IRS Scandal explodes. "no evidence that would support a criminal prosecution."

[fskimospy]

Since when is the military the department of defense? Does that mean that every school in the country is the department of education or every hospital the department of health and human services and therefore they are part of the administration?

Edit: Whatever, they report to the executive at some point I guess (through a cabinet position). But then again, they also report to Congress as well.

The military is 100%, entirely part of the executive branch.

Unlike hospitals and schools, every service member is a federal employee, and through the chain of command they are directly under the command and supervision of the executive branch.

 

[xBiffx]

Shameful. Much earlier in this thread, it was established that only the timing of the information release was improper. It was released prior to approval & would have been released anyway upon approval.

You already knew that, but please, hack away.

Confidential info would have been released? Care to back that up?

 

[xBiffx]

The military is 100%, entirely part of the executive branch.

Unlike hospitals and schools, every service member is a federal employee, and through the chain of command they are directly under the command and supervision of the executive branch.

As well as the legislative branch, at least partly. But yes, they report directly to the executive through the Department of Defense. I get that.

Edit: I would say there is a rather large difference between the military and the IRS, or other agencies when it comes to how things are handled regarding the executive. But I'd probably be splitting hairs. In the end, I guess it would be just as correct to say Obama's Military as Obama's IRS.

 

[fskimospy]

As well as the legislative branch, at least partly. But yes, they report directly to the executive through the Department of Defense. I get that.

No, they are not part of the legislative branch at all. The president is in charge of them and they get their funding through appropriations to an executive agency (department of defense).

While it's true that Congress can issue regulations that affect the military that's true for every executive branch agency. I mean would you say the FBI or the SEC is part of the legislative branch? They are as much part of the legislative branch as the military is.

 

[xBiffx]

No, they are not part of the legislative branch at all. The president is in charge of them and they get their funding through appropriations to an executive agency (department of defense).

While it's true that Congress can issue regulations that affect the military that's true for every executive branch agency. I mean would you say the FBI or the SEC is part of the legislative branch? They are as much part of the legislative branch as the military is.

I should have highlighted the part I was referring to. I didn't mean to say they are part of the legislative branch I meant to address that part about who they report to. Sorry for that confusion.

I would say the FBI is much like the military regarding report structure.

This is an interesting side topic but its starting to go way off topic. I think we cleared up this side debate nicely though.

 

[fskimospy]

I should have highlighted the part I was referring to. I didn't mean to say they are part of the legislative branch I meant to address that part about who they report to. Sorry for that confusion.

I would say the FBI is much like the military regarding report structure.

This is an interesting side topic but its starting to go way off topic. I think we cleared up this side debate nicely though.

Fair enough!

 

[Pens1566]

no, because the military isn't part of the executive branch, i.e. The administration.

Edit: The military is actually part of the executive branch via the depart of defense.

derp derp derp

 

[MongGrel]

Confidential info would have been released? Care to back that up?

As well as the legislative branch, at least partly. But yes, they report directly to the executive through the Department of Defense. I get that.

Edit: I would say there is a rather large difference between the military and the IRS, or other agencies when it comes to how things are handled regarding the executive. But I'd probably be splitting hairs. In the end, I guess it would be just as correct to say Obama's Military as Obama's IRS.

I should have highlighted the part I was referring to. I didn't mean to say they are part of the legislative branch I meant to address that part about who they report to. Sorry for that confusion.

I would say the FBI is much like the military regarding report structure.

This is an interesting side topic but its starting to go way off topic. I think we cleared up this side debate nicely though.

What rock did you climb out from under lately to spew your lunacy ?

 

[Jhhnn]

Confidential info would have been released? Care to back that up?

Trivial and well established. Werepossum knew it when he posted bait for chumps like you-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...al-info-on-conservative-groups-to-propublica/

 

[xBiffx]

What rock did you climb out from under lately to spew your lunacy ?

Suck my what?

 

[xBiffx]

Trivial and well established. Werepossum knew it when he posted bait for chumps like you-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...al-info-on-conservative-groups-to-propublica/

I don't think that link says what you think it says. Information doesn't equate to confidential information. If the groups gained approval and received exempt status, that information about who the group was could be released. That says nothing about releasing confidential information regarding the group.

Again, nowhere is it stated that confidential information was going to be released.

 

[Jhhnn]

I don't think that link says what you think it says. Information doesn't equate to confidential information. If the groups gained approval and received exempt status, that information about who the group was could be released. That says nothing about releasing confidential information regarding the group.

Again, nowhere is it stated that confidential information was going to be released.

