TheTrolls.net

It's Seafood Month!
It is currently Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:59 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: IRS, weapon of democrats
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Just so you know...

Quote:
The Internal Revenue Service is apologizing for inappropriately flagging conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.

Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt groups, said organizations that included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their applications for tax-exempt status were singled out for additional reviews.

Lerner said the practice, initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati, was wrong and she apologized while speaking at a conference in Washington.

Tea-party groups complained endlessly about IRS harassment last year. February 28, 2012:

Tea Party chapters around the nation are blasting the Internal Revenue Service after the federal agency sent them letters demanding information about their politics, contributors and even family members.

In letters sent from IRS offices in Cincinnati earlier this month, chapters including the Waco (Texas) Tea Party and the Ohio Liberty Council were asked to provide a list of donors, identify volunteers, financial support for and relationships with political candidates and parties, and even printed copies of their Facebook pages…

Tea Party leaders say they were particularly offended by demands that they name donors and volunteers, which is required by law, but were also asked to list any political ambitions of board members or their relatives.

News of the harassment made it all the way up to Congress last spring — and yet only now, months after the election, are we finally seeing the IRS come clean. Go figure.

To this day, the left-wing Democratic water-carrying hacks known as Media Matters remain fully tax-exempt. Congressional hearings are now a fait accompli; what I want to know is who’s getting fired in the meantime. Obviously house will be cleaned at the Cincinnati branch. What about Lerner herself? Stand by for updates.

Update: I want to know why the word “patriot” in particular triggered some sort of extra scrutiny. That smells like something you’d see on “Hardball,” treating tea partiers as if they’re some sort of nascent domestic terrorists simply because McVeigh-type nuts often use the word “patriot” too. Is that what happened here, smearing tea party groups with guilt by rhetorical association? Or was this more straightforward harassment of a political opponent?

Update: Some of these tea-party groups have since been granted tax exemption thanks to the ACLJ, which has been litigating on their behalf for more than a year.

As a recap to this past year’s efforts on this front, when these groups submitted their initial requests to the IRS, the IRS did little or nothing with respect to their submitted applications and, in some instances, waited for over 18-20 months to respond.

Once we informed the IRS of our representation of these groups, within days of our taking action we began to receive a high level of cooperation from the agency with regard to these organizations’ files…

Our original assessment of these cases last year raised serious Constitutional concerns. These intrusive requests for extreme amounts of information – in their content, breadth, and vagueness – implicated the free speech rights of our clients and their organizations. As we stated before, requests for the personal information of the organization’s membership lists ran afoul of NAACP v. Alabama and implicated their rights to freedom of association…

As we noted in our extensive coverage of this story last year, the IRS appeared to have been using the routine process of seeking and granting tax exemptions to undertake a sweeping, top-down review of the internal workings of the Tea Party movement in the United States. Such a review is far beyond its mission and directly implicated the First Amendment rights of all citizens.
Here’s a PDF of some of the questions asked by the IRS. Note page 8.

Update: Lerner apparently claimed today that no higher-ups at the IRS knew and that the harassment was not motivated by political bias, even though progressive groups mysteriously seem to have been spared these intrusive inquiries.

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.


Nothing to see here. These people will be in charge of making sure your healthcare is appropriate from now on.

_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:26 pm
Posts: 1930
Location: ^^^ With her ^^^
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that such things are going on. I am also, of course, expecting the lovely brown envelope in my mailbox any day now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Sample questions

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... tions.html

I do this for a living, never seen anything like that.

_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:56 pm
Posts: 5898
Quote:
The Internal Revenue Service is apologizing for inappropriately flagging conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.

Lerner said the practice, initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati, was wrong and she apologized while speaking at a conference in Washington.

Update: Lerner apparently claimed today that no higher-ups at the IRS knew and that the harassment was not motivated by political bias, even though progressive groups mysteriously seem to have been spared these intrusive inquiries.

“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.

OK, so some low level employees in Cincinnati fucked up.

The IRS is apologizing for it. No doubt some will lose their jobs, and the practice obviously has ended.

So what would you like to see happen? If this constitutes a crime, then they should be charged. But what do you want to see happen?

