IRS scandal directly linked to those closest to Obama

PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/05/15/abc-analyst-drops-bombshell-people-very-close-to-obama-authorized-irs-actions-69362

tick tick tick...

newswatcher wrote:

157 reported visits to the White House by the IRS Chief....anyone surprised?....

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/05/15/abc-analyst-drops-bombshell-people-very-close-to-obama-authorized-irs-actions-69362

tick tick tick...

157 reported visits to the White House by the IRS Chief....anyone surprised?....The cowh knew of the practices that were taking place but with his background in Chicago thuggery politics he knows how to insulate himself in order to deny....Remember he saw this on the news like other Americans...

2seaoat wrote:If somebody has a hunch that there is a direct connection with the White House, does it not bother you that somebody may have a hunch that there is a direct connection with Putin........hunches and folks wishing for something do not make evidence or facts.

Now having said that, do you want the IRS to do their job? Do you want them to be fair and even handed? If you answered yes to those questions, then would our time not be better spent asking why the House ways and means folks are only spending half the time they did in 1968 working. In the absence of them working to achieve fair implementation after Citizens United..........there is only one direct connection.......Congress is failing.

VectorMan wrote:It just keeps getting deeper.

Wouldn't be surprised at all if orders came directly from Obama.

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/05/15/abc-analyst-drops-bombshell-people-very-close-to-obama-authorized-irs-actions-69362

tick tick tick...

157 reported visits to the White House by the IRS Chief....anyone surprised?....The cowh knew of the practices that were taking place but with his background in Chicago thuggery politics he knows how to insulate himself in order to deny....Remember he saw this on the news like other Americans...

doubtingthomas wrote:

Did you ever once think there was another reason he reported 157 visits? Poker game, circle jerk, etc.?

Sal wrote:

doubtingthomas wrote:

Did you ever once think there was another reason he reported 157 visits? Poker game, circle jerk, etc.?

Delivering cocaine for the Benghazi sex orgies.

Markle wrote:

Not surprising, the cavalier attitude Progressives have toward the deaths of American Citizens including our Ambassador in a planned terrorist attack. A terrorist attack which was first denied by President Barack Hussein Obama and his entire administration for nearly two weeks.

You must be so proud!

Markle wrote:

Sal wrote:

doubtingthomas wrote:

Did you ever once think there was another reason he reported 157 visits? Poker game, circle jerk, etc.?

Delivering cocaine for the Benghazi sex orgies.

Not surprising, the cavalier attitude Progressives have toward the deaths of American Citizens including our Ambassador in a planned terrorist attack. A terrorist attack which was first denied by President Barack Hussein Obama and his entire administration for nearly two weeks.

You must be so proud!

Markle wrote:

Sal wrote:

doubtingthomas wrote:

Did you ever once think there was another reason he reported 157 visits? Poker game, circle jerk, etc.?

Delivering cocaine for the Benghazi sex orgies.

Not surprising, the cavalier attitude Progressives have toward the deaths of American Citizens including our Ambassador in a planned terrorist attack. A terrorist attack which was first denied by President Barack Hussein Obama and his entire administration for nearly two weeks.

You must be so proud!

polecat wrote:The IRS scandal.

You mean the IRS scandal where not one, not a single one, of the targeted conservative groups requesting 501(c)3 or (c)4 designations were denied tax exempt status despite being engaged in blatantly political activities in direct violation of the intent of the tax code? You mean the IRS scandal where not one of the targeted organizations were denied their rights as citizens of the United States or, in point of fact, were not harmed in any way? You mean the IRS scandal where no actual laws were broken? Where there was no actual cover up? And where the IRS itself found the problem and corrected it and then reported it to the American people?

You mean that “scandal?”

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:

Sal wrote:

doubtingthomas wrote:

Did you ever once think there was another reason he reported 157 visits? Poker game, circle jerk, etc.?

Delivering cocaine for the Benghazi sex orgies.

Not surprising, the cavalier attitude Progressives have toward the deaths of American Citizens including our Ambassador in a planned terrorist attack. A terrorist attack which was first denied by President Barack Hussein Obama and his entire administration for nearly two weeks.

You must be so proud!

It doesn't surprise me that Markle keeps politicizing the faces of four dead Americans. I am sure their families love to see that graphic posted all over the web, assisted by Markle, who posts the same political crap repeatedly on on forums all over the Internet. Markle, have you no shame?

Markle wrote:

It wasn't me who ridiculed what happened in the Benghazi Terrorist Attack where they were brutally murdered.

Markle wrote:

polecat wrote:The IRS scandal.

You mean the IRS scandal where not one, not a single one, of the targeted conservative groups requesting 501(c)3 or (c)4 designations were denied tax exempt status despite being engaged in blatantly political activities in direct violation of the intent of the tax code? You mean the IRS scandal where not one of the targeted organizations were denied their rights as citizens of the United States or, in point of fact, were not harmed in any way? You mean the IRS scandal where no actual laws were broken? Where there was no actual cover up? And where the IRS itself found the problem and corrected it and then reported it to the American people?

You mean that “scandal?”

What part is difficult for you to understand?

The INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE themselves have admitted to discriminating against Conservative groups for years. They said they did, they apologized for what they had done.

The head of the department that makes non-profit decisions has, pled a garbled Fifth Amendment. She wouldn't quit so she is on paid leave.

The only problem now is to determine who falls on their sword as it reaches inside the White House. This is the only form of politics President Obama knows, the CHICAGO WAY.

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

polecat wrote:The IRS scandal.

You mean the IRS scandal where not one, not a single one, of the targeted conservative groups requesting 501(c)3 or (c)4 designations were denied tax exempt status despite being engaged in blatantly political activities in direct violation of the intent of the tax code? You mean the IRS scandal where not one of the targeted organizations were denied their rights as citizens of the United States or, in point of fact, were not harmed in any way? You mean the IRS scandal where no actual laws were broken? Where there was no actual cover up? And where the IRS itself found the problem and corrected it and then reported it to the American people?

You mean that “scandal?”

What part is difficult for you to understand?

The INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE themselves have admitted to discriminating against Conservative groups for years. They said they did, they apologized for what they had done.

The head of the department that makes non-profit decisions has, pled a garbled Fifth Amendment. She wouldn't quit so she is on paid leave.

The only problem now is to determine who falls on their sword as it reaches inside the White House. This is the only form of politics President Obama knows, the CHICAGO WAY.

An apology is not an admission of guilt. I wish the President had used a qualifier. The scandal here is that any organization that spent one red cent on blatantly partisan political activity should get any kind of tax break. There was no "targeting" of conservative groups; it was a method to sort out legitimate groups from those engaging in partisan politics.

Sal wrote:

Markle wrote:

It wasn't me who ridiculed what happened in the Benghazi Terrorist Attack where they were brutally murdered.

Actually, I was ridiculing you, idiot.

I know, I know ...

... low-hanging fruit and all, but sometimes I can't help myself.