calfoxwc Posted June 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Do you have links, or not? I read that article about it being 11 times. But that is bogus, too. I go by what all I read, all over the place. You go by emotionally defending liberalism and liberal politicians. Alan Colmes is more objective than you. Back it up, or shut it up. I know that the question is out there "he was only approved to visit 157 times, blah blah.... Still, your claim that WH advisors were never talked to is a joke. Link it, or clink it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Why...I wonder why heck isn't posting funny stuff from Stewart anymore. He loves posting Stewart stuff. Hmm. Let's see what Stewart has been saying....maybe that will give us an idea about that: http://townhall.com/video/stewart-rips-irs-for-recent-scandals-n1613575 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Did you even watch the video Cal? Or does your brain just work by going "Make fun of IRS? POST! Liberals are bad!" That had almost nothing to do with a scandal and he just made fun of the IRS, and it was pretty funny. So Stewart is just some stupid liberal comedian that we can't take seriously, until you think he says something you like, then its ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Like I said, Cal, you don't get it and you won't accept it, even though it's the truth. The man didn't visit the White House 157 times. Those logs are public record. The Daily Caller, and Fox News, and Michelle Malkin, and all the rest of them, are such pathetic and shitty sources of news, who don't know the first fucking thing about journalism, that they didn't even bother to ask any other question beyond the one that they hoped made Obama look bad. The story is a joke. It took The Atlantic all of five minutes to completely discredit this story, and since then everyone is laughing at O'Reilly & company, who keep breathlessly reporting on it every night even though it's already proven to be a bogus story. Because nothing gets into that Fox/Rush/Drudge bubble. Just like Steve in the other thread, operating on the false assumption that Scoutmasters get naked and shower with the Scouts, and refusing to accept that this is against their codes and doesn't happen, the right is operating under the assumption that the head of the IRS has visited the White House 157 times! And that sounds like proof that Obama was in on it! So ...who cares if it's not true? That's how sad your side has become. And they wonder why their party is in such trouble. You're practically begging to be misinformed, and you resist with all of your might any suggestion that you are misinformed. But you are, Blanche! You are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 With Holder probably going to resign, and the IRS scandal, plus Benghazi, it shows that Obama is either a very weak leader who isn't in touch with his people, or he is incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Watch! We can do this all day. We could do it all tomorrow. Just like the Civilian Security Force or the "rampant voter fraud" or any of the other untold amounts of bullshit you and the others have peddled in here as truth, there's no amount of information that makes any difference. The Civilian Security Force was the dumbest, easily refutable load of horseshit the fever swamp ever put out. And yet to this day you still believe Obama is creating a scary Civilian Security Force. I saw you posting about it recently. There's no point with you. Why bother showing you the evidence that the 157 visits story is highly misleading, and came from The Daily Caller, a laughable news site that's only notable for continually getting things wrong? You're the dumbest man who ever lived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Did you even watch the video Cal? Or does your brain just work by going "Make fun of IRS? POST! Liberals are bad!" That had almost nothing to do with a scandal and he just made fun of the IRS, and it was pretty funny. So Stewart is just some stupid liberal comedian that we can't take seriously, until you think he says something you like, then its ok? Stewart Drudge Hannity David Gregory Rachel Maddow...... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 I think there are some portions of the IRS scandal that are quite disturbing/irritating. They're right to be getting shit from the commentators and comedians. But let's give them shit about where they're guilty, not what they aren't. And let's not pretend it goes higher than we have evidence for just because we wish it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 hey its already gone higher than we first thought remember Cincinnati flunkeys blah blah blah tomorrow? Who can tell! and why shouldn't it be fair to ask who benefits from this? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Well, here you go. Here are the numbers of groups that had their tax status approved by the IRS: 122 conservative 48 liberal/nonconservative 6 unknown And they should ask questions. But asking "who benefits" and then connecting that dot in your head without evidence is what Oliver Stone and 9/11 Truthers do. You either have proof or you don't. Imagining a motive is easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Uh oh, folks. Non-conservative advocacy groups given special scrutiny by the IRS in or after 2010 included the Coffee Party USA, the alternative to the Tea Party movement that got a bunch of press in 2010, as well as such explicitly progressive groups as the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada; Rebuild the Dream, founded by former Obama administration official Van Jones; and Progressives United Inc., which was founded by former Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold. Also included in the special scrutiny were Progress Texas and Progress Missouri Inc.; Tie the Knot, which sells bow ties to raise money to promote same-sex marriage; and ProgressNow, which describes itself as “a year-round never-ending progressive campaign.