Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

IS THIS THE ‘SMOKING GUN’ THAT TIES THE IRS SCANDAL TO THE WHITE HOUSE?

+4
2seaoat
NaNook
Floridatexan
VectorMan
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

VectorMan

VectorMan

A new story from The American Spectator that has been gaining steam begins with this startling intro:

Is President Obama directly implicated in the IRS scandal?

Is the White House Visitors Log the trail to the smoking gun?

The stunning questions are raised by the following set of new facts.

The story focuses on Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union (i.e. the union for IRS employees), and her meeting with President Obama on March 31, 2010 — one day before the IRS started targeting conservative groups.

White House visitor logs available on TheBlaze show the visit:
IS THIS THE ‘SMOKING GUN’ THAT TIES THE IRS SCANDAL TO THE WHITE HOUSE? Screen-grab-35

“[T]he very day after the president of the quite publicly anti-Tea Party labor union — the union for IRS employees — met with President Obama, the manager of the IRS ‘Determinations Unit Program agreed’ to open a ‘Sensitive Case report on the Tea party cases,’” the American Spectator’s Jefferey Lord reports, citing the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration audit of the fed agency.

Lord provides some background on the NTEU:

The NTEU is the 150,000 member union that represents IRS employees along with 30 other separate government agencies. Kelley herself is a 14-year IRS veteran agent. The union’s PAC endorsed President Obama in both 2008 and 2012, and gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 2010 and 2012 election cycles to anti-Tea Party candidates.

But let’s back up for a second and clarify a few things.

First, Kelley visiting the White House in March of 2010 is not in of itself an extraordinary event. Indeed, according to Visitor Logs, she had already met with President Obama on a few occasions.

Second, we must point out that 117 “total people” were present at the 2010 White House forum on “Worplace Flexibility,” which the log lists as the reason for the visit. To be fair, that seems to point to a larger event as opposed to Kelley meeting with Obama behind closed doors.

Third, according to visitor records, the 2010 forum was held in the White House’s South Court Auditorium, which as former White House communications worker Josh King points out, is simply a large auditorium.

“On most days, South Court Auditorium is a generic, stadium-style meeting room with four or five rows of seats; space in the back of the room for cameras sitting on tripods; a small buffer area in front of the stage for still photographers to capture the key moment; and handy backstage doors for easy ingress and egress by the principals,” King explains.

Not exactly top-secret, private meeting material here.

IS THIS THE ‘SMOKING GUN’ THAT TIES THE IRS SCANDAL TO THE WHITE HOUSE? Bilde
Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.

But here’s something interesting: President Obama in 2009 handed Kelley’s union an unprecedented amount of control over the IRS.

“President [Obama] issued Executive Order 13522,” Lord notes. “The Executive Order, titled: ‘Creating Labor-Management Forums To Improve Delivery of Government Services’ applied across the federal government and included the IRS.”

The directive specifically allows “employees and unions to have pre-decisional involvement in all workplace matters.”

The fact that Kelley’s 2010 White House visit coincides so perfectly with the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups, the level of power the president recently granted her union, and the ability by someone within the administration to grant either a quick private meeting or briefing away from the group has raised a few eyebrows.

Just think of it this way, says Lord:

…the IRS union chief went to the White House to meet personally with the president on March 31. The union already had Executive Order 13522 behind it, issued by the President barely three months earlier. An Executive Order directing that the IRS must “allow employees and unions to have pre-decisional involvement in all workplace matters….”.

The very next day after that March 31 meeting at the White House, the IRS, with the union involved in its decision-making, was setting up its “Sensitive Case Report on the Tea Party.”

Coincidence? Perhaps. Odd? A little.

Needless to say, this has raised some very troubling questions [via AmSpec.]:

Did the President himself ever discuss the Tea Party with Kelley?
Did the President ever communicate his thoughts on the Tea Party to Kelley — in any fashion other than a face-to-face conversation such as e-mail, text, or by phone?
What was the subject of the Obama-Kelley March 31, 2010 meeting?
Who was present at the Obama-Kelley March 31 meeting?
Was the Tea Party or any other group opposing the President’s agenda discussed at the March 31 meeting, or before or after that meeting?
Is the White House going to release any e-mails, text, or phone records that detail Kelley’s contacts with not only Mr. Obama but his staff?
Will the IRS release all e-mail, text, or phone records between Kelley or any other leader of the NTEU with IRS employees?
What role did Executive Order 13522 play in the IRS investigations of the Tea Party and all these other conservative groups?
Clearly, the IRS scandal may be much bigger than originally thought. Perhaps that’s why Kelley has kept her mouth shut since the targeting was first revealed.

