Patterico's Pontifications

6/2/2013

More Evidence that the IRS Targeting of Tea Party Groups Was Guided by D.C.

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:13 pm



Daily Mail:

Interviews with IRS employees have established that the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the Internal Revenue Service was engaged in targeting tea party groups and other conservative organizations for unfair levels of scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.

Rep. Darrel[l] lssa, chairman of powerful House Committee of Oversight and Government Reform, made that startling announcement on CNN Sunday morning.

‘As late as last week,’ he said, ‘the [Obama] administration was still trying to say the [IRS targeting scandal] was from a few rogue agents in Cincinnati, when in fact the indication is that they were directly being ordered from Washington.’

Issa also has called Jay Carney a “paid liar,” which sounds apt.

113 Responses to “More Evidence that the IRS Targeting of Tea Party Groups Was Guided by D.C.”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Holder leaves if and when he and Obama work out a deal. Holder knows Obama is dirty, IRS, Fast and Furious, Benghazi etc. If Obama (Bonnie) craps on Holder (Chinless Clyde), he finds himself impeached. Can’t happen. They will stall for some time, Holder will resign, later Obama will pardon him.

    Gus (694db4)

  3. It’s interesting to see that David Plouffe has decided to trot out a “Bush did it, too” defense regarding the IRS targeting.

    Regardless of whether that is true or not, how is that defense supposed to make it better?

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  4. In fairness to Jay, he would also lie for free. It’s not about the money.

    Gazzer (716db0)

  5. Regardless of whether that is true or not, how is that defense supposed to make it better?

    If Bush had done it too, then there would no scandal, it would just be politics as it is played. “Politics ain’t beanball”, I believe the saying goes. Unfair, perhaps; maybe even technically illegal, but if everyone has been doing it forever then it’s de facto legal no matter what the law says. Nobody can be expected to hobble themselves by obeying a law that everyone else is ignoring with impunity.

    The one flaw in that narrative is that it isn’t true. Bush didn’t do it, and even if he had wanted to he couldn’t. If he’d dared to try it, not only would the IRS workers have refused, but it would have been all over the papers instantly, and he’d’ve been facing a major scandal.

    Milhouse (3d0df0)

  6. I am thankful we have Congressman Issa around.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  7. Preposterous!
    Slanderous!
    Impeach Issa Now!

    (Assumed text of any Sheila Jackson Lee response)

    SteveG (794291)

  8. I am thankful we have Congressman Issa around.

    Some of our friends and allies on conservative blogs — including this one — will from time to time criticize Issa for being insufficiently conservative on this or that issue, but by and large I think Issa does a pretty solid job.

    JVW (23867e)

  9. That he does. Then again, so did Specter in similar circumstances, e.g. the Senate hearings into the Clinton/Gore fundraising scandals, and into the IRS abuses of that era — plus ça change, etc. That didn’t make him conservative, it just made him a zealous advocate for the team he was then on, which was ours.

    Milhouse (3d0df0)

  10. Issa did well under cross-examination by the neutral Ms. Crowley.

    Patricia (be0117)

  11. Convictions are needed for justice to prevail.
    When Issa convicts these hacks, I will give him proper praise.
    Until then, he is just another car salesman.

    mg (31009b)

  12. I can’t imagine. Say? Why don’t we review those WH records to make sure no IRS personnel contacted the WH an abnormal amount of time? That might lead somewhere.

    pat (83ebf3)

  13. On the bright side at least the administration hasn’t blamed this fiasco on a YouTube video.

    William Scalia (89a442)

  14. They keep saying Cincinnatti like the damage was limited to Ohio when more inmportantly its the regional multistate processing center located in Cincinnatti, one of I believe 5 in the whole country.

    E.PWJ (6140f6)

  15. “Paid liar”, perhaps. But clearly not a pro liar.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  16. That many meetings inside the White House has to involve somewtrhing besides targeting Tea Party groups and.or how to target them.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  17. #13 above (89a442)

    At least, not yet.

    Bill M (e0a4e5)

  18. “That many meetings inside the White House has to involve somewtrhing besides targeting Tea Party groups and.or how to target them.”