_________________
Cito Gaston wrote:
Being the first with bad news is the board equivalent of doing an 8 ball.
HighPlainsGrifter wrote:
Trolling is life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:17 pm
Posts: 2433
Location: Kicking your ass.
The fuck is this 'apologizing' bullshit?

You fuck up your taxes and they come after you for blood. The IRS only speaks cash.

Some motherfuckers heads need to roll and a congressional hearing might do the entire fucked organization some good.

Apologize?

FUCK OFF


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Jsc810 wrote:
OK, so some low level employees in Cincinnati fucked up.

The IRS is apologizing for it. No doubt some will lose their jobs, and the practice obviously has ended.

So what would you like to see happen? If this constitutes a crime, then they should be charged. But what do you want to see happen?


You think only the low level people knew? You think the practice has ended?


Quote:
update:

IRS on conf call saying no disciplinary action against employees who targeted tea party groups for extra scrutiny.
12:03 PM - 10 May 2013


Update: As is usually true for Democratic scandals, the media’s angle on the story will quickly become not the scandal itself but the GOP’s reaction to it. Don’t focus on the misdeeds, focus on the politics.

_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 3394
Jsc810 wrote:
OK, so some low level employees in Cincinnati fucked up.


No, they were doing what the fuck they were told. "Low-level" workers don't fucking decide who they're going to fuck with, the bosses decide who the low-level workers are going to fuck with. How fucking gullible are you anyway?

Quote:
The IRS is apologizing for it.


Bullshit

Quote:
No doubt some will lose their jobs,


More bullshit. There's no doubt nobody is even fucking going to be disciplined, let alone fired

Quote:
and the practice obviously has ended.


Absolute, total bullshit.

_________________
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:56 pm
Posts: 5898
Hold whatever hearings, I don't care. I do think it needs to be investigated and the guilty punished, including criminally if appropriate.

Yes, I believe it was low level employees who were responsible, and yes I believe the practice has stopped. If there is any information to the contrary, please post it.

As for the claim that this was not done because of political bias, that's horseshit, of course it was. And the employees weren't disciplined? That's horseshit too. Whoever was responsible, as well as whoever was supposed to be supervising them, should be disciplined and probably terminated.

The organizations should be made whole again, meaning they should be paid for the time and effort that they had to expend responding to the fraudulent requests.

_________________
Cito Gaston wrote:
Being the first with bad news is the board equivalent of doing an 8 ball.
HighPlainsGrifter wrote:
Trolling is life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:53 am
Posts: 3303
Location: SW FL
An omen of things to come as the IRS is granted sweeping powers under the Affordable Care Act huge new federal con game.

_________________
Life is good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:26 pm
Posts: 1930
Location: ^^^ With her ^^^
Jsc810 wrote:
OK, so some low level employees in Cincinnati fucked up.

The IRS is apologizing for it. No doubt some will lose their jobs, and the practice obviously has ended.


Really? There are more than a few of the groups that have still not had their tax exempt status certified.

Quote:
So what would you like to see happen? If this constitutes a crime, then they should be charged. But what do you want to see happen?


I want a deeper investigation. I want to know where these employees received their direction from, when most everyone seems to be pretty clear and pretty quickly that their actions were well outside the lines. Federal employees at the lower levels are often not particularly imaginative, at least in my long experience working in and around government. I find it a bit of a stretch to think that some low level drones with no political connections came up with this happy conspiracy.

While there might be some criminal culpability if an actual conspiracy can be proven, the meat, I believe, is that the acts fall under 42 USC 1983 for violation of the civil rights of the victim organizations and their members. If a criminal conspiracy could be proven (and I would guess that the shredding and purging is already ongoing) that would be all the better.

These people, and whomever commanded their acts, need to be made examples of. Perhaps for no better reason than to but a bit of a brake on the IRS, what with that agency becoming the enforcement arm of the ACA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 10:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 1915
The country is poised for a GIGANTIC enema.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 10:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:30 pm
Posts: 994
I guess if Miss America is judged based on your views on gay marriage, it's only fitting that whether or not you pay taxes should be based on that factor as well.