We already know you'll only believe what you want to believe. Say something different.

The information in question is only confidential during the approval process. One approval is granted, the information is made public.

Werepossum & other propagandists just keep throwing it out there as FUD for the mindless masses. That's true of all the information about this controversy. There is no new information, just new spin.

 

[xBiffx]

We already know you'll only believe what you want to believe. Say something different.

The information in question is only confidential during the approval process. One approval is granted, the information is made public.

Not true at all. The information released after approval was never confidential. The IRS just didn't have the authority to do it until the group start benefiting from tax exempt status.

 

[Jhhnn]

Not true at all. The information released after approval was never confidential. The IRS just didn't have the authority to do it until the group start benefiting from tax exempt status.

You're attempting a maneuver best left to those more capable- dancing on the head of a rhetorical pin. The information release was premature, at worst, and not an indication of malicious intent at all.

Werepossum knew it when he tossed you that chunk of red meat laced with hallucinogens.

 

[xBiffx]

You're attempting a maneuver best left to those more capable- dancing on the head of a rhetorical pin. The information release was premature, at worst, and not an indication of malicious intent at all.

Werepossum knew it when he tossed you that chunk of red meat laced with hallucinogens.

The IRS wouldn't be losing in a lawsuit and being fined for prematurely releasing information that would have been made public anyways. It's because of releasing confidential information that they lost and were forced to pay.

 

[piasabird]

Make the IRS pay a $10,000 fine to everyone who's information they compromised without a court order or permission of the individual.

 

[xBiffx]

Make the IRS pay a $10,000 fine to everyone who's information they compromised without a court order or permission of the individual.

They were forced to pay $50,000 in the case of the National Organization for Marriage so I'd say that sets the precedence on the figure.

 

[piasabird]

It should go further than that and here is why. For a non-profit, they did something that was illegal by asking for all the names of the donors. Lets say you have a list of 10,000 donors. Every donor should have to be paid A FINE by the IRS.

 

[xBiffx]

It should go further than that and here is why. For a non-profit, they did something that was illegal by asking for all the names of the donors. Lets say you have a list of 10,000 donors. Every donor should have to be paid A FINE by the IRS.

I see what you mean. Agreed.

Things have to change at the IRS though too. They are paying this out with our money and we should be able to request that it not be allowed to happen again.

 

[PokerGuy]

Having the IRS pay fines is good for those harmed, but in the end they are just paying the fines with our money. Idiots that do these dumb things need to be held accountable - fired, suspended, loss of pension, demotion, whatever is appropriate for their role. That's when things start to change, when people feel the impact personally. As we see with police department settlements etc all the time, when they just dole out someone elses money (the taxpayers' ), it doesn't provide a good enough incentive to stop the misbehaving.

 

[cabri]

Having the IRS pay fines is good for those harmed, but in the end they are just paying the fines with our money. Idiots that do these dumb things need to be held accountable - fired, suspended, loss of pension, demotion, whatever is appropriate for their role. That's when things start to change, when people feel the impact personally. As we see with police department settlements etc all the time, when they just dole out someone elses money (the taxpayers' ), it doesn't provide a good enough incentive to stop the misbehaving.

When someone else pays the bills; there is no incentive to conserve

 

[bshole]

Yea keep barking up this tree. That will get you somewhere.....

 

[Moonbeam]

When someone else pays the bills; there is no incentive to conserve

A lot of people who have no internal morality think as you do imagining in their ignorance that all people think that way.

 

[PokerGuy]

A lot of people who have no internal morality think as you do imagining in their ignorance that all people think that way.

Proof, meet pudding. Morality or not, empirical evidence shows us fines paid by others are not a very effective deterrent. Personal accountability for misbehavior can be.

 

[cabri]

Link

Another layer of the onion is peeled back

Lerner famously took the Fifth rather than testify about how the Internal Revenue Service came to target right-leaning advocacy nonprofits in the run-up to the 2012 election.

Ever since, the IRS has blocked congressional efforts to get to the facts, while the Justice Department’s “probe” was a joke even before the president declared there’s “not a smidgen of corruption” in the affair.

Happily, the public-interest group Judicial Watch is on the job, pushing to get the facts out. On Monday, it forced an IRS attorney to admit Lerner had used a personal email account under the “Toby Miles” name to conduct official government business.

..


The capper: One Lerner acquaintance says “Toby Miles” is the name of Lerner’s dog.

Nothing quite says truth and transparency like doing Uncle Sam’s work under your dog’s name.

and for those that like to shoot the messenger
FoxNews