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 I hate to say it, but this "scandal" is starting to fall apart as well. It's looking more and more like the "targeting" was what they said it was - inappropriate search terms. There seems to be no political agenda behind it at all. More and more, it's looking like bureaucratic incompetence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 so you encourage a special prosecutor and investigation? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 I hate to say it, but this "scandal" is starting to fall apart as well. It's looking more and more like the "targeting" was what they said it was - inappropriate search terms. There seems to be no political agenda behind it at all. More and more, it's looking like bureaucratic incompetence. NO! They're trying to stamp out the tea party for being too influential! Don't question it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 WASHINGTON (AP) — Two Internal Revenue Service agents working in the agency's Cincinnati office say higher-ups inWashington directed the targeting of conservative political groups when they applied for tax-exempt status, a contention that directly contradicts claims made by the agency since the scandal erupted last month. The Cincinnati agents didn't provide proof that senior IRS officialsin Washington ordered the targeting. But one of the agents said her work processing the applications was closely supervised by a Washington lawyer in the IRS division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, according to a transcript of her interview with congressional investigators. Her interview suggests a long trail of emails that could support her claim. The revelation could prove to be significant if investigators are able to show that Washington officials were involved in singling out tea party and other conservative groups for extra scrutiny. IRS officials have said repeatedly that the targeting was initiated by front-line agents in the Cincinnati office and was stopped once senior officials in Washington found out. A yearlong audit by the agency's inspector general found no evidence that Washington officials ordered or authorized the targeting. However, the inspector general blamed ineffective management by senior IRS officials for allowing the targeting to continue for nearly two years during the 2010 and 2012 elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 It's already been established, btw, that Ms. Lerner told the one pro life group, to drop out of political activity, and she would have the IRS audit threat cancelled. The group had to promise not to picket any abortion clinics. Lerner needs to be drug back into Congress and testify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 The IRS Implodes Into Not a Huge Scandal Now. From the Washington Post: A self-described “conservative Republican” manager from the Cincinnati office told congressional investigators that he sent a tea party case to Washington on Feb. 25, 2010 to help determine whether the group should qualify for tax-exempt status, according to the excerpts. A timeline from the inspector general’s report listed an event on that same date as the genesis of the targeting initiative, which first focused on groups with names including “tea party,” “patriot” and “9/12,” a term associated with conservative political commentator Glenn Beck. A screening agent from the Cincinnati office told congressional investigators that he developed the initial search criteria after the conservative manager asked him to identify additional cases, according to Cummings. “I noticed that there were hundreds of these things,” the agent reportedly said about tea party groups he discovered on the Internet. “So some of the names I used — some of the terms — to find the tea parties. Tea party went by other names.” According to Cummings’ memo, the conservative IRS manager said no one from Washington ordered him to identify additional tea party cases. “There was no — there was no — no one said to make a search,” the employee said, according to an excerpt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 So here's what we know now about the "political targeting" of right wing groups: - It started with a self-described "conservative Republican" manager, who asked a screening agent to come up with a formula to search for these groups, because they were overwhelmed by the number of them. Obviously, this was not done for political reasons, but for reasons related to the IRS' mission. - They targeted dozens of progressive groups as well. - The number of conservative groups approved far outnumber the number of progressive groups approved. (They were also more numerous to begin with, so it makes sense.) ...Does anyone want to tell me what the scandal is now? I don't get it. Just like with Benghazi, where you all creamed your jeans hoping for some directive from Obama, or the political arm of the White House, you've been left with a far more boring explanation - this is nothing but the usual bureaucratic DC bullshit that happens every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 so, independent investigation or no? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 No. It doesn't look like they have any cause to call for one. Until they come up with something that suggests wrongdoing, obviously you wouldn't spend money on an investigation. Which isn't to say that they couldn't come up with something, but I don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 They've got to investigate the Washington office of the IRS and see if there's any evidence that this was directed out of that office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Claiming the fifth, as Ms. Lerner did, is a red flag that something is very wrong. ***************************************************** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/07/irs-email-shows-dc-officials-knew-about-tea-party-scandal-in-2010-not-2011/ WASHINGTON – A misfired email from an Internal Revenue Service employee in Ohio alerted officials in Washington that conservative groups were being targeted a full year earlier than previously acknowledged, Fox News confirms. Transcripts from interviews held with IRS employees in Cincinnati show that managers in Washington knew about the heightened scrutiny put on Tea Party groups applying for tax-exempt status in July 2010. The transcript, which was initially reviewed and reported by Reuters, apparently shows that Cincinnati IRS official Elizabeth Hofacre was in communication with D.C.-based IRS attorney Carter Hull. Hofacre was put in charge of handling tax-exempt status applications from conservative groups by her Cincinnati boss, she claims. According to the report, Hofacre was asked to summarize her initial findings and send it via email to a small group of IRS workers, including a few in the D.C. tax-exempt unit. Mistakenly, she sent the email to everybody in the Washington IRS Exempt Organizations Rulings and Agreements unit. Hofacre’s Cincinnati bureau used a “be-on-the-lookout” (BOLO) list that included the words “Tea Party” and “Patriot” that was used to flag conservative applications for extra scrutiny. Many targeted groups have come forward in the days since the scandal broke and said the IRS held up their applications, asked invasive questions and tried other tactics to slow the approval process. Still, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration has said there is no evidence that the screening list was created by high-level IRS officials or the Treasury Department, or was tied to the White House. Separately, at a hearing Monday, the watchdog who exposed the IRS' targeting testified nobody in the Ohio office being blamed for the scandal would tell his investigators who directed the program, as the new IRS chief vowed to "get to the bottom" of that growing question. Lois Lerner, the IRS official who set off the controversy, has said that she first learned of the BOLO list in June 2011, and that she ordered the partisan criteria to be removed immediately. Transcripts with IRS officials, though, have shown them claiming officials in Washington requested the lists. Fox News' Mike Emanuel contributed to this report. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/07/irs-email-shows-dc-officials-knew-about-tea-party-scandal-in-2010-not-2011/#ixzz2VpWj48Mr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Benghazi coverup. NSA coverup. IRS coverup. Fast and Furious coverup, AP coverup. I mean, it was testified before Congress, that Ms. Lerner said that the pro-life group, if the leader would promise not to picket any more abortion clinics, that the harrassment from the IRS would immediately end.... yeah. Political targeting, and we still need more information. And Ms. Lerner is on paid leave..pleading the fifth.... why? And Holder and Obamao are trying desperately to keep a FISA court judgement that their spying violated the Constitution.... secret... It's all a mess. This Obamao regime is more Mao than the joke I started back in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 And here's where all these scandals will live on no matter what we learn - in the demented minds of people like Cal. Who still think Benghazi was a "cover-up." Who'll still think the IRS was a White House plot. You'll be screaming about this stuff all the way to the 2016 election, and the rest of the country will think you've lost it even more than before. One day, Roger Ailes is going to realize that his big idea ruined the Republican Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 before you get too far off topic here in your honest opinion why do you think anyone would plead the fifth in this situation? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 To protect oneself from self-incrimination, naturally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Well that's why I asked for your opinion what do you suppose she might be incriminating herself with? I mean if there's absolutely nothing wrong going on..... Do you believe she's probably done anything illegal or protecting someone else? Andif so shouldn't someone get to the bottom of it? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 But that's not what "self-incrimination" means. She might have done nothing wrong. She might have done something illegal. We don't know. Pleading the 5th isn't an admission she's done something wrong. One should be able to imagine why a person in the national spotlight might not want to have their case and their reputation adjudicated in the press and by Darrell Issa and the House Oversight Committee, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 the fifth refers to self incrimination, not refusal to tell the possibly damaging truth about someone you are protecting. And, heckbunker, you apparently are enraged that I countered your liberal support crap, with stuff that directly contradicts your crap. See? You will personally attack anyone on this board who sees things differently than you do. Coward. BTW, you are the one who brought up E. Germany, moron. Oh, THAT's an issue that bothers you, so it's okay to go "batshit crazy". You've long since become the "dick" of the board, since you keep screwing around with facts and definitions and subjects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Besides, again, Ms. Lerner, as testified before Congress, tried to "blackmail" a conservative group leader, ... saying that if the group would stop/promise not to picket abortion clinics, the harassment by the IRS would immediately go away. That is probly what the fifth is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.