No wonder America is less relevant than Canada right now...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 7:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:56 pm
Posts: 5898
Yann Ballsack wrote:
There are more than a few of the groups that have still not had their tax exempt status certified.

Then those files should be reviewed on an expedited basis, and be certified retroactively as tax exempt if appropriate.


Quote:
I want a deeper investigation. I want to know where these employees received their direction from, when most everyone seems to be pretty clear and pretty quickly that their actions were well outside the lines. Federal employees at the lower levels are often not particularly imaginative, at least in my long experience working in and around government. I find it a bit of a stretch to think that some low level drones with no political connections came up with this happy conspiracy.

While there might be some criminal culpability if an actual conspiracy can be proven, the meat, I believe, is that the acts fall under 42 USC 1983 for violation of the civil rights of the victim organizations and their members.

Fine, investigate it. If crimes have been committed, prosecute them.

And as for 1983 actions, I already said give them all remedies available there, I would do it without the necessity of
filing suit. See my comments above about making them whole again.

This was wrong, it shouldn't have happened, those responsible should be punished, those affected should be made whole again.

_________________
Cito Gaston wrote:
Being the first with bad news is the board equivalent of doing an 8 ball.
HighPlainsGrifter wrote:
Trolling is life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 7:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Jsc810 wrote:
Yes, I believe it was low level employees who were responsible, and yes I believe the practice has stopped. If there is any information to the contrary, please post it.



Oh, ok. Just in case you thought I forgot how retardedly blinded you are by your loyalty to the ideals of Obama and Hillary and ho full of shit you are in general.

Quote:
Breaking: Senior IRS officials knew of targeting conservative groups in 2011; Update: IRS chief counsel knew in 2011



This changes the dynamic in two ways:

A federal watchdog’s upcoming report says senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups in 2011.

The disclosure contradicts public statements by former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who repeatedly assured Congress that conservative groups were not targeted. ….

That report says the head of the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups learned that groups were being targeted in June 2011. It does not say whether Shulman was notified.
Yesterday, the IRS claimed that this only happened in one office in just 2012, and that only lower-level officials were involved. This report from the Associated Press refutes both of those claims — and adds yet another damning example to a growing list of misleading and false statements from the Obama administration.

Let’s go back to yesterday’s admission:

Lois G. Lerner, the IRS official who oversees tax-exempt groups, said the “absolutely inappropriate” actions by “front-line people” were not driven by partisan motives.

Rather, Lerner said, they were a misguided effort to come up with an efficient means of dealing with a flood of applications from organizations seeking ­tax-exempt status between 2010 and 2012.

Lerner’s statement gave the clear impression that the IRS only just learned about this, and that the actions were by rogue agents without enough supervisory control. The AP’s report on the upcoming Treasury IG’s report is that it will demonstrate that “senior officials” knew about this more than a year earlier — while Shulman was telling Congress that nothing of the sort was going on.

If the IG report substantiates this, then the questions will really start flying for the Obama administration. Why would senior IRS officials remain silent while their agents illegally targeted conservative non-profits with their knowledge? Was it because they were ordered to make it happen?

Most government bureaucrats don’t go that far out of their way to innovate, especially in a legal landmine area such as this. And I’d suspect that “senior officials” wouldn’t climb out on that limb unless pressed on it, too.

Hey, maybe this is why there were no disciplinary actions, huh?

Anyone still buying that this wasn’t driven by partisan motives? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Update: More from the AP, including a huge problem for Lerner and Shulman:

The agency blamed low-level employees, saying no high-level officials were aware.

But on June 29, 2011, Lois G. Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt organizations, learned at a meeting that groups were being targeted, according to the watchdog’s report. At the meeting, she was told that groups with “Tea Party,” ”Patriot” or “9/12 Project” in their names were being flagged for additional and often burdensome scrutiny, the report says. …

On Jan, 25, 2012, the criteria for flagging suspect groups was changed to, “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform/movement,” the report says.

While this was happening, several committees in Congress were writing IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman to express concern because tea party groups were complaining of IRS harassment.

In Shulman’s responses, he did not acknowledge targeting of tea party groups. At a congressional hearing March 22, 2012, Shulman was adamant in his denials.

