IRS: We Targeted Conservative, Tea Party Groups With Extra Scrutiny — 'Mistakes Were Made'

reply to post by charles1952


Thanks Charles, for providing that information.

I honestly believe that most would be terrified to introduce impeachment to the Obama-machine.

reply to post by beezzer


Impeachment is fruitless. Time would be better spent trying to identify a qualified candidate for the next election cycle. It has been such a long time since we have had one. Nothing but shills and crooks......

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by beezzer

 

Impeachment is fruitless. Time would be better spent trying to identify a qualified candidate for the next election cycle. It has been such a long time since we have had one. Nothing but shills and crooks......

We need an ATS version of the Diogenes Society.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Impeachment is fruitless. Time would be better spent trying to identify a qualified candidate for the next election cycle. It has been such a long time since we have had one. Nothing but shills and crooks......

Ain't that the truth!!

Obama does need to be scrutinized though. His "above the law" tactics, failures and blunders are just the tip of the proverbial Iceberg.

No one should think they can get away with breaking the law, especially the President. I'm worried what Obama will do in his last years as President. That should worry everyone..

And yes.... Those shills and crooks we have in Congress need the microscope on them also.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

What concerns me, my friend, is that we are asking the fox to investigate who stole the chickens from the hen-house.

Isn't this the same thing that happened with Benghazi? Do we have a new trend here?

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

What concerns me, my friend, is that we are asking the fox to investigate who stole the chickens from the hen-house.

Isn't this the same thing that happened with Benghazi? Do we have a new trend here?

Benghazi is the point on the timeline where the trend could be proven. Fast and Furious is where the trend started. Though, we could also include the Fort Hood "work place incident" another plot point in the trend. As well as the Saudi "person of interest" that wasn't interesting. All of these things are being fully covered up, errr excuse me, investigated by the White House.

The chickens are coming home to roost. Need we any other excuses to cling to our bibles and guns? I'm an atheist, but my government is quickly placing the fear of God in me. Strange times indeed. Obama just might be the proverbial false messiah, which until recently I always thought was a ridiculous idea. I;m beginning to think there may be some merit to the idea. It's at least worth another White House investigation [cover up].

Originally posted by charles1952
The question of which law was broken may be irrelevant. Consider the three Nixon articles of impeachment. The first article was the break in.

The second contained this:

This conduct has included one or more of the following:
1.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.(emphasis added)

This, clearly, is what Obama has also done, and the IRS has admitted to.

And from the third article of impeachment comes:

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his 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 violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. (emphasis added)

watergate.info...

I hate to sound like a kook, but it appears that the only thing keeping Obama from being impeached is the lack of political will to do it, and not any legal problem.

Dear me Charles, you really must think Obama is a muslim for him to be attracting this level of ire from you. Please identify where this is evidence the president did anything of the sort? And rest of the class, no rolling eyes, prove it or there is nothing to claim.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by charles1952

 

Thanks Charles, for providing that information.

I honestly believe that most would be terrified to introduce impeachment to the Obama-machine.

Wow, you really don't stop there do you? Why would they be terrified? How does the info from Charles actually play into this as there is nothing (I don't care what you think might be the case, prove it or it's BS) to say anyone in the WH made the IRS pay more attention on extreme right wing groups, or that the IRS routinely looks at groups at the extreme side of the pendulum with more detail than those more central? Yet once again, you snatch at it.....

I hate to sound like the one who sounds the cliche, but deny ignorance should mean just because you think something is right with no evidence to back up your feelings doesn't make it right. Sheesh, if that was the case on ATS I would now be trying to get bigfoot to get off my chair, the reptilians to give me back the remote and those holographic planes to stop trying to crash into my house.

Originally posted by something wicked


Dear me Charles, you really must think Obama is a muslim for him to be attracting this level of ire from you.

Huh? Where did that come from? Or are you panicking and grasping at straws now.

Please identify where this is evidence the president did anything of the sort?

The evidence exists. As for culpability? That is still being determined. But Obama is the president. You know, the whole, "The buck stops here" thing?

And rest of the class, no rolling eyes, prove it or there is nothing to claim.

*yawn*



Didn't realize that we had to have proof in order to speculate first.

The progressive machine at MSNBC must be sweating bullets right now.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by something wicked


Dear me Charles, you really must think Obama is a muslim for him to be attracting this level of ire from you.

Huh? Where did that come from? Or are you panicking and grasping at straws now.

Please identify where this is evidence the president did anything of the sort?

The evidence exists. As for culpability? That is still being determined. But Obama is the president. You know, the whole, "The buck stops here" thing?

And rest of the class, no rolling eyes, prove it or there is nothing to claim.

*yawn*

Didn't realize that we had to have proof in order to speculate first.

The progressive machine at MSNBC must be sweating bullets right now.

Awwwwwww, ok, you are right, you don't need proof to speculate first, but without proof all you have is opinion. Can I add a yawn to your comments please? You seem to constantly look for things to pick up on and blame the president of the country you don't currently live in (if you are now back in the US, apologies).

BTW, the point about Charles and him thinking Obama must be a muslim is the closest thing to a joke I could think of - you would understand if you saw many of the posts Charles has made which I respect but kind of show some kind of leaning.

Originally posted by beezzer


Didn't realize that we had to have proof in order to speculate first.

The progressive machine at MSNBC must be sweating bullets right now.

"Forward" isn't just MSNBC's slogan either...........


And for speculation.I wouldn't be surprised like I said earlier, that Obama and his Administrations hands are all over this one.