For instance, in a recent Washington Post article titled “IRS, union mum on employees held accountable in ‘sin’ of political targeting,” Kelley really didn’t want to talk about the scandal:

NTEU is working to get the facts but does not have any specifics at this time. Moreover, IRS employees are not permitted to discuss taxpayer cases. We cannot comment further at this time.

There you have it.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


There is no smoking gun, because there is no scandal. The IRS was inundated
with applications for that protected status as the fake grassroots organization known as the Tea Party rose to prominence as a wing of the GOP, promoted by Faux News and a few other right-wing crazies. The number of applications for 501(c)4 status more than doubled, but there was a gray area because of the Citizens United decision that left the IRS unsure of how to handle these entities. This is a non-scandal, and it's really making the GOP look like fools.

Audit them all.

NaNook

NaNook

[quote="Floridatexan"]
There is no smoking gun, because there is no scandal. The IRS was inundated
with applications for that protected status as the fake grassroots organization known as the Tea Party rose to prominence as a wing of the GOP, promoted by Faux News and a few other right-wing crazies. The number of applications for 501(c)4 status more than doubled, but there was a gray area because of the Citizens United decision that left the IRS unsure of how to handle these entities. This is a non-scandal, and it's really making the GOP look like fools.

Audit them all.[/quote

I agree on the audits. I find it unusual Tea Party groups denied tax exempt status filed before the SCOTUS decision. What was the work-load before the decision?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

[quote="NaNook"]
Floridatexan wrote:
There is no smoking gun, because there is no scandal. The IRS was inundated
with applications for that protected status as the fake grassroots organization known as the Tea Party rose to prominence as a wing of the GOP, promoted by Faux News and a few other right-wing crazies. The number of applications for 501(c)4 status more than doubled, but there was a gray area because of the Citizens United decision that left the IRS unsure of how to handle these entities. This is a non-scandal, and it's really making the GOP look like fools.

Audit them all.[/quote

I agree on the audits. I find it unusual Tea Party groups denied tax exempt status filed before the SCOTUS decision. What was the work-load before the decision?

I don't know if I can find the figures easily, but it was in the realm of 1,400 filings the previous year to somewhere over 3,000. I also heard (and posted here) that 70% of these filers did not qualify for the designation, and that the Tea Party groups were approximately 1/3 of the total.

Guest


Guest

I have two things to say, its odd the woman responsible got that nice little promotion to over see obamacare. she must have done something pretty big to help these crooks, because other than that, she aint all that.


the other thing is, that's one really ugly damn lady.

VectorMan

VectorMan

Floridatexan wrote:
There is no smoking gun, because there is no scandal. The IRS was inundated
with applications for that protected status as the fake grassroots organization known as the Tea Party rose to prominence as a wing of the GOP, promoted by Faux News and a few other right-wing crazies. The number of applications for 501(c)4 status more than doubled, but there was a gray area because of the Citizens United decision that left the IRS unsure of how to handle these entities. This is a non-scandal, and it's really making the GOP look like fools.

Audit them all.

Auditing them all is okay by me.

Can you explain why the IRS would want to know the contents of someone's prayers in the context of granting tax exempt status?

These actions by the IRS are outrageous. They have way too much power and need to be reeled in. Liberals that pretend there is nothing to this are looking pretty foolish. Again.

2seaoat



Help me with this outstanding logic of a connection to the White House........on June 1st the head of the Caterpillar Union visited the White House and met with the President. The very next day Caterpillar board of directors decided that they would not sell their product in South Africa.

Therefore the President is linked to the decision of the company not to sell product in South Africa because the president met with the head of the UAW for Caterpillar..............stunning ignorance and lack of understanding of the relationship of unions with line government authority........this really has become stupid vs intelligent.