    Sammy – Stephanie Cutter, the long nosed campaign strategist for Obama, stated that she participated in may meetings with the head of that independent agency that is non-political, the IRS.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/jackpot-brother-obama-campaign-manager-i-attended-white-house-meetings-with-irs-chief-i-was-in-them-video/

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  19. 13. On the bright side at least the administration hasn’t blamed this fiasco on a YouTube video.

    Comment by William Scalia (89a442) — 6/3/2013 @ 4:15 am

    I would love to get a WH press pass just once to ask that question.

    “Jay Carney, were the IRS agents motivated to persecute conservative groups by a hateful YouTube video that the Obama administration had nothing to do with?”

    To be quickly followed by a follow-on:

    “Jay Carney, will the media shield law that President Obama favors be sufficient to prevent President Obama from abusing his powers when previous restrictions on President Obama were not?”

    And possibly

    “Jay Carney, at what point was President Obama shocked and outraged to discover there was such a thing as an executive branch of government over which he presided?”

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  20. Too many scandels to keep track of,
    how about a non-existent employee sockpuppet winning multiple awards for ethical bahavior
    no, you can’t make this stuff up:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/349934/epa-honors-fake-employee-eliana-johnson

    daughter of PowerLine making a name for herself

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  21. RE: #21 (3d3f72)

    The corruption of this administration is almost beyond belief and still the media lapdogs sit-up and beg for more.

    Bill M (e0a4e5)

  22. 19 Daleyrocks: She said many of these meetings ahd to do with healthcare implementation – Obamacare.

    They would have needed a lot of meetings about that. Lots of decisons to make and they needed to avoid anything that could lose votes and that was not easy because the law wasn’t written very well..

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  23. Yes, Bill. I thought having a sockpuppet to try to get around disclosure rules was pretty bad, but then to award “it” an ethics award…
    well, even hubris must have its limit somewhere

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  24. “They would have needed a lot of meetings about that.”

    Sammy – Thank you. Why does Obama need his campaign manager to sit in on meetings with the head of an independent, non-political agency, when his entire campaign is based on negative attacks on Romney? It makes no sense.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  25. Maybe one of the things that kept Douglas Shulman going to the White House:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/us/politics/irs-to-base-insurance-affordability-on-single-coverage.html?_r=0

    (This decision, which was actually a pretty obvious one) was postponed until after the election.

    Subsidies woiuld kick in at 9.5% iof income – for individual coverage. But Obamacare requires the whole fanily to be covered! That was a problem.

    Of course the law was written that way to make the math work better.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  26. Also remember that the TIGTA frequently reminded House members during his testimony that he conducted an audit, not an investigation, when they asked him questions about whether he found connections to the White House or outside political influence on the IRS. He stated the nature of his procedures did not lead him to look at such matters. He was only looking to report facts and events as they occurred, not a paper trail or evidentiary trail of who ordered who to do what.

    Thus the defense of people like Carney, Axelrod and Plouffe that the TIGTA report found no political influence in play and no connection to the White House is deeply disingenuous dodge of the truth, because the TIGTA procedures specifically did not address those concerns.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  27. New york times editorializes about this decision (postponed till after the election) on Feb 3, 2013:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/a-cruel-blow-to-american-families.html

    Although some analysts had offered persuasive legal and social arguments for adopting a more expansive and generous interpretation of what the law requires, the strict interpretation prevailed in a final rule issued by the I.R.S. last week.

    There is no doubt that this pinched approach will put a significant number of workers and their dependents in a bind. A Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that in 2012, employees’ annual share of insurance premiums averaged $951 for individual coverage and $4,316 for family coverage. Under the I.R.S. rule, such costs would be considered affordable for an employee with a household income of $35,000 a year — making the employee’s spouse and children ineligible for a public subsidy on a health exchange, even though that family would have to spend 12 percent of its income for the employer’s family plan.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  28. “Of course the law was written that way to make the math work better.”

    Sammy – Actually, the law was written so that people get hosed. People were warned but are only now finally paying attention.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  29. There has to be soem political influence – but it may not have come from somebody high up in the White House. Maybe it came from somebody lobbying.