But you wont get "Investigating Journalism" from the likes of the Liberal Media. The only way anything comes out of this, is if the Tea Party movement, and Conservatives start protesting in mass. I am ALL for it.

Originally posted by something wicked
You seem to constantly look for things to pick up on and blame the president of the country

Our President consistently has problems, here and abroad.

You don't have to look far either. I would expect investigations, regardless if its a Democrat or a Republican President.

Imagine if Union Members were being held to the same scrutiny the Tea Party groups or Conservatives were?

Do you think there would be outrage? I sure as hell know there would be. I would be angered just the same.

reply to post by sonnny1


Greg Gutfeld stated that the MSM is a media condom for Obama. He is flawless and has to be protected at all times.

He will probably not be touched by this personally, but his legacy will be one of lies, non-transparency, deceit, blame, obfuscation and incompetence.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Greg Gutfeld stated that the MSM is a media condom for Obama. He is flawless and has to be protected at all times.

He will probably not be touched by this personally, but his legacy will be one of lies, non-transparency, deceit, blame, obfuscation and incompetence.

I am angered at the weak "apology" from the IRS.




Typical media response.......

The President has been very proud of the absence of scandal in his administration, and rightly so.

IRS Mess


Are you kidding me?????

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Greg Gutfeld stated that the MSM is a media condom for Obama. He is flawless and has to be protected at all times.

He will probably not be touched by this personally, but his legacy will be one of lies, non-transparency, deceit, blame, obfuscation and incompetence.

Beezzer, why don't you just say - I don't care what the issue is, it's Obama's fault? You clearly feel so. What are you going to do when the next president comes in?

I've honestly no skin in this game, but you seem to apply no critical thought, you just don't like the guy - just say it once and surely that's it, said, unless you actually have some information to actually provide?

reply to post by something wicked

Dear something wicked,

I agree with you, partially, let me deal with that first.

Is there absolute, "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof? No, you're right. Might I add "not yet." The point of the investigations is to establish proof of what happened and who did what. They are already turning up interesting proofs. Many on the left and right are saying that, as of now, things are not looking good for the Administration.

But I must ask for an apology, which of course you don't have to offer, for your statement:

Dear me Charles, you really must think Obama is a muslim for him to be attracting this level of ire from you

I have never claimed that Obama is a Muslim. My standard position is "I don't know, but it is a question in some people's minds. The important question isn't his religion but his policies." You have misrepresented me.

I appreciate the semi-retraction contained here, but it is insufficient:

BTW, the point about Charles and him thinking Obama must be a muslim is the closest thing to a joke I could think of - you would understand if you saw many of the posts Charles has made which I respect but kind of show some kind of leaning.

Some kind of leaning? What does that mean? Who cares whether I lean one way or the other. Besides, as I said, I truly and honestly don't care about the religion. I don't have any leanings on that subject, and i believe my posts reflect that.

Further, you are insisting that other posters provide proof. Will you provide proof of your statement? Or am I expecting the impossible?

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. "Credibility points" are crucial to me. If they mean nothing to you, that's your call. - C -

Originally posted by something wicked


Beezzer, why don't you just say - I don't care what the issue is, it's Obama's fault? You clearly feel so. What are you going to do when the next president comes in?

I'll probably be just as critical. Obama has been a failed president from the start. His approach of Keynesian economics, his guarded approach that stinks of the Cloward-Piven Strategy, his failed foreign policies, his failed domestic policies. Waah. Sorry if I upset his fan club. I'll be just as much a bastard in the next presidency. Hell, I got banned from half a doze conservative sites when Bush was in office because I refuse to drink the kool-aide and demand a spine and honesty, integrity, and common sense from my elected representative.

I've honestly no skin in this game, but you seem to apply no critical thought, you just don't like the guy - just say it once and surely that's it, said, unless you actually have some information to actually provide?

Just did. I don't base my opinions on emotional issues like you progressives do.

I tend to just look at facts.

Originally posted by something wicked
What are you going to do when the next president comes in?

If its Joe Biden, God help us..........

Well now.... The plot thickens. I'd wondered what brought all this on. How about...they were about to be busted very publicly and very badly ...and of course, this White House handles damage control like pros! (After all, they've had enough experience needing to, to be master craftsman by now)

Senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew employees were singling out conservative groups for extra scrutiny as early as 2011, according to a watchdog agency’s report set to be released next week, POLITICO has confirmed from a congressional source.

The disclosure that senior officials knew agents were flagging applications containing the words “patriot” or “tea party” contradicts public statements by former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. He repeatedly denied that his agency was targeting conservative groups when asked by Congress last year.

“This, to me, is simply unbelievable. While I’m glad that the IRS has apologized for this misconduct, that is simply not enough. We need to know more,” the Utah Republican said at a conference in Washington on Saturday. “We need to know who was behind this unlawful activity, when it began, who found out about it, when they found out, and what they did or did not do to correct it.”

(Source: Politico)

I do believe that last quote has a good point. "Getting out ahead", just to preempt being busted ....is absolutely not enough. Now that there may be more perspective for why they were so happy and eager to take blame and say strong things (I'd REALLY wondered about that)? Let the investigation of the IRS begin!

It's about time THEY got to feel the pointy end of an inquisition. They're the ones GIVING it most of the time.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Add this to the IRS's arsenal of information.........

The Secure Firearms Act includes:

Up to a $1,200 tax deduction to purchase a gun safe and/or security devices through December 31, 2014.
A prohibition on the IRS use of tax deduction claims to produce any form of gun owner registration.

Secure Firearms Act to Reduce Gun Violence introduced by Carter, Cuellar

Not to say its a bad idea, but anything that involves the IRS should be met with scrutiny.