Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I'm not exactly sure how much blame the Obama Administration should get for this considering that it started under the watch of a Bush appointee, but the current administration sure tried to cover it up....

SuperHornet wrote:I'm not exactly sure how much blame the Obama Administration should get for this considering that it started under the watch of a Bush appointee, but the current administration sure tried to cover it up....

I'm thinking the problem here is that there just isn't enough bureaucratic oversight in some of these Federal agencies. It might well be a case of certain offices taking it upon themselves to make their own rules.

That being said, I noticed that preliminary to the OIG report coming out, IRS tried to do a little damage control and it backfired on them, primarily with the revelation that nobody was going to be sacked over this. They are going to have to tread VERY lightly now, because now that the cat's out of the bag Congress and the public are going to demand some heads. If they try to handle it by scapegoating people things might get interesting.


Sent from the center of the universe.

Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

You are a moron.

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

Nixon was a liberal.

AshevilleApp wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

Nixon was a liberal.

So?

D1B wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

You are a moron.

Excellent rebuttal, SuperHornet.

AshevilleApp wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

Nixon was a liberal.

The difference??? The media absolutely abhored Nixon. The media absolutely loves all things 0bama.

That is why nothing will come of any of these scandals...

blueballs wrote:

AshevilleApp wrote:

Nixon was a liberal.

The difference??? The media absolutely abhored Nixon. The media absolutely loves all things 0bama.


That is why nothing will come of any of these scandals...

But I think his point is that they are both liberals.

"PROGRESSIVE GROUP: IRS GAVE US CONSERVATIVE GROUPS' CONFIDENTIAL DOCS

The progressive-leaning investigative journalism group ProPublica says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office that targeted and harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle gave the progressive group nine confidential applications of conservative groups whose tax-exempt status was pending.
The commendable admission lends further evidence to the lengths the IRS went during an election cycle to silence tea party and limited government voices.
ProPublica says the documents the IRS gave them were “not supposed to be made public”:

The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year... In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)

The group says that "no unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to ProPublica.”

According to Media Research Center Vice President for Business and Culture Dan Gainor, ProPublica’s financial backers include top progressive donors:

ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure”–“progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

On Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to hold a formal hearing on the IRS conservative targeting scandal. IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George are slated to testify.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ive-Groups" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

D1B wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:Congress of the United States, Articles of Impeachment against Richard M Nixon,

Article 2

“1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.”

You are a moron.

If it were a Republican, you'd be calling for impeachment.

# of conservative groups targeted by IRS swells to