“There’s absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people” who apply for tax-exempt status, Shulman said at the House Ways and Means subcommittee hearing.
Lerner’s going to look like a liar. Shulman might end up facing charges of lying to Congress and perhaps obstruction as well. It probably won’t end there, either.

Update: John Hinderaker notes the convenience of discovering this now rather than before the election:

So the harassment of conservative groups began much earlier than the IRS told us yesterday, when the agency’s spokesman said the improper conduct occurred “during the 2012 election.” As I wrote yesterday, I was skeptical about that since I had heard of the targeting of Tea Party groups by the IRS well before the 2012 campaign season.

It now appears that this is one more scandal that the Obama administration managed to keep quiet until after November’s election. One wonders how many more skeletons will come tumbling out of the closet, now that Obama is safely re-elected.

It’s still going to be a massive political problem for Obama, with a Congressional probe now all but guaranteed as yet another set of false talking points collapses.

Update: How big of a deal is abusing the tax system to gain an advantage over the political opposition? Don’t forget that it was one of the charges in the Watergate articles of impeachment:

Article 2
Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.

This conduct has included one or more of the following:
He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

That doesn’t make Obama guilty of the actions, but it does demonstrate the seriousness of the violation — and the fact that the Obama administration tried to shortstop the IG report with yesterday’s dog-and-pony show also demonstrates just how bad they know this will be.

Update: A quote from the Nixon tapes about using the IRS against Nixon’s opponents — “There’s a lot of gold in them thar hills. … Are we looking into Muskie’s returns?”

Update: I missed this earlier, but the IG report will accuse the chief counsel of the IRS of knowing that the targeting was taking place, and saying nothing:

Among the other revelations, on Aug. 4, 2011, staffers in the IRS’ Rulings and Agreements office “held a meeting with chief counsel so that everyone would have the latest information on the issue.”

On Jan, 25, 2012, the criteria for flagging suspect groups was changed to, “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform/movement,” the report says.
Hmmm. Why would a chief counsel remain silent on such a development?

Update: Another point: if the chief counsel knew about this in August 2011, how likely would it have been that IRS Commissioner Shulman would have been unaware of it when he testified before Congress in March 2012? I think it’s time for Shulman to find a very good lawyer and start looking to make a deal.

Update: William Jacobson reminds us (along with Daniel Drezner) that the IRS is now also the enforcer for ObamaCare. Nothing to worry about there, though … right?

Update: Hey, here’s a good question:


Remember how much Harry Reid was mouthing off about tax returns? Did the White House feed him some inside information, or did the IRS?



_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:56 pm
Posts: 5898
Quote:
Breaking: Senior IRS officials knew of targeting conservative groups in 2011; Update: IRS chief counsel knew in 2011


You were right.

I was wrong.

Absolutely hold congressional hearings.

_________________
Cito Gaston wrote:
Being the first with bad news is the board equivalent of doing an 8 ball.
HighPlainsGrifter wrote:
Trolling is life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 6:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 1915
Quote:
The IRS is apologizing for it.






Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 8:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:32 am
Posts: 851
Location: Charleston, SC
'What difference does it make!!'


Image

_________________
ImageImageCitizens Not Subjects


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:07 am
Posts: 2119
Jsc810 wrote:
Absolutely hold congressional hearings.


Well, I suppose they can do that while preparing articles of impeachment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:56 pm
Posts: 5898
If Obama directed them to do this, or even if he knew after the fact and didn't correct the situation, then yes, he should be impeached.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 5121
Location: Denver, CO
Yeah, buh, buh, buh, he's our messiah...he's here to save the country! We helped him and he's here to help us! It's really hard to clean up 8 years of Bush so he still needs to be given a chance to really turn this place around. He cannot be impeached!

This is just another thing to sweep under the rug until his honorable presidency is unfortunately over in 2016. At that time we'll just have to ignore the constitution and have him push for a 3rd term.

