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

[Doc Savage Fan]

So now you're just repeating yourself while providing evidence from the same people that you want to use as judges of the paper's position that the NYT is consciously unbiased about governance related things. You also have not explained why you attempted to use the public editor's statements as evidence of a policy bias when he explicitly disavowed such a thing. (intellectual dishonesty)

Regardless, all this stemmed from a hilarious attempt to equate the paper of record in the US with an extreme, openly right wing blog. That's a transparently stupid comparison.

I'm not providing evidence from the same people. There have been 5 public editors for the paper and I've shown that 3 of these acknowledged liberal bias. I also quoted 2 Executive Editors who also freely acknowledged the paper's liberal bias.

And lastly, I never attempted to equate NYT bias with that of a right wing blog. If you're looking for "transparently stupid"...you might want to start there. Anyway, I'm done...I've derailed this thread enough and I offer my apologies to the OP. Peace.

 

[hal2kilo]

They are perfectly correct within the context of the application process. That is clearly what I was talking about, and is indeed what this entire controversy is about: proactive enforcement of those laws during the application process to ensure applicants are truly eligible for 501(c)(4) status.

This is was so predictable. You know that this was the whole purpose of this show hearing. They've gotten exactly what they've wanted alll along. The IRS has officially been bullied into not doing ther due diligence and just rubber stamping this whole charade of "sociaL advocacy" not being just another ruse for political donations.

 

[cabri]

This is was so predictable. You know that this was the whole purpose of this show hearing. They've gotten exactly what they've wanted alll along. The IRS has officially been bullied into not doing ther due diligence and just rubber stamping this whole charade of "sociaL advocacy" not being just another ruse for political donations.

Just like a bluff being called in poker.
The IRS is unable to defend their actions, so they are folding their hand rather than try to play it out. That way, they hope to not have to show their hand

 

[Bowfinger]

You do recognize the parallel now?

I recognize you are trying to invent a parallel between two unrelated things, yes. Lerner's drive crash, its timing, and her attempts to recover her data via her IT group are well documented and well understood. The relative workload for those agents reviewing 501(c)(4) applications is not.

 

[Bowfinger]

This is was so predictable. You know that this was the whole purpose of this show hearing. They've gotten exactly what they've wanted alll along. The IRS has officially been bullied into not doing ther due diligence and just rubber stamping this whole charade of "sociaL advocacy" not being just another ruse for political donations.

That's what it looks like to me. The IRS application review process only slightly impeded the anonymous flow of dirty money into political "advocacy" (i.e., covert campaign support), but even that was too much for the right. They've now bullied the IRS into abandoning even that small hurdle. A government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. God ble$$ the U$A.

 

[werepossum]

This is was so predictable. You know that this was the whole purpose of this show hearing. They've gotten exactly what they've wanted alll along. The IRS has officially been bullied into not doing ther due diligence and just rubber stamping this whole charade of "sociaL advocacy" not being just another ruse for political donations.

Um, no. The IRS has officially been bullied into not ASSUMING that conservative groups will be less honest than proggie groups and therefore on the basis of that assumption shunting conservative groups' applications into limbo, never being denied with reasons that may be refuted, whilst left wing groups' applications are quickly approved. The IRS remains free to police actual behavior, just not free to stack the deck before the fact and thereby restrict the benefits of not-for-profit status to the political left.

 

[thraashman]

That's what it looks like to me. The IRS application review process only slightly impeded the anonymous flow of dirty money into political "advocacy" (i.e., covert campaign support), but even that was too much for the right. They've now bullied the IRS into abandoning even that small hurdle. A government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. God ble$$ the U$A.

It's absolutely disgusting and the people who support is are just as disgusting. I can't believe how many people are longing for the days of robber barons.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's what it looks like to me. The IRS application review process only slightly impeded the anonymous flow of dirty money into political "advocacy" (i.e., covert campaign support), but even that was too much for the right. They've now bullied the IRS into abandoning even that small hurdle. A government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. God ble$$ the U$A.

Too true. Their idea of how to run a political campaign was partially revealed In the John Doe 2 investigation around Scott Walker's office.

 

[PokerGuy]

That's what it looks like to me. The IRS application review process only slightly impeded the anonymous flow of dirty money into political "advocacy" (i.e., covert campaign support), but even that was too much for the right. They've now bullied the IRS into abandoning even that small hurdle. A government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. God ble$$ the U$A.

The IRS got bullied? Really? You guys seem to constantly forget that this entire mess came about when the bullying and illegal activities of the IRS were exposed. There is concrete evidence of misdeeds and abuse on the part of the IRS. That's not something concocted by the ebil right wing. The subsequent coverups and lies are another matter entirely. I don't think it's a good thing for any of us to have the IRS not be able to do what they're supposed to do, but to think this is all the doing of the ebil right wing is simply delusional. The conservative groups are clearly the victims here.

 

[PokerGuy]

It's absolutely disgusting and the people who support is are just as disgusting.

Wait... so IRS abusing conservative groups is OK, but exposing that abuse and going after the abusers is "disgusting"? Interesting logic you got there.

 

[thraashman]

Wait... so IRS abusing conservative groups is OK, but exposing that abuse and going after the abusers is "disgusting"? Interesting logic you got there.

No, the Republican advocation for the rich buying elections is what's disgusting. But thanks for playing, even those who end the game with negative scores still get a lovely parting gift.

 

[Jhhnn]

The IRS got bullied? Really? You guys seem to constantly forget that this entire mess came about when the bullying and illegal activities of the IRS were exposed. There is concrete evidence of misdeeds and abuse on the part of the IRS. That's not something concocted by the ebil right wing. The subsequent coverups and lies are another matter entirely. I don't think it's a good thing for any of us to have the IRS not be able to do what they're supposed to do, but to think this is all the doing of the ebil right wing is simply delusional. The conservative groups are clearly the victims here.

Oh, God! Victimhood! Of the worst kind! The "They made us fill out paperwork!" kind! The "They tried to block our scam!" kind!

Now that they got what they wanted, expect all the raving & misdirection about "Finding the Truth!" from congressional Repubs to die down completely.

 

[xBiffx]

Pointless to argue with anyone who is still defending the IRS's actions at this point.

Regardless of how you feel about the investigation, the IRS's actions are completely indefensible to anyone but a tool.

And don't for a second believe that anything would be any different if parties were reversed in this scandal. Well, except for the media attention aspect, that is.

 

[PokerGuy]

Pointless to argue with anyone who is still defending the IRS's actions at this point.

Regardless of how you feel about the investigation, the IRS's actions are completely indefensible to anyone but a tool.

And don't for a second believe that anything would be any different if parties were reversed in this scandal. Well, except for the media attention aspect, that is.

Exactly spot on. There is no defense for the IRS actions, and everyone knows it. The circus really revolves around the how/why/who knew/when and all that jazz -- the IRS actions being wrong is undeniable at this point.

 

[Jhhnn]

Pointless to argue with anyone who is still defending the IRS's actions at this point.

Regardless of how you feel about the investigation, the IRS's actions are completely indefensible to anyone but a tool.

And don't for a second believe that anything would be any different if parties were reversed in this scandal. Well, except for the media attention aspect, that is.

Exquisite false equivalency. There is no parallel to the vast & pervasive right wing money laundering machine on the Left.

 

[werepossum]

Pointless to argue with anyone who is still defending the IRS's actions at this point.

Regardless of how you feel about the investigation, the IRS's actions are completely indefensible to anyone but a tool.

And don't for a second believe that anything would be any different if parties were reversed in this scandal. Well, except for the media attention aspect, that is.

Yep, although I'll point out that when Nixon tried to use the IRS similarly, Republicans did not rally behind him but proceeded to drawing up articles of impeachment with the Democrats.

 

[fskimospy]

Yep, although I'll point out that when Nixon tried to use the IRS similarly, Republicans did not rally behind him but proceeded to drawing up articles of impeachment with the Democrats.

Of course they did. Nixon was caught giving an envelope of names to the IRS that he wanted investigated. Obama has been found doing nothing of the sort.

So if by "similarly" you mean "in the invented scenario that I have decided is reality the same thing happened" that's fine. If we're stuck only dealing with reality though, "similarly" looks pretty delusional to say.

 

[xBiffx]

Yep, although I'll point out that when Nixon tried to use the IRS similarly, Republicans did not rally behind him but proceeded to drawing up articles of impeachment with the Democrats.

To be fair, nothing yet leads to the White House in this case so I wouldn't compare the two parties responses to both events just yet. Still, democrats still defending the IRS in this matter is ridiculous. I think it does tell us what its going to look like if this does eventually go higher.

 

[Bowfinger]

Pointless to argue with anyone who is still defending the IRS's actions at this point.

Regardless of how you feel about the investigation, the IRS's actions are completely indefensible to anyone but a tool.

And don't for a second believe that anything would be any different if parties were reversed in this scandal. Well, except for the media attention aspect, that is.

Just as it is pointless to argue with fuzzy-headed rubes who have accepted as fact all of the innuendo, supposition, and outright lies pushed by Issa, Fox, and the rest of the wing-nut propaganda mill. The rubes believe, they have faith, they FEEL the "truth" in their guts. They are incapable of acknowledging that much of what they "know" is not supported by fact. It is a mass demonstration of partisan cognitive dissonance.

It is true the IRS used partisan keywords to help identify political organizations that did not qualify for 501(c)(4) status. That was wrong (even though it was effective, as documented in the TIGTA report). The IRS, specifically Lois Lerner, acknowledged early on that this approach was wrong and ordered it stopped. Five separate investigations, deposing scores of witnesses and reviewing upwards of a million documents, have yet to show any evidence this keyword targeting had any partisan intent whatsoever or was done at the request of Obama, or Lerner, or any other senior officials. Those are the basic facts.

 

[xBiffx]

Just as it is pointless to argue with fuzzy-headed rubes who have accepted as fact all of the innuendo, supposition, and outright lies pushed by Issa, Fox, and the rest of the wing-nut propaganda mill. The rubes believe, they have faith, they FEEL the "truth" in their guts. They are incapable of acknowledging that much of what they "know" is not supported by fact. It is a mass demonstration of partisan cognitive dissonance.

I actually haven't watched one second of Fox or listened to one word from Issa on the matter. All I've done is watch a little CSPAN of the actual hearings and read a little bit of news here and there. Most of my conclusions are drawn directing from the horse's mouth(s). Lerner and Koskinen have given any objective observer all they need to come to the conclusion that the IRS's actions in regards to targeting certain groups and the handling of documentation were illegal.

But go on thinking that one needs innuendo and partisan cognitive dissonance when you have the accused admitting to wrongdoing.

You are such a fucking tool, Bowfinger.

 

[Bowfinger]

I actually haven't watched one second of Fox or listened to one word from Issa on the matter. All I've done is watch a little CSPAN of the actual hearings and read a little bit of news here and there. Most of my conclusions are drawn directing from the horse's mouth(s). Lerner and Koskinen have given any objective observer all they need to come to the conclusion that the IRS's actions in regards to targeting certain groups and the handling of documentation were illegal.

But go on thinking that one needs innuendo and partisan cognitive dissonance when you have the accused admitting to wrongdoing.

You are such a fucking tool, Bowfinger.

Sure. Feel free to provide actual quotes from Lerner and Koskinen contradicting me, or "admitting to wrongdoing" beyond what I've already stated. I won't hold my breath. The beauty of your faith is that you don't need actual facts to form your beliefs. You get this nice circular reinforcement, where you start with your partisan conclusions and spin everything new to fit those conclusions. When you encounter facts that directly contradict your faith, you ignore them. (Of course it's even easier when you limit your "news" to nutter bubble sources that do the spinning for you, telling you what to think without the inconvenience of challenging facts.) You are an RNC true-believer, a religious tool for the right.

 

[hal2kilo]

I actually haven't watched one second of Fox or listened to one word from Issa on the matter. All I've done is watch a little CSPAN of the actual hearings and read a little bit of news here and there. Most of my conclusions are drawn directing from the horse's mouth(s). Lerner and Koskinen have given any objective observer all they need to come to the conclusion that the IRS's actions in regards to targeting certain groups and the handling of documentation were illegal.

But go on thinking that one needs innuendo and partisan cognitive dissonance when you have the accused admitting to wrongdoing.

You are such a fucking tool, Bowfinger.

Must have been a different hearing. All I saw was a bunch of idiots interogating witnesses as if they had already been convicted of a crime, and not waiting for their answers.

 

[trenchfoot]

Must have been a different hearing. All I saw was a bunch of idiots interogating witnesses as if they had already been convicted of a crime, and not waiting for their answers.

From thinking back to the time when Obama first got elected, I get a sense that the Repub politicians in D.C. have come to the conclusion that they were now in a position of fighting a war that was "progressively" turning against them to the point where they had to create their own version of the "Battle of the Bulge" and go on an all-out offensive in a desperate attempt to turn back the ever building irrepressible tide of demographic change that's threatening to flush them out of office.

That strategy is manifesting itself in, among other tricks of the trade, hearings like the one in this post.

 

[werepossum]

Of course they did. Nixon was caught giving an envelope of names to the IRS that he wanted investigated. Obama has been found doing nothing of the sort.

So if by "similarly" you mean "in the invented scenario that I have decided is reality the same thing happened" that's fine. If we're stuck only dealing with reality though, "similarly" looks pretty delusional to say.

I'll clarify: Nixon was caught trying to use the IRS in behavior that is similar to what the IRS has been doing, which may have absolutely nothing to do with Obama. The IRS' behavior is similar between what they have been doing now and what Nixon wished them to do; I would not make the claim that Obama directed that behavior. It is worth pointing out though that Obama's "Justice" Department has been giving cover to the IRS, and after the election Obama too has been giving cover to the IRS.

To be fair, nothing yet leads to the White House in this case so I wouldn't compare the two parties responses to both events just yet. Still, democrats still defending the IRS in this matter is ridiculous. I think it does tell us what its going to look like if this does eventually go higher.

Agreed. I actually think this may have had nothing to do with Obama personally. Like the BAFTE going wild under Carter, this may well have been bureaucrats finally feeling free to act as they wished. Nixon too had nothing to do with the initial break-in, but felt that he had to cover it up after the fact to avoid political damage. In the course of that Nixon went on to commit acts for which impeachment could be the only remedy. Obviously we have not seen Obama do the same.

One very troubling thing is clear though - Obama and his Congressional Democrats and many if not most of their supporters believe that the IRS's actions are how government should work.

 

[PokerGuy]

One very troubling thing is clear though - Obama and his Congressional Democrats and many if not most of their supporters believe that the IRS's actions are how government should work.

That is the biggest issue here. The biggest issue isn't really that the IRS abused conservative groups -- we all know that already. Trying to determine the motivation behind the abuse, who was responsible, how exactly it came to be etc has become the big circus. The disconcerting reality is that the left has circled the wagons and finds the behavior (the abuse of people based on political affiliation) as acceptable, and has done everything to hinder any investigation and keep the truth hidden because they view it as potentially politically damaging.

Personally, I don't see any evidence to indicate that it was obummer himself that gave the orders, but it sure looks like other loyal followers in various places in the IRS (people like Lerner, Sands etc) used their positions to help 'further the cause'. That concept should scare everyone.