This is very simple.......the mid term elections are going to be a massacre. It is always the economy. In order to transfer the focus from the final mid term election in Clinton's second term.....there were blue dresses and impeachment.....result was stunning victories for the Democrats.....the American people are not this stupid.....yes, granted some are, because folks post this nonsense, and i think they really believe it.....perhaps if they had saved their cords at birth some brain replacement could begin.....but sadly.....stupid is a permanent condition. My Republican party has to take a lead on immigration reform, increase revenues to balance budgets, and make strategic long term cuts to improve efficiencies. Focus on job credits, and stimulus on needed infrastructure improvements. Business will boom, and the middle class will have a path to recovery.

2seaoat



Can you explain why the IRS would want to know the contents of someone's prayers in the context of granting tax exempt status?

The IRS is guided by legislation passed by congress. The very committee which is conducting the investigation....the House ways and means committee has historically been the most powerful committee in government because they basically write the tax code. So to start with the committee proposes legislation, and if it gets out of committee it will be voted on by the House, and then the Senate, and the President will sign the bill. The IRS promulgates regulations pursuant to that law, and when challenged there will be court interpretations of those revenue rulings and regulations. There is always a constant tension and often when the courts rule a certain way, they take it back and modify the law, or IRS amends their regulations.

So why would someone have to look at the content of prayer. The answer would be to make a determination if the not for profit was legitimate, or whether it was a tax shelter and a sham. The criteria for such inquiry starts with congress and is refined by regulations, and court cases. If you want someone to blame, start with the very committee who is investigating, but any thinking person wants vigorous monitoring of tax shams, and as much as this inquiry may seem to be prejudicial, if it meets the rational basis test of the due process clause and there are legitimate government interests being protected by the classification system and inquires and audits......the challenges to those not for profits will be upheld by the courts, but if they are using faulty classifications or are careless in executing the same, they will be found in violation of the law under the equal protection clause of the 5th and 14th amendment......the simple fact of making an inquiry as to prayer content on the face of it may be allowable in the absence of congressional laws banning the same. and a legitimate state interest in catching tax cheats.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:Can you explain why the IRS would want to know the contents of someone's prayers in the context of granting tax exempt status?

The IRS is guided by legislation passed by congress. The very committee which is conducting the investigation....the House ways and means committee has historically been the most powerful committee in government because they basically write the tax code. So to start with the committee proposes legislation, and if it gets out of committee it will be voted on by the House, and then the Senate, and the President will sign the bill. The IRS promulgates regulations pursuant to that law, and when challenged there will be court interpretations of those revenue rulings and regulations. There is always a constant tension and often when the courts rule a certain way, they take it back and modify the law, or IRS amends their regulations.

So why would someone have to look at the content of prayer. The answer would be to make a determination if the not for profit was legitimate, or whether it was a tax shelter and a sham. The criteria for such inquiry starts with congress and is refined by regulations, and court cases. If you want someone to blame, start with the very committee who is investigating, but any thinking person wants vigorous monitoring of tax shams, and as much as this inquiry may seem to be prejudicial, if it meets the rational basis test of the due process clause and there are legitimate government interests being protected by the classification system and inquires and audits......the challenges to those not for profits will be upheld by the courts, but if they are using faulty classifications or are careless in executing the same, they will be found in violation of the law under the equal protection clause of the 5th and 14th amendment......the simple fact of making an inquiry as to prayer content on the face of it may be allowable in the absence of congressional laws banning the same. and a legitimate state interest in catching tax cheats.

Thank you for providing a level-headed explanation of the situation, Seaoat. I doubt it will extinguish any of the towering infernos raging on heads of certain posters..... Oh well, it's their hair loss..... Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

I am against the irs using any sort of bias or preference... and want any wiff of it investigated fully... radical I know.

2seaoat



I am against the irs using any sort of bias or preference... and want any wiff of it investigated fully... radical I know.

I do not think any American would disagree with your statement. We want a fair game. We want the ref to execute the rules of the game. We do not want James getting preferential treatment on foul calls in the NBA, and we certainly do not want a vendetta on illegal criteria.

