IRS confesses to inappropriately targeting conservative groups.

[OutHouse]

Ah.....nothing like a good old fashion fishing expedition on the tax payer's dime.

the fish has been landed pal, the problem is finding out who caught it and send their ass to prison.

 

[Double Trouble]

Ah.....nothing like a good old fashion fishing expedition on the tax payer's dime.

A fishing expedition is when they go out to search for some wrongdoing. In this case the wrondoing has been confirmed, looks like the only way we're going to get any real answers is through a special prosecutor.

 

[Fern]

Even more interesting is that the IRS is being sued now for that change:

http://www.citizensforethics.org/le...ailing-to-revise-rules-governing-501c4-groups

Info about the change can be found in the article as well.

Thanks for the info.

I see there are already cases filed (e.g., a former candidate named Dr. Gill from FL).

The problem appears to be that so far courts find that taxpayers suing for this do not have standing. I don't see how CREW can overcome this either.

Moreover, the courts seem reluctant to embrace the term "exclusively" in a literal sense. To do so would prevent all organization from qualifying.

E.g., Time in a meeting is spent gossiping (local politics, who is on vacation and where etc.) or eating food. A literal interpretation of "exclusively" (i.e., 100%) would preclude any organization from qualifying.

I suppose they can tighten up on the definition of "primarily". Is it 51% to 49%, or 99% to 1%?

And whatever % number you come up with it, how is it measured? Is it money? Is it time? etc. It's going to be problematic. As it is, defining "social welfare" is very nebulous.

In any case, the pooling of funds for political purposes is not taxable, nor should it be. Nor should it be tax deductible for the donors (and it isn't).

Perhaps they should re-think this and come up with an entirely new category and new set of rules for such quasi-political groups.

Fern

 

[kage69]

It was the "Whitewater Defense" sorry if you're not old enough to have seen it, it's a classic.

I'm sure that's what Rush and others would like to refer to it as, I'm not surprised at all it wouldn't have taken a namesake from the Reagan years.
I actually remember watching the Hillary testimony on CNN, saw clear weaselism and avoidance true enough, but none of that approached the attitude and sleaze that Alberto disgusted Congress and nation with.

Not even close, which is probably why no one is coughing up links comparing the two.

Sorry, whatever mold you think Hillary created was shattered by Gonzales, with gusto. Magnitude just seems more relevant to me than date. Kinda like when I contemplate fast cars, I don't consider a vintage Shelby Mustang the embodiment of speed. The Lambo or GT-R would be more appropriate, even though I still know the Shelby is fast. Probably not the view brand-loyal car enthusiasts would take though, I'll admit.

 

[monovillage]

I'm sure that's what Rush and others would like to refer to it as, I'm not surprised at all it wouldn't have taken a namesake from the Reagan years.
I actually remember watching the Hillary testimony on CNN, saw clear weaselism and avoidance true enough, but none of that approached the attitude and sleaze that Alberto disgusted Congress and nation with.

Not even close, which is probably why no one is coughing up links comparing the two.

Sorry, whatever mold you think Hillary created was shattered by Gonzales, with gusto. Magnitude just seems more relevant to me than date. Kinda like when I contemplate fast cars, I don't consider a vintage Shelby Mustang the embodiment of speed. The Lambo or GT-R would be more appropriate, even though I still know the Shelby is fast. Probably not the view brand-loyal car enthusiasts would take though, I'll admit.

It's always from point of view. However I'm a motorcycle guy so the Suzuki Hayabusa or the Kawasaki Ninja , Honda CBX etc. give all the speed you can handle at a tiny fraction of the price.

 

[kage69]

It's always from point of view.

I hear that, but I don't consider believing 64 > 12 is a matter of perspective. Mathematical fact is not subjective.

I also consider partisan corruption at the Justice Department, resulting in effective employees being terminated, far more of a pressing national issue than an improper business loan.

However I'm a motorcycle guy so the Suzuki Hayabusa or the Kawasaki Ninja , Honda CBX etc. give all the speed you can handle at a tiny fraction of the price.

Did not see that coming at all.

 

[xBiffx]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/darrell-issa-irs-lois-lerner-91755.html?hp=t3_3

I tend to agree. I also don't think she has a constitutional right to not incriminate others.

She claims she is innocent and has done nothing wrong so nothing she says can hurt her. She would not be exercising her 5th amendment right if what she said in her statement is true.

 

[raildogg]

Get rid of the IRS and many of the government departments. You will reduce waste and make lives slightly easier for people. Have simple tax codes that can be enforced rather than having a huge bureaucracy that seems frightening to many people. But that will not happen because people are more interested in scoring political points rather than solving the actual problems.

 

[brycejones]

the fish has been landed pal, the problem is finding out who caught it and send their ass to prison.

And there is the problem you already assume something criminal was done. I won't even begin to argue that it was a stupid policy. But criminal? In what way, please site the specific federal statute you believe was broken and how.

 

[Fern]

And there is the problem you already assume something criminal was done. I won't even begin to argue that it was a stupid policy. But criminal? In what way, please site the specific federal statute you believe was broken and how.