Sincerely,
Dims, CNN, all networks of ABC, CBS, NBC, and all other pole smoking fagmoes

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 3394
Why Tea wrote:
Quote:
Breaking: Senior IRS officials knew of targeting conservative groups in 2011; Update: IRS chief counsel knew in 2011


Was that the same IRS whose Commissar testified to congress just last year that no fucking way was any goddam, motherfucking, cocksucking, son of a bitching targeting going on whatsoever? That IRS?

This is obviously nothing more than a partisan witch hunt.

_________________
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:26 pm
Posts: 1930
Location: ^^^ With her ^^^
Jsc810 wrote:
Quote:
You were right.

I was wrong.

Absolutely hold congressional hearings.


That 1983 action is looking a little better now as well, isn't it counselor? It's looking more and more like federal employees acted in a conspiracy under color of authority with each passing day. The IRS counsel's office admitting they knew about it two years ago and --apparently-- doing nothing speaks volumes.

There really needs to be some harsh examples made in the IRS before we get to full implementation of Obamacare, because we know the level of absolute authority the agency gets via the ACA would never corrupt anyone.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 6:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Cuda wrote:
Why Tea wrote:
Quote:
Breaking: Senior IRS officials knew of targeting conservative groups in 2011; Update: IRS chief counsel knew in 2011


Was that the same IRS whose Commissar testified to congress just last year that no fucking way was any goddam, motherfucking, cocksucking, son of a bitching targeting going on whatsoever? That IRS?

This is obviously nothing more than a partisan witch hunt.


Quote:
On Saturday, we discovered that the IRS targeting of conservative groups didn’t start in 2012 and wasn’t limited to a few rogue low-level agents. Senior officials became aware of the practice at least as early as June 2011, including the top lawyer for the IRS. Today, the Wall Street Journal and Reuters report that an upcoming IG report will show that the practice first began in the 2010 midterm cycle (via TPM):

But questions continued to swirl about the failure of IRS officials to disclose the problems until the inspector general’s report was about to become public.

The timeline contained in the draft report indicates that IRS scrutiny of tea-party and other conservative groups began as early as 2010 and came to the attention of Ms. Lerner, the head of the tax-exempt-organizations division, at least by the following year.

The report’s timeline indicates that the criteria were changed to be more neutral in July 2011 after Ms. Lerner “raised concerns.” The criteria for heightened scrutiny continued to evolve over the next year or so, even as complaints from tea-party groups—and questions from GOP lawmakers—mounted over IRS inquiries to various groups about their activities.
Lerner seems to have deliberately misled Congress, which was demanding answers after receiving a raft of complaints about aggressive IRS agents:

Letters from Ms. Lerner in April and May 2012 responding to questions by Republican lawmakers made no mention of the problems that had surfaced in the IRS unit.

According to the draft report, on April 24 and 25 of last year, officials in Ms. Lerner’s office were reviewing “troubling questions” that had been asked of organizations, including “the names of donors.”


One way the IRS attempted to throw people off the trail was by subtly changing their search criteria. They started off by looking at Tea Party groups, but then expanded to any group unhappy with the administration’s performance:

When tax agents started singling out non-profit groups for extra scrutiny in 2010, they looked at first only for key words such as ‘Tea Party,’ but later they focused on criticisms by groups of “how the country is being run,” according to investigative findings reviewed by Reuters on Sunday.

Over two years, IRS field office agents repeatedly changed their criteria while sifting through thousands of applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status to select ones for possible closer examination, the findings showed.

At one point, the agents chose to screen applications from groups focused on making “America a better place to live.”
Who knew that motive was so sinister? Does the IRS want America to be a worse place to live? If so, they’re well on their way with this scandal.

Reuters mentions Friday’s announcement ahead of the report:

After brewing for months, the IRS effort exploded into wider view on Friday when Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations for the IRS, apologized for what she called the “inappropriate” targeting of conservative groups for closer scrutiny, something the agency had long denied.

At a legal conference in Washington, while taking questions from the audience, Lerner said the agency was sorry.

She said the screening practice was confined to an IRS office in Cincinnati; that it was “absolutely not” influenced by the Obama administration; and that none of the targeted groups was denied tax-free status.


