What do you think about the IRS scandal unfolding in DC?

Here's another point, papadee -

If the problem was too many tea party groups applying all at once, the IRS should have assigned more staff to the problem. Don't give us some bullshit story about how the IRS needed to stop potential fraud or abuse. Just apply the SAME STANDARDS to new applications as you did BEFORE the tea parties came flooding in. They either qualify or they don't. Either way, they deserve a timely response, not a deliberate drip drip drip request for more info more info more info dragging on for 3 years until the next election is over and the damage is done because all the potential donors and volunteers gave up and moved on...


P.S. You're not really naive enough to believe there was no targeting, are you?

. Originally Posted by lustylad

You & IB are funny. It seems neither one of you are friends of govt. Yet you call for more staffing (bigger govt.), and IB called for govt. efficiency (an oxymoron in this nation). Look at the VA, our energy initiatives, reconstructing Iraq, etc. Our govt. is a model of inefficiency.

I never said there was fraud & abuse. I said because of the influx of applications, the apps were scrutinized more closely.

It depends on if you're saying partisanship targeting or anomaly targeting. Once again, conservative/TP applications were being approved even in 2009 w/o delay. Once the increase happened, especially after Citizens United, more scrutiny occurred. Was it partisan or was it the anomaly of the numbers of apps. I believe it was the number of apps. I also believe the Pres. was born in Hawaii, he's not a Muslim, and a fist bump isn't gang-related. There can't be a conspiracy everywhere, every time.

1st point - I ignored that question because it doesn't pertain to the issue of why the IRS targeted these groups. I didn't comment on this subject to talk about the "cover-up/scandal". I just wanted to give my opinion on why these groups were "targeted". It does pertain to "why" the IRS targeted those groups, and the current IRS effort to cover its tracks more than indicates that the basis for the "why" was illegal.

2nd Point - I never said they were illegitimate. I said because there was an increase in applications, they were singled out to make sure they were legitimate. Guess what? Most of them were. Just because the approval was delayed, doesn't mean conspiracy. And actually some of the first TP applicants were cleared in a few months. But when the IRS saw the applications snowballing, yes, they put them on a slower track for a more thorough look. Cite your sources, because that's different from what's been reported. Many if not most of those groups are still in limbo: neither approved nor denied.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's audit found (page 14): "For the 296 potential political cases we reviewed, as of December 17, 2012, 108 applications had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied, and 160 cases were open from 206 to 1,138 calendar days (some crossing two election cycles)." Bloomberg News reported on May 14, 2013, "None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected."

WASHINGTON -- In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked.

That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...roups/2158831/

3rd Point - Government efficient? You & I both know that's not happening. So why bring it up? There's 'inefficient', and then there is 'obstruction', papadee.

4th Point - Is unequal treatment before the law illegal? Honestly, I don't know. But I do know that people have been treated unequally under the law for over 200 years here and it hasn't stopped yet. Laws have been passed to treat people unequally, Presidents have signed the laws, and the SC has upheld those laws, so having one more example of unfair treatment is just, well, one more example. Does it hurt more because a cause you care about was affected by unfair treatment?
Are you gloating because a cause you despise was subjected to unfair treatment by a partisan government agency, papadee? And for your edification, papadee:

"A federal official who has been briefed on the matter said the investigation could focus on potential violations of civil rights law, including targeting groups based on political affiliation and infringing free speech."

And no, I will not answer your question about the email.
By your silence, papadee, you are admitting your inability to defend the indefensible; thus, you are also admitting you recognize that the IRS' excuse that "her computer broke" is a bogus BS excuse from the IRS and the Odumbo administration which are actively trying to hide their illegal activities. Let's say that again, papadee, "illegal activities".

Originally Posted by papadee

You & IB are funny. It seems neither one of you are friends of govt. Yet you call for more staffing (bigger govt.), and IB called for govt. efficiency (an oxymoron in this nation). Look at the VA, our energy initiatives, reconstructing Iraq, etc. Our govt. is a model of inefficiency.

I never said there was fraud & abuse. I said because of the influx of applications, the apps were scrutinized more closely.

