[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

join Republicans in holding him accountable. That's what I thought, none.

In MY world, the Constitutional one, we hold him accountable by congressional oversight. We DON'T do it by flapping our gums.

I'll be HAPPY to join Republicans if they'll just DO their jobs.. There's this chick, Lois Lerner.. If MY president ordered the IRS to target his enemy's, She KNOWS it. So, she's pleading the 5th Amendment... Now, the Republican you want me to JOIN, COULD offer her immunity to find out EXACTLY what she knows... But, he ISN'T. I have NO idea why.

Why, oh why, would I want to join in on such ineptitude??

excon

[speechlesstx]

So where is that Special Prosecutor?

[tomder55]

If the congress CANNOT do its job of oversight, why aren't you DOING anything about that??? If the president can DO whatever he wants, then we're TOAST. I just DON'T believe the founders were SOOOOO neglectful...

But, IF they were, where is the bill to FIX it? Where???

Oh they foresaw these days and gave us provisions in the Constitution for the days when the branches of the Federal Gvt did not do their duties . It's called the Article 5 State convention provision to amend the Constitution.

[tomder55]

Statement by House Ways and Means Chair Rep Dave Camp :

Over the past six months, this Committee has investigated the Internal Revenue Service's targeting of conservative groups. Though our investigation is not complete, and the IRS still has many more documents to provide to the Committee, we have discovered a concerted effort by the IRS to limit the ability of those targeted conservative groups to operate and engage in constitutionally protected public debate.

Some in Washington have tried to sweep this under the rug, calling the IRS targeting an attempt to “streamline determinations” that was based in “confusion” about the rules. That rhetoric does not match the reality of what this investigation has uncovered so far:

• Before February 2010, the IRS was processing and approving Tea Party cases within three months without Washington, DC intervention.
• Tea Party cases were flagged due to “media attention” in February 2010, not as a result of any confusion as to how to interpret 501(c)(4) law.

Additionally, we now know that the IRS targeted not only right-leaning applicants, but also right-leaning groups that were already operating as 501(c)(4)s. At Washington, DC's direction, dozens of groups operating as 501(c)(4)s were flagged for IRS surveillance, including monitoring of the groups' activities, websites and any other publicly available information. Of these groups, 83 percent were right-leaning. And of the groups the IRS selected for audit, 100 percent were right-leaning.

All of this provides context for today's markup, which is legislation we are considering that would stop the ability of the IRS and Treasury to legalize the targeting of conservative groups. On Black Friday, Treasury released proposed rules regarding 501(c)(4)s that would essentially remove conservative groups from the public square. The rationale of the IRS and Treasury was that the rules, which have been in place for more than 50 years, created “confusion.”

However, we learned that Treasury and the IRS had been working on these guidelines behind closed doors for years. According to interviews with IRS employees, as early as 2011, work started on new 501(c)(4) regulations. A June 2012 email between Treasury officials and then-IRS Director of Tax Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner revealed that these potential regulations were being discussed “off-plan” – meaning that the plans for the regulations were not to be published on the public schedule. Treasury's fabricated rationale for changing a 50-year old rule raises serious questions about the integrity of the rule-making process and counsels for putting a hold on the draft rules.

It is important to note that the Committee has made these discoveries without even having the full universe of documents requested from the IRS – including thousands of documents from Lois Lerner that have not yet been provided. Simply put, our investigation is not yet over, the document collection is not yet complete, and I don't believe the IRS or the FBI has interviewed a single victim. The notion that the Administration would rush forward with rules intended to remove these groups from the public forum, is simply unacceptable.

Under these proposed rules, activities such as candidate forums, get out the vote efforts, and voter registration would now be considered “political activity” for 501(c)(4) groups. It is notable to mention that these activities would not be considered political for 501(c)(3)s – who cannot engage in any political activity – or unions.

I have long made clear that this Committee will fight any and all efforts to restrict the rights of groups to organize, speak out and educate the public. The legislation before us today would prevent these rules from being implemented by this Administration for one year. This timeframe would allow Congress to finish our investigation and ensure that the agency processes what is already a record number of public comments – more than 23,000 so far – so that the IRS and Treasury can really get to the merits of why these rules were formed.

