTIME during questioning.. What you CAN'T do, is selectively answer questions. You can make ANY statement you like..
excon
Rights are rights stuffing about is a political exercise
Why are you hollering at me? I just posted the news and called it a ballsy move.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:22 PM. |