    Worried about interference with lobbying.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  30. Great, Sammy, no doubt you’ll find a way to explain away the unprecedented visit approvals for the IRS Commissioner to the White House and be able to blame it on the CIA.

    SPQR (cde90f)

  31. “Jay Carney, at what point was President Obama shocked and outraged to discover there was such a thing as an executive branch of government over which he presided?”

    Has he discovered that yet?

    http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/is-the-i-r-s-an-independent-agency/

    By law and by practice, the Treasury keeps an arms-length relationship with the I.R.S. on matters of tax administration, enforcement and “process,” which basically means that it doesn’t ask the I.R.S. for information about taxpayers. But on matters of tax policy and regulations, it works closely with the I.R.S.

    Regulations about Obamacare fall into the second category.

    And if they were breaking the law, or coming very close, they wouldn’t have wanted or needed to have him over more than 150 times.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  32. Of course the law was written that way to make the math work better.”

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/3/2013 @ 2:01 pm

    Sammy – Actually, the law was written so that people get hosed. People were warned but are only now finally paying attention.

    Getting people hosed wasn’t the intention, just an inevitability of the individual mandate and the type of insurance the law promoted.

    The law does not get any competition going.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/health/colonoscopies-explain-why-us-leads-the-world-in-health-expenditures.html?pagewanted=all

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  33. Sammy nailed it.
    The White House is going to the mat to protect…rogue lobbyists from Cincinatti!

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  34. 32. Comment by SPQR (cde90f) — 6/3/2013 @ 2:10 pm

    Great, Sammy, no doubt you’ll find a way to explain away the unprecedented visit approvals for the IRS Commissioner to the White House and be able to blame it on the CIA.

    The purposes of the visits weren’t particularly honest, but it would be very illogical to assume they were related to the way some applications for tax exemptions were being discriminated against (which remined one person of the way southern registrars in some places before 1965 treated Negroes attemoting to register to vote)

    You didn’t need that many visists for such a pourpose.

    So I think the politics of Obamacare is the reason for the enormous number of visits to the White House by the IRS commissioner.

    Even if somebody there was suggesting harassment of conservatives, the overwhelming number of meetings had to be about something else.

    I would imagine something not legal would be run not according to the chain of command, anyway.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  35. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 6/3/2013 @ 2:21 pm

    The White House is going to the mat to protect…rogue lobbyists from Cincinatti!

    First of all, the lobbyists probably were in Washington.

    Putting the Cincinati office in charge was probably part of the scheme. They had somebody there, or in the chain of command.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  36. Sammy, you have always had a very creative version of logic. It seems that your assumptions are always logical and contrary assumptions are illogical.

    In this case, given how convenient the IRS harassment was for the Obama campaign, how widespread and consistent it was in the IRS, and Obama’s previous “joke” references to using the IRS in such a manner, its more “logical” to make it the White House’s burden to prove their uninvolvement in the illegal acts of their underlings.

    SPQR (cde90f)

  37. SPQR, I don’t know about you but I’m watching in amazed fascination to see how this turns out.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  38. SPQR – Just look at the TIGTA report! He did not find evidence of anything he was not looking for!!!!!!

    He said he found no connection to the White House. Therefore the White House is innocent.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  39. Sammy, just make sure that you don’t bend over near a highway. Because of all the “facts” you keep pulling outa your ass, some truck driver is gonna think that it’s a parking garage.

    peedoffamerican (35b482)

  40. Sorta reminds me of Mel Brooke’s character in ‘History of the World’ when he was applying for unemployment in Rome.

    peedoffamerican (127915)

  41. “More Evidence that the IRS Targeting of Tea Party Groups Was Guided by D.C.”
    What “evidence?”

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  42. You do realize that sworn testimony is considered evidence don’t you? Or are you just being the typical partisan hack defending the indefensible?

    peedoffamerican (a84075)

  43. The testimony seems nothing beyond conjecture. Read the statements. No?

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  44. btw, “interviews with IRS employees”=testimony?

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  45. also note, when Candy remarked to Issa that the statement he’d provided CNN wasn’t “definitive,” he agreed.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  46. Is that all you’ve got, tiffy?

    JD (20406c)

  47. Yep. You? I’m asking what the “more evidence” is.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  48. like reality, it’s just beyond your grasp, tiffy.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  49. btw, “interviews with IRS employees”=testimony?

    Comment by tifosa (cd74e5) — 6/5/2013 @ 3:00 am

    You do know that lying to a federal investigator is a crime don’t you? So yes, it is testimony.

    18 U.S.C. § 1001 : US Code – Section 1001: Statements or entries generally
    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
    matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
    judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly
    and willfully –
    (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
    device a material fact;
    (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
    statement or representation; or
    (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
    same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
    statement or entry;
    shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years
    or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as
    defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or
    both.
    (b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial
    proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements,
    representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or
    counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
    (c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the
    legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to –
    (1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a
    matter related to the procurement of property or services,
    personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a
    document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to
    the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative
    branch; or
    (2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the
    authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of
    the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or
    Senate.

    peedoffamerican (127915)

  50. hmmm, compelling. Will that fly as “evidence” though? 😉

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  51. I agree with tifosa: non-descript interviews with the IRS isn’t going to get me in a huff. Would you like to know why? It is because I am not a partisan hack.

    right_reddy (05f7c7)

  52. Hell, Holder could be charged under this section.

    peedoffamerican (c1642d)

  53. peedoff, so what was the “more evidence” they provided?

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  54. It is because I am not a partisan hack.

    Comment by right_reddy (05f7c7) — 6/5/2013 @ 3:32 am

    FIFY

    peedoffamerican (c1642d)

  55. Read the interviews yourself dimwit.

    peedoffamerican (04dfe5)

  56. Soooooo, you don’t know? Sokay. Thanks. :)

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  57. No , I have read them and if you”re to lazy to go and read them yourself, then keep spouting off about something for which you are totally clueless.

    F@cking ‘tard.

    peedoffamerican (a84075)

  58. You’ve read them? Where? Last I knew, Issa gave partial transcripts to CNN and even those he said had no evidence of a connection.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  59. I remember reading on this site (I believe it was PCD who said) that President Obama was going to get hauled off in handcuffs over something. I believe it was FnF. Still waiting for that to happen. Of course, if a few IRS employees with an axes to grind say they personally were told to give conservative groups hell by the president well then… it must be so.

    right_reddy (05f7c7)

  60. btw, peedoff, here are the only (chopped) transcripts I’ve seen:
    http://oversight.house.gov/release/issa-talks-irs-targeting-investigation-previews-thursdays-irs-conference-spending-hearing-on-cnn-sotu/
    I believe that’s what CNN saw as well.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  61. right_reddy, not to mention that Issa touted the emails that were supposed to tank PresObama on Benghazi…until they were found to have been altered.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  62. I guess the truth doesn’t matter to these types… its the ‘good’ of the cause that counts.

    right_reddy (05f7c7)

  63. This is like the Punch and Judy show. They simply ignore that which does not comport with Teh Narrative, to the exte t that they even deny it exists. Surreal.

    JD (20406c)

  64. No evidence
    Low level employees
    No connection to DC
    Axe to grind
    They asked for it
    Over-reach
    Seems Teh Narrative is taking shape, and the trusted footsoldiers are out.

    JD (20406c)

  65. tifosa–Let’s cut to the chase. I only want to know one thing from you–and it only requires a simple sentence or two response from you. Are you fine with what the IRS admits it did to identify/target certain groups, and then conduct intimidating audits on certain people immediately after they were identified as being donors/associated with the groups?. If you are fine with it regardless of where the plan originated, please just say so, so the rest of us can move on with the discussion and ignore your diversionary squirrel tactics. If you are not fine with what the IRS did, please say why you are not fine with it, and what you think needs to be done about it. In the event you do have some concerns about a mighty government agency overstepping its power, then would knowing where and why the “breakdown” in trust occurred be important in preventing further abuse by the IRS of American citizens?

    elissa (4d9fe8)

  66. I’m not fine with it if that’s what actually occurred. Some information I’ve seen is that no Tea application has been denied, but some Dem-leaning applications were.
    Here’s what I’d be REALLY fine with: an actual investigation. (Too many sentences?)

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  67. Don’t engage tifosa. It is a waste of time, which is what it wants.

    nk (875f57)

  68. reading lists, content of prayers, all correspondence, membership lists, all notification,
    Alinsky’s ‘make them live up to their own rules, to a extreme degree’

    narciso (3fec35)

  69. Good start, tifosa. What would an “actual investigation” consist of, and who should conduct it do you think? How best to get that ball rolling?

    elissa (4d9fe8)

  70. until they were found to have been altered.

    no they weren’t…

    next lie please.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  71. tifosa is following the new liberal template for this story. I consider this good news for conservatives because last week liberals thought they could stonewall this scandal. Now they apparently realize the media isn’t going to ignore the IRS scandal so they have to find some way to spin it.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  72. “Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
    And I’m very NOT FINE with granting tax exemptions for groups that have a clear political agenda/activity~from either side.

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  73. what we have here is a petty, bumbling liar looking to defend the First petty, bumbling liar…

    how precious.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  74. Uh uh. Who should conduct the actual investgation to find out what happened, tifosa?

    elissa (4d9fe8)

  75. Interesting link, narciso. When the Democrats say the IRS is refusing reasonable requests, the Administration is in trouble.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  76. C’mon. Let’s get that actual investigation going tifosa. Are you with me? I’m really curious to find out what all happened and why. I’m really curious about who, if anybody, is telling the truth about those IRS scrutinizing questionnaires and requests and audits. Sunlight is good. Knowledge is good.

    elissa (4d9fe8)

  77. Oh, tifosa. The IRS is the subject of this thread. Yes. Go up and check out the headline.

    elissa (4d9fe8)

  78. US Consulate overrun, by Ansar Al Sharia, other related militia, Ambassador Stevens, missing presumed dead, speculation hinges on Islamic Jihad trigger video for Cairo protests,

    narciso (3fec35)

  79. “actual investigation” would be great elissa! But “who”? is a good question. A non-partisan commission made up of real folks with no pony in the show re: politics?

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  80. narcisso, elissa has a message for ya 😉

    tifosa (cd74e5)

  81. It was the same prespin, that Lerner had, prior to that woefully shallow IG report,

    narciso (3fec35)

  82. The IRS already admitted it targeted conservatives. That part of the investigation is done. The only questions remaining are how pervasive it was, who coordinated it, and who in DC knew about it. Tiffy desperately wants to play squirrel, hence the altered email nonsense. And that is exactly what that is, nonsense.

    JD (20406c)

  83. Admitted it “targeted conservatives?” When?
    There was an acknowledgement of singling out the terms, not of “targeting conservatives.”

    tifosa (446a90)

  84. Ah yes, remember all of those Code Pink Patriots, Tea Party Leftists and Constitutional Democrats groups that were active during the last election cycle?

    Yeah, me too.

    Icy (eaa5ae)

  85. Engelbrecht is trying to tie her case to the IRS issue. True The Vote is blatantly partisan, and DOJ’s Civil Rights Division started an investigation based on allegations of voter harassment and intimidation.
    Not remotely related to the IRS case.

    tifosa (446a90)

  86. 90. You mean like Progress Texas, Clean Elections Texas, and Emerge America?
    Also, while no Tea groups were denied tax-exempt status, Emerge America WAS.

    tifosa (446a90)

  87. FBI, ATF, OSHA every agency under the sun, descended on Engelbrecht

    narciso (3fec35)

  88. Why? (Hint, not because there’s “tea” or “patriot” in the name 😉

    tifosa (446a90)

  89. Icy is engaging tifosa
    Una puta de Obama que no es hermosa
    We need to rescue the poor bloke
    With a limerick or joke
    Cause engaging lefies is a lost causa.

    nk (875f57)

  90. tifosa moves on
    no more demon rum for her
    snortin’ sh*t up beak

    Colonel Haiku (cd2f41)

  91. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” ~Alinsky :)

    tifosa (446a90)

  92. Emerge America WAS.

    Because their stated objective was to train and elect Dem candidates.

    Tiffy is playing SQUIRREL again. Arguing against simple basic facts, and reality.