It depends on if you're saying partisanship targeting or anomaly targeting. Once again, conservative/TP applications were being approved even in 2009 w/o delay. Once the increase happened, especially after Citizens United, more scrutiny occurred. Was it partisan or was it the anomaly of the numbers of apps. I believe it was the number of apps. I also believe the Pres. was born in Hawaii, he's not a Muslim, and a fist bump isn't gang-related. There can't be a conspiracy everywhere, every time. Originally Posted by papadee

Actually, papadee, you and people like are the ones who are "funny". You think you're intelligent, but then you publicly bask in your stupidity when you admit that you believe and submit to the lies of your lib-retarded Pied Pipers.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

The only place where they fly the gay stars and bars is outside the Enfield drugstore in Clarksville TX so assup doesn't get lost trying to find it. Originally Posted by lustylad

The lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM probably has one hanging on the ceiling over his bed where he and his boyfriend practice their rhythm method while lip-syncing (and dick-licking) to Billy Idol's "Rebel Yell"!

Sharyl Attkisson EMAIL: IRS’ LERNER SUGGESTED TARGETING SEN. GRASSLEY (R-IOWA)

Email: IRS’ Lerner Suggested Targeting Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa)

by Sharyl Attkisson on June 25, 2014

New emails reviewed by the House Ways and Means Committee in the IRS targeting investigation revealed something that might knock the probe up another notch: IRS manager Lois Lerner allegedly sought to have the circumstances surrounding a speaking invitation to Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, referred for IRS examination.

“We have seen a lot of unbelievable things in this investigation, but the fact that Lois Lerner attempted to initiate an apparently baseless IRS examination against a sitting Republican United States Senator is shocking,” said Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) in a written press release.

According to the Ways and Means Committee, and the email chain released today, Lerner and Sen. Grassley were invited to speak at the same event in Dec. of 2012, but their invitations got mixed up. When Lerner received Grassley’s invitation, she suggested to others in her office that the invitation should be referred for examination.

“Looks like they were inappropriately offering to pay for his wife,” Lerner said. “Perhaps we should refer to Exam?”

One of Lerner’s colleagues apparently thought better of it, answering: “I think the offer to pay for Grassley’s wife is income to Grassley, and not prohibited on its face.” He went on to say that they would need to wait to see if Sen. Grassley accepted the speaking engagement and then filed the proper tax form.

The email thread implies that Lerner’s the examination idea was dropped. Sen. Grassley’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.

The Ways and Means Committee says that its investigation into Lerner’s involvement in the potential Grassley examination is “ongoing.”

“At every turn, Lerner was using the IRS as a tool for political purposes in defiance of taxpayer rights. We may never know the full extent of the abuse since the IRS conveniently lost two years of Lerner emails, not to mention those of other key figures in this scandal. The fact that DOJ refuses to investigate the IRS’s abuses or appoint a special counsel demonstrates, yet again, this Administration’s unwillingness to uphold the rule of law,” said Rep. Camp.

Democrats have repeatedly said that the Republican-led investigation into the IRS targeting of conservatives is purely political and is conspiracy-theory driven. President Obama has said no corruption is involved and has promised to get to the bottom of any wrongdoing.

Sen. Grassley and his wife signed a waiver allowing this confidential tax information to be made public.

http://sharylattkisson.com/email-irs...assley-r-iowa/

It depends on if you're saying partisanship targeting or anomaly targeting. Once again, conservative/TP applications were being approved even in 2009 w/o delay. Once the increase happened, especially after Citizens United, more scrutiny occurred. Was it partisan or was it the anomaly of the numbers of apps. I believe it was the number of apps. I also believe the Pres. was born in Hawaii, he's not a Muslim, and a fist bump isn't gang-related. There can't be a conspiracy everywhere, every time. Originally Posted by papadee

So you're not naive, everyone else is paranoid, huh? What would it take to change your mind? Facts? IB just noted there was a period of 27 months when not a SINGLE tea party application was approved. That's not a delay, that's a FREEZE. Look at the facts and then tell me with a straight face that it's just "anomaly targeting".

Maybe you're not naive. Maybe your own partisan blinders make it impossible for you to admit partisan wrongdoing until it smacks you in the face...

1st point - I ignored that question because it doesn't pertain to the issue of why the IRS targeted these groups. I didn't comment on this subject to talk about the "cover-up/scandal". I just wanted to give my opinion on why these groups were "targeted".

2nd Point - I never said they were illegitimate. I said because there was an increase in applications, they were singled out to make sure they were legitimate. Guess what? Most of them were. Just because the approval was delayed, doesn't mean conspiracy. And actually some of the first TP applicants were cleared in a few months. But when the IRS saw the applications snowballing, yes, they put them on a slower track for a more thorough look.

3rd Point - Government efficient? You & I both know that's not happening. So why bring it up?

4th Point - Is unequal treatment before the law illegal? Honestly, I don't know. But I do know that people have been treated unequally under the law for over 200 years here and it hasn't stopped yet. Laws have been passed to treat people unequally, Presidents have signed the laws, and the SC has upheld those laws, so having one more example of unfair treatment is just, well, one more example. Does it hurt more because a cause you care about was affected by unfair treatment?

And no, I will not answer your question about the email. Originally Posted by papadee

Are you sure you've been following the IRS debacle? Are you aware of some of the questions asked, and documents demanded of these groups?

One applicant was asked what books they read. How exactly is that relevant to an application for tax exempt status? Would having read the entire Harry Potter series get someone disqualified? What if they had once read War and Peace?

Many groups were routinely asked to provide a list of names of their donors, and amount donated. However, 501(c)'s are not required to provide that information, so why was the question asked?

Why were groups left to sit for as long as 2 and 3 years without a response? That isn't inefficient, that isn't a backlog. That is just "we don't like you, so we are going to ignore you"

Why was the average wait time for progressive organizations months, while conservative organizations waited years?

Have you read any of the transcripts of some of the emails that WEREN'T mysteriously lost? I have to admit, some of them are kind of funny, if they weren't so offensive. One IRS staffer gleefully detailed to another his bullet point list of stupid questions he planned to ask a particular group he was investigating.

It really doesn't work very well when you try to defend something, but are apparently abysmally unaware of the facts at hand. Do a little research, and come back and try to defend the IRS.

You & IB are funny. It seems neither one of you are friends of govt. Yet you call for more staffing (bigger govt.), and IB called for govt. efficiency (an oxymoron in this nation). Look at the VA, our energy initiatives, reconstructing Iraq, etc. Our govt. is a model of inefficiency.

I never said there was fraud & abuse. I said because of the influx of applications, the apps were scrutinized more closely.

It depends on if you're saying partisanship targeting or anomaly targeting. Once again, conservative/TP applications were being approved even in 2009 w/o delay. Once the increase happened, especially after Citizens United, more scrutiny occurred. Was it partisan or was it the anomaly of the numbers of apps. I believe it was the number of apps. I also believe the Pres. was born in Hawaii, he's not a Muslim, and a fist bump isn't gang-related. There can't be a conspiracy everywhere, every time. Originally Posted by papadee

Of course Obama is a muslim. His father was, his grandfather was, and he said so on the Skippy show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMUgNg7aD8M

And the conservative ideal (which you misquote) is an efficient government with just enough people to do the limited things that government does. No one says that the things that government should be doing should be hamstring with not enough personnel. That is what you said, not us.

IRS finds out about Lerners missing e-mails in the press... LOL!

Do you think these groups should be tax exempt? Originally Posted by WTF

I'd like to get rid of all tax exempt organizations.

Like your Evangelical Church, BJerk?

Like your Evangelical Church, BJerk? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

So sayeth the dick sucker who takes it up the ass and accuses me of being, among others, Lovingkayla, Don't Be Daft!, Uncle Han, etc.
Go fuck yourself, faggot!

Remy: What are the Chances? (An IRS Love Song)

.

House investigators said Tuesday that the computer hard drive of ex-agency official Lois Lerner -- a key figure in the IRS targeting scandal -- was only “scratched,” not irreparably damaged, as Americans have been led to believe.

GOP-led Ways and Means Committee investigators, in their quest to recover missing Lerner emails, learned her hard drive was damaged but recoverable by talking to IRS information-technology experts, after the government originally refused to make them available, according to the committee.

“It is unbelievable that we cannot get a simple, straight answer from the IRS about this hard drive,” said committee Chairman Dave Camp.

The Michigan Republican said the new information also raises more questions about potential criminal wrongdoing at the IRS because the committee was told no data was recoverable and the physical hard drive was recycled and potentially shredded.

In addition, learning that the hard drive was only scratched also raises questions about why the IRS refused to use outside experts to recover the data.

“In fact, in-house professionals at the IRS recommended the agency seek outside assistance in recovering the data,” the committee said Tuesday in a release.

House investigators said they also are trying to determine whether the scratch was accidental or deliberate.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...6pLid%3D505723

Of course Obama is a muslim. His father was, his grandfather was, and he said so on the Skippy show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMUgNg7aD8M
. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Wrong again, douche-bag.

http://snopes.com/politics/obama/muslimfaith.asp

Wrong again, douche-bag.

http://snopes.com/politics/obama/muslimfaith.asp Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

You could try to be more agreeable, rather than being a jackass, munchonmen.
Obama claims to be a Christian, I'll give it to him. Perhaps, though, he is unduly sympathetic to Muslims and their terrorist fellow travelers since his dad was one of them!