Groups should be treated fairly regardless of their political beliefs. The “STOP Targeting of Political Beliefs by the IRS Act” ensures that this Administration will not be allowed to discriminate against groups based on their politics

.http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/d...umentID=369556

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

The “STOP Targeting of Political Beliefs by the IRS Act” ensures that this Administration will not be allowed to discriminate against groups based on their politics

He was right up till he said that.

The IRS sucks. We ALL know that. But, WITHOUT a smoking gun, there's NO evidence whatsoever that the "administration", meaning Obama, had ANYTHING to do with it.

But, I'm on YOUR SIDE.. You wanted me to join a Republican.. You're elected.. In that thing you posted, I didn't see ANYTHING about them getting TOUGH about the things they want.. I just heard 'em SNIVELING that he's not getting it.

I'm SURE, the founders of this great country gave the congress MORE power than sniveling.. Tom said the only thing we can do about a ROGUE president, is to call a Constitutional convention...

Really?

excon

[tomder55]

EX , in both Nixon and Clintoon cases , the legislative branch was unified under the opposition party AND there was a special prosecutor appointed by the Executive Justice Dept. The only other time in history a POTUS was held accountable was when Andrew Johnson (who was a Dem ) defied majority Republican Congress over Reconstruction laws. Again ... both houses of Congress were firmly in the opposition. If you can show me the time when a split Congress held POTUS accountable for anything please do so .

[speechlesstx]

Look, an actual scandal in NJ involving a prominent National figure.

NJ comptroller alleges rampant corruption at Newark watershed, director pleads fifth | NJ.com

[tomder55]

quick update .... a Fed investigation has found no evidence the Christie knew anything about Bridgegate . You saw that in the news this week ;right ?

Didn't think so.

[talaniman]

I heard it Tom, but I also heard this,

NBC says it was wrong on Chris Christie report

NEWARK, N.J. — NBC says a report by Brian Williams on the network's Nightly News program that federal charges have been ruled out for Gov. Chris Christie in the George Washington Bridge scandal was incorrect.
Federal prosecutors say the investigation is ongoing and haven't made any announcement on Christie's status.
"The investigation is continuing,'' said Rebekah Carmichael, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Paul Fishman.

[paraclete]

What is this? A first, trial by media overturned

[tomder55]

the silence is deafening . But the investigators aint satisfied ...they are going to keep on probing until they can get a Scooter Libby type charge on someone. The next thing is to question his judgment in selecting staffers.
They want to keep the issue hanging now that candidates for President have begun their preliminary campaign appearances .

[talaniman]

Can't blame you guys for being mad that your want to be emperor is so harassed by us like our elected twice emperor has been harassed by you guy. I have always know you guys can holler loud, but can't stand being hollered at.

[tomder55]

I don't want Christie as Prez . Many better potential candidates than he .

[paraclete]

What a pity you don't decide who is and who isn't a candidate

[excon]

Hello again,

The question ISN'T, was he involved... The question IS, why didn't he know that his ENTIRE staff WAS involved??

excon

[paraclete]

So he's a dill point taken

[tomder55]

as I said ......"The next thing is to question his judgment in selecting staffers.
They want to keep the issue hanging now that candidates for President have begun their preliminary campaign appearances ."

Up until this week ,the investigation was if he was involved .

[talaniman]

That's what the investigation is still about Tom.

"The investigation is continuing,'' said Rebekah Carmichael, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Paul Fishman.

The problem is there is so much to investigate.

[tomder55]

of course they are not giving up . Plamegate was over early in the investigation too ( Asst .Sec State Richard Armitage admitted that he had leaked Plame's name by mistake ) . But Patrick Fitzgerald went on a witch hunt until he finally was able to entrap Scooter Libby ,a minor player in the story .
I expect the Dem prosecutors in this case will dig and dig and try to keep the story alive as long as Christie is a potential candidate .

[talaniman]

Or until someone goes to jail.