    JD (b63a52)

  93. Also, while no Tea groups were denied tax-exempt status

    That is a cute mediamutterz ThinkRegress talking point. Going years without an answer is as good as being denied, especially when coupled with the onerous and partisan paperwork and requests for info.

    JD (b63a52)

  94. was once a young lass called tifosa
    she’d plainly come down with a dose-a
    BIG fan of 0bama
    and Orwellian drama
    her syphilitic sores were so gross-a

    Colonel Haiku (cd2f41)

  95. “Pick your scab, clean wound, cauterize it, Simonize® it.” – David Crosby

    Colonel Haiku (cd2f41)

  96. Exactly my point JD.
    (Engelbrecht’s TruTheVote,’ Rove’s ‘Crossroads GPS’ and AFP are ‘social welfare’ with non-partisan agendas?)

    tifosa (446a90)

  97. So JD? They…what… in the meantime? Pay taxes on their profits? Like any new business? SO?

    tifosa (446a90)

  98. But the Malik Obama foundation with a base in Nairobi, tied with the Sudanese warlord Bashir,
    that went through backdated.

    narciso (3fec35)

  99. “Also, while no Tea groups were denied tax-exempt status, Emerge America WAS.”

    Tiffy – Cute. How many Tea Party groups were actually granted tax-exempt status during the period in question?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  100. I see Tifosa does not want you to be discussing the NSA overreach question on the newer thread.

    elissa (594c4d)

  101. “Of the 176 organizations the IRS has approved, Tax Analysts counted 46 that had either “Tea Party,” “patriots,” or “9-12 project” in their name. The table released by the IRS indicated that 136 of all approved organizations were awarded 501(c)(4) status, 39 received 501(c)(3) status, and one was granted 501(c)(6) status.”
    http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/D2A6C735EAFA7A9085257B7B004C0D90

    tifosa (446a90)

  102. I’d like to see the Patriot Act be scrutinized, maybe eliminated Elissa.

    tifosa (446a90)

  103. This thread started on the second of June. Here os where we were at on 6/5:

    67.tifosa–Let’s cut to the chase. I only want to know one thing from you–and it only requires a simple sentence or two response from you. Are you fine with what the IRS admits it did to identify/target certain groups, and then conduct intimidating audits on certain people immediately after they were identified as being donors/associated with the groups?. If you are fine with it regardless of where the plan originated, please just say so, so the rest of us can move on with the discussion and ignore your diversionary squirrel tactics. If you are not fine with what the IRS did, please say why you are not fine with it, and what you think needs to be done about it. In the event you do have some concerns about a mighty government agency overstepping its power, then would knowing where and why the “breakdown” in trust occurred be important in preventing further abuse by the IRS of American citizens?
    Comment by elissa (4d9fe8) — 6/5/2013 @ 6:24 am

    68. I’m not fine with it if that’s what actually occurred. Some information I’ve seen is that no Tea application has been denied, but some Dem-leaning applications were.
    Here’s what I’d be REALLY fine with: an actual investigation. (Too many sentences?)
    Comment by tifosa (cd74e5) — 6/5/2013 @ 6:34 am

    69.Don’t engage tifosa. It is a waste of time, which is what it wants.
    Comment by nk (875f57) — 6/5/2013 @ 6:39 am

    74. “Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.” And I’m very NOT FINE with granting tax exemptions for groups that have a clear political agenda/activity~from either side.
    Comment by tifosa (cd74e5) — 6/5/2013 @ 6:43 am

    Tifosa’s blind spots and talking points have not “evolved”, I see. She must be absolutely thrilled with how well the “actual investigation” is coming along.

    elissa (594c4d)

  104. and people feel the need to engage the great critical thinker tifosa?

    It’s Sunday – Father’s Day – and it’s a beautiful day!

    Colonel Haiku (5f2c6b)

  105. c’mon, teh klown couldn’t find its own ass with two hands and a map.

    Colonel Haiku (5f2c6b)

  106. Tiffy is a broken record. A bad one. Transparent, it is.

    SQUIRREL!!!!!!

    JD (04b3a3)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.8242 secs.