However, there is a very different test under the rational basis test which allows often stupid criteria for audits to actually be enforced by the courts where there is a nexus between the logic of the criteria of the audit and the governmental interests it protects. So in fact all 501 c 4 applications could be audited, and in fact some criteria which we find a stretch might be enforced by the court. Now the exception is if the class of people being impacted by the classification is a protected class......then it requires a compelling state interest to allow that classification. None of these issues to date have been protected classes, and yes.....as sad is this to say.....stupid can be enforced by the courts.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:I am against the irs using any sort of bias or preference... and want any wiff of it investigated fully... radical I know.

I do not think any American would disagree with your statement. We want a fair game. We want the ref to execute the rules of the game. We do not want James getting preferential treatment on foul calls in the NBA, and we certainly do not want a vendetta on illegal criteria.

However, there is a very different test under the rational basis test which allows often stupid criteria for audits to actually be enforced by the courts where there is a nexus between the logic of the criteria of the audit and the governmental interests it protects. So in fact all 501 c 4 applications could be audited, and in fact some criteria which we find a stretch might be enforced by the court. Now the exception is if the class of people being impacted by the classification is a protected class......then it requires a compelling state interest to allow that classification. None of these issues to date have been protected classes, and yes.....as sad is this to say.....stupid can be enforced by the courts.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Guest


Guest

Chrissy wrote:
2seaoat wrote:I am against the irs using any sort of bias or preference... and want any wiff of it investigated fully... radical I know.

I do not think any American would disagree with your statement. We want a fair game. We want the ref to execute the rules of the game. We do not want James getting preferential treatment on foul calls in the NBA, and we certainly do not want a vendetta on illegal criteria.

However, there is a very different test under the rational basis test which allows often stupid criteria for audits to actually be enforced by the courts where there is a nexus between the logic of the criteria of the audit and the governmental interests it protects. So in fact all 501 c 4 applications could be audited, and in fact some criteria which we find a stretch might be enforced by the court. Now the exception is if the class of people being impacted by the classification is a protected class......then it requires a compelling state interest to allow that classification. None of these issues to date have been protected classes, and yes.....as sad is this to say.....stupid can be enforced by the courts.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Political class does not fall under life.liberty or property. It was not illegal to scrutinize the tax status. Got it?

2seaoat



Very good....you found one of the equal protection clauses in our constitution, it is another matter to understand how the standards have been applied by our Supreme Court, because you would be shocked that when the courts enforce the rational basis test..........a remedy or classification may not be the most logical.....the most intelligent, to be enforced by the courts as long as the criteria is substantially in favor of the defined state interest.

So the audit criteria for fraud among farmers could take data which shows pig farmers overstate their losses at a rate of 60% and represent a potential 1 billion loss to treasury.....while sheep farmers overstate their losses at a rate of 70% but only represent a 10 million loss to treasury, the IRS focusing on simply the highest percentage potential violators would probably be logical and pass the rational basis test when applied by the courts, but equally important is the volume of dollars saved for the government and return on hours invested in those audits. So the Pig farmers could yell that they are being selected for persecution and unfair audit criteria, but there is enough of a rational basis for auditing pig farmers to meet the equal protection clause and find the classification for audits enforceable, even though sheep farmers when they are not messing with their sheep are over stating their losses at a greater rate........

cutting and pasting an amendment without context......well that is done quite a great deal around here.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Very good....you found one of the equal protection clauses in our constitution, it is another matter to understand how the standards have been applied by our Supreme Court, because you would be shocked that when the courts enforce the rational basis test..........a remedy or classification may not be the most logical.....the most intelligent, to be enforced by the courts as long as the criteria is substantially in favor of the defined state interest.

So the audit criteria for fraud among farmers could take data which shows pig farmers overstate their losses at a rate of 60% and represent a potential 1 billion loss to treasury.....while sheep farmers overstate their losses at a rate of 70% but only represent a 10 million loss to treasury, the IRS focusing on simply the highest percentage potential violators would probably be logical and pass the rational basis test when applied by the courts, but equally important is the volume of dollars saved for the government and return on hours invested in those audits. So the Pig farmers could yell that they are being selected for persecution and unfair audit criteria, but there is enough of a rational basis for auditing pig farmers to meet the equal protection clause and find the classification for audits enforceable, even though sheep farmers when they are not messing with their sheep are over stating their losses at a greater rate........

cutting and pasting an amendment without context......well that is done quite a great deal around here.