I already posted a link to one of the specific statutes (felony) that would have been broken should allegations be correct.

Fern

 

[Pantoot]

She claims she is innocent and has done nothing wrong so nothing she says can hurt her. She would not be exercising her 5th amendment right if what she said in her statement is true.

I really, really hope you don't believe that. Anytime you say anything to the police, to a judge, to a prosecutor, or even to congress it can hurt you. Regardless of whether or not you have done anything wrong.

 

[xBiffx]

I really, really hope you don't believe that. Anytime you say anything to the police, to a judge, to a prosecutor, or even to congress it can hurt you. Regardless of whether or not you have done anything wrong.

Sorry, it works different in front of Congress than it does in a court of law.

Also, she can't claim innocence and then hide behind the 5th. Claiming innocence is making testimony. At that point, the fifth is too late for you.

 

[HomerJS]

I love people here who are so fond of the constitution get bent out of shape when someone exercises their constitutional rights.

 

[monovillage]

I love people here who are so fond of the constitution get bent out of shape when someone exercises their constitutional rights.

You mean like how outraged you got when Zimmerman used his 2nd Amendment Rights to protect his life?

 

[Brainonska511]

Get rid of the IRS and many of the government departments. You will reduce waste and make lives slightly easier for people. Have simple tax codes that can be enforced rather than having a huge bureaucracy that seems frightening to many people. But that will not happen because people are more interested in scoring political points rather than solving the actual problems.

And who will collect taxes and enforce tax laws? Perhaps some sort of agency that will be in charge of revenue internal to the United States?

 

[Paratus]

I haven't really been paying attention to this but an I getting this right?

Conservatives are pissed because they were profiled by the IRS? I thought conservatives all loved profiling?

Maybe that's only for brown people. :hmm:

 

[palehorse]

I haven't really been paying attention to this but an I getting this right?

Conservatives are pissed because they were profiled by the IRS? I thought conservatives all loved profiling?

Maybe that's only for brown people. :hmm:

Grow up. This is a serious issue that shouldn't be dismissed or downplayed by anyone.

On another note... I thought that the issue with her taking the 5th was that she only did so AFTER reading her statement, therefore preventing cross-examination of that statement itself? Also, wasn't the only reason they didn't pursue that fact because it wasn't an actual Federal court?

That's how I interpreted it...

 

[monovillage]

I haven't really been paying attention to this but an I getting this right?

Conservatives are pissed because they were profiled by the IRS? I thought conservatives all loved profiling?

Maybe that's only for brown people. :hmm:

Nope, you're wrong again, but you should be used to fail by now.

 

[brycejones]

I already posted a link to one of the specific statutes (felony) that would have been broken should allegations be correct.

Fern

Post number?

 

[HomerJS]

You mean like how outraged you got when Zimmerman used his 2nd Amendment Rights to protect his life?

Confusing right to bear arms with the right to hunt down and kill innocent people??

 

[boomerang]

Sorry, it works different in front of Congress than it does in a court of law.

Also, she can't claim innocence and then hide behind the 5th. Claiming innocence is making testimony. At that point, the fifth is too late for you.

Somebody was going to take the fall for this and after her performance yesterday, we know she's guilty of something and I'd say she's it.

Trey Gowdy nailed it. She either got some really bad advice, (on purpose maybe?) did it purposely herself or is just too damned ignorant to have comprehended the consequences of making an opening statement and then pleading the fifth. Regardless, she's unfit for the office and unfit to serve the nation in any capacity.

It will be interesting to see how this debacle affects Obamacare. As the chief enforcement arm for it, the IRS has pretty much proven themselves incapable as well as unwilling to enforce the law in an unbiased manner.

 

[Paratus]

Grow up. This is a serious issue that shouldn't be dismissed or downplayed by anyone.

On another note... I thought that the issue with her taking the 5th was that she only did so AFTER reading her statement, therefore preventing cross-examination of that statement itself? Also, wasn't the only reason they didn't pursue that fact because it wasn't an actual Federal court?

That's how I interpreted it...

I'm glad to hear that you consider the government illegally targeting individuals and groups is chilling. It is. Whenever they do it, to whomever.......

As to the 5th I believe you can invoke it anytime you wish.


This really looks like incompetence at the Ohio branch of the IRS with middle mangers now taking the fifth to cover their asses. Or is there a conspiracy I missed?

 

[Paratus]

Nope, you're wrong again, but you should be used to fail by now.

Yup every post of yours. :biggrin:

 

[Attic]

Has this wretch been fired yet? Her choice to shut up about what she knows, legal council my ass, just take a slither of responsibility for the harm you caused and continue to cause and then resign. In a case contingent on knowledge she is giving the finger to everybody while claiming she's just waving.

Clearly she has history of being complicity deceitful in her conduct. Get rid of her and find someone better ffs.

 

[boomerang]

Or is there a conspiracy I missed?

No conspiracy. Congressional hearings aren't typically based on whims.