In retrospect, this looks like a strategy to spin the report ahead of its release. Rather than wait for the results to drop like a bombshell in the media, the IRS sent Lerner out for damage control, admitting to as little as possible while sounding as though the agency was taking responsibility for their errors. That way, when the report did come out, the media could proclaim it “old news,” taking a page from Jay Carney’s Benghazi scandal strategy, and castigate anyone demanding more answers and drawing the obvious conclusion that the Obama administration has politicized the IRS.

Unfortunately, that strategy didn’t work very well. Lerner turned out to be a very poor choice for that job, bungling the media handling badly enough that the media ended up more annoyed than mollified. Mostly, though, this is news that’s just not spinnable. The report now appears to implicate the highest levels of the IRS in either misleading or outright lying to Congress, and raises questions about how exactly this effort got put into place at all. They basically threw gasoline on a fire that would have exploded anyway, making the conflagration even more eye-catching as a result.

Update: The New York Times’ headline focuses on the real scandal — “I.R.S. Focus on Conservatives Gives G.O.P. an Issue to Seize On”. If you pay for the subscription, presumably you get the audio of the Gray Lady weeping over this blow.

_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 6:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:32 am
Posts: 851
Location: Charleston, SC
As Our Dear Leader :arab: stated the nite of his re-election :punchballs: 'the best is yet to come', so this is just the ol' tip of the iceberg.

I think some people are missing the real issue here... since the IRS will be 'assisting' with the implementation of ObarryCare... I seriously doubt that when you 'get on the list' for say, a coronary stent, the IRS would NEVER cross check their 'information files' on your 'past history', and being a member of certain 'patriotic parties' would NEVER influence when, or if, you received treatment.

Oh yeah, we've set sail ya'll, and our ship is the Titanic.... :banana:

_________________
ImageImageCitizens Not Subjects


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 6:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 pm
Posts: 8626
Quote:
NRO’s Eliana Johnson transcribes Collins’ response, in part:

Maine senator Susan Collins is demanding that Presient Obama publicly apologize for the IRS’s targeting out of conservative groups, calling his failure to do so up to this point “very disappointing.”

“It is absolutely chilling that the IRS was singling out conservative groups for extra review and I think that it’s very disappointing that the president hasn’t personally condemned this and spoken out,” she told CNN’s Candy Crowley. “The president needs to make crystal clear that this is totally unacceptable in America.” …

“I just don’t buy that this was a couple of rogue IRS employees. After all, groups with ‘prorgressive’ in their names were not targeted, there’s some evidence that higher-level supervisers were aware of this, and the IRS was not forthcoming in telling Congress about this,” she said.


It wasn’t just some low-level staffers; the IRS’ chief counsel knew of the practice by August 2011. The top man in the IRS at the time, Commissioner Douglas Shulman testified to Congress in March 2012 that no such practices were taking place, but it’s almost impossible to imagine that an IRS chief counsel wouldn’t have alerted Shulman before testifying on that very point. If Shulman lied, does anyone – anyone — think Shulman would have done that on his own?

Before you answer that, let’s take a quick trip down Memory Lane, via the Daily Caller:

Just months after being slimed by President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, Mitt Romney supporter and businessman Frank VanderSloot was informed that he was going to be audited not only by the Internal Revenue Service, but by the Labor Department as well.

VanderSloot’s saga was told by columnist Kimberley Strassel in the Wall Street Journal last July.

In April 2012, VanderSloot, who served as the national co-chair of Mitt Romney’s presidential finance committee, was one of eight Romney backers to be defamed as ”wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records” in a post on the Obama campaign’s website. The post, entitled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” singled out VanderSloot for being a ”litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

Two months later, the IRS informed VanderSloot he and his wife were going to be audited, Strassel reported. Two weeks after that, VanderSloot was notified by the Labor Department that it was going to “audit workers he employs on his Idaho-based cattle ranch under the federal visa program for temporary agriculture workers,” reported Strassel.


Does anyone believe that the orders for that audit came from “low-level staffers”?


I can name one person who probably believes it.

_________________
[quote="Elijah Dukes"] When you are the inappropriately aged early 40 year old in the illicit relationship, you NEVER go to try to smooth it over at her house. That's when you get attacked by baseball bats.[/quote]


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: RedivideR and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group