Jesus Christ! Enough w/ the equal protection. It's not illegal.

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:
Chrissy wrote:
2seaoat wrote:I am against the irs using any sort of bias or preference... and want any wiff of it investigated fully... radical I know.

I do not think any American would disagree with your statement. We want a fair game. We want the ref to execute the rules of the game. We do not want James getting preferential treatment on foul calls in the NBA, and we certainly do not want a vendetta on illegal criteria.

However, there is a very different test under the rational basis test which allows often stupid criteria for audits to actually be enforced by the courts where there is a nexus between the logic of the criteria of the audit and the governmental interests it protects. So in fact all 501 c 4 applications could be audited, and in fact some criteria which we find a stretch might be enforced by the court. Now the exception is if the class of people being impacted by the classification is a protected class......then it requires a compelling state interest to allow that classification. None of these issues to date have been protected classes, and yes.....as sad is this to say.....stupid can be enforced by the courts.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Political class does not fall under life.liberty or property. It was not illegal to scrutinize the tax status. Got it?

we just simply disagree, I think it was illegal for them to selectively discriminate against certain people due to their personal beliefs.

There are various opinions about this, from attorneys. Im not a attorney and I don't play one on the internet either. with that said, the 14th adm, does say any person, and groups are made up of individuals. and before you go off on insanity again, don't try an tell me it doesn't apply to groups, because its groups it protects, you know racial groups, < that's a group of people ho used this amd, for protection, religion is a group, thre are a few others. Thing is, we never had to to invoke this rule of law to protect political groups, but now the climate is so bad, we need to.

Thn theres the free speech avenue.

“I am astounded and appalled that the IRS targeted organizations based on their political beliefs,” said Rep. Dave Camp, who as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee is the nation’s chief tax-law writer. “No American, regardless of political affiliation, should have their right to free speech threatened by the IRS.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/14/irs-audit-finds-bias-so-burdensome-that-targeted-g/#ixzz2U1NxpUWX
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

I don't think this is done by a long shot. and it shouldn't be. The IRS simply can not be politically motivated in their actions. They must be non partisan in their decisions.

Guest


Guest

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-center-for-public-integrity/irs-employees-back-obama_b_3278655.html

Markle

Markle

This could easily be the scandal that brings down President Barack Hussein Obama. People already fear the IRS, using it as a weapon on them by the administration crushes any trust they might have had. On top of that, having the IRS, administer and punish people for not having ObamaCare and this gets even bigger.

IRS, then three other major scandal and a new one brewing, no wonder he got out of the country.

Guest


Guest

one of the IRS heads is now pleading the 5th.

whats to hide, nothing was done illegal right?

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Can you explain why the IRS would want to know the contents of someone's prayers in the context of granting tax exempt status?

The IRS is guided by legislation passed by congress. The very committee which is conducting the investigation....the House ways and means committee has historically been the most powerful committee in government because they basically write the tax code. So to start with the committee proposes legislation, and if it gets out of committee it will be voted on by the House, and then the Senate, and the President will sign the bill. The IRS promulgates regulations pursuant to that law, and when challenged there will be court interpretations of those revenue rulings and regulations. There is always a constant tension and often when the courts rule a certain way, they take it back and modify the law, or IRS amends their regulations.

So why would someone have to look at the content of prayer. The answer would be to make a determination if the not for profit was legitimate, or whether it was a tax shelter and a sham. The criteria for such inquiry starts with congress and is refined by regulations, and court cases. If you want someone to blame, start with the very committee who is investigating, but any thinking person wants vigorous monitoring of tax shams, and as much as this inquiry may seem to be prejudicial, if it meets the rational basis test of the due process clause and there are legitimate government interests being protected by the classification system and inquires and audits......the challenges to those not for profits will be upheld by the courts, but if they are using faulty classifications or are careless in executing the same, they will be found in violation of the law under the equal protection clause of the 5th and 14th amendment......the simple fact of making an inquiry as to prayer content on the face of it may be allowable in the absence of congressional laws banning the same. and a legitimate state interest in catching tax cheats.

2seaoat....

What happened to separation of Church and State? You seem to have left out the First Amendment...how could that happen?

What part of this is unclear? Do you need a translation?

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Or is this where Progressives get to pick and choose which part of the Constitution or obey and which to ignore? You know, like President Barack Hussein Obama.

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:This could easily be the scandal that brings down President Barack Hussein Obama. People already fear the IRS, using it as a weapon on them by the administration crushes any trust they might have had. On top of that, having the IRS, administer and punish people for not having ObamaCare and this gets even bigger.

IRS, then three other major scandal and a new one brewing, no wonder he got out of the country.

...............................

If any of your rant was true, you'd already be targeted.

Moron.

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-center-for-public-integrity/irs-employees-back-obama_b_3278655.html

IS THIS THE ‘SMOKING GUN’ THAT TIES THE IRS SCANDAL TO THE WHITE HOUSE? Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSXPfu4_TG3o-TXO_9XY28EXB6lmHcxadT-KahC8k-0HACCuB15

We weren't allowed to display political affiliation in the military because I do believe it's against the law for a governmental entity/agency to do so.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQzUCO7rG0M

Smile

Markle

Markle

Red Kneckerson wrote:
Markle wrote:This could easily be the scandal that brings down President Barack Hussein Obama. People already fear the IRS, using it as a weapon on them by the administration crushes any trust they might have had. On top of that, having the IRS, administer and punish people for not having ObamaCare and this gets even bigger.

IRS, then three other major scandal and a new one brewing, no wonder he got out of the country.

...............................

If any of your rant was true, you'd already be targeted.

Moron.

Thank you for sharing!

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

We've only seen the tip of this iceberg. This has the power to bring down this President. People already fear the IRS, to be using it as a weapon against innocent citizens. Now we're supposed to TRUST the IRS with our health care. Sounds like a plan and one you love.

How long before the government arranges for wedding receptions too?

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
Red Kneckerson wrote:
Markle wrote:This could easily be the scandal that brings down President Barack Hussein Obama. People already fear the IRS, using it as a weapon on them by the administration crushes any trust they might have had. On top of that, having the IRS, administer and punish people for not having ObamaCare and this gets even bigger.

IRS, then three other major scandal and a new one brewing, no wonder he got out of the country.

...............................

If any of your rant was true, you'd already be targeted.

Moron.

Thank you for sharing!

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

We've only seen the tip of this iceberg. This has the power to bring down this President. People already fear the IRS, to be using it as a weapon against innocent citizens. Now we're supposed to TRUST the IRS with our health care. Sounds like a plan and one you love.

How long before the government arranges for wedding receptions too?

........................................

Socrates was an Atheist and a pedophile. I can understand why you identify with him.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Red Kneckerson wrote:
Markle wrote:
Red Kneckerson wrote:
Markle wrote:This could easily be the scandal that brings down President Barack Hussein Obama. People already fear the IRS, using it as a weapon on them by the administration crushes any trust they might have had. On top of that, having the IRS, administer and punish people for not having ObamaCare and this gets even bigger.

IRS, then three other major scandal and a new one brewing, no wonder he got out of the country.

...............................

If any of your rant was true, you'd already be targeted.

Moron.

Thank you for sharing!

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

We've only seen the tip of this iceberg. This has the power to bring down this President. People already fear the IRS, to be using it as a weapon against innocent citizens. Now we're supposed to TRUST the IRS with our health care. Sounds like a plan and one you love.

How long before the government arranges for wedding receptions too?

........................................

Socrates was an Atheist and a pedophile. I can understand why you identify with him.

Markle isn't that smart. What I wonder is why certain people here are having trouble understanding the concept of intent under the law. It sure seems that one major group defined under this tax status...that of Norm Coleman...got a free ride. The IRS, instead of rubber-stamping his application, needs to give it a second look. I can see a scenario in which this particular group, which financed something like 80% of GOP funding from this classification (tax exempt, non-disclosure) would not like to revisit that classification; hence, the bruhaha about "targeting" conservative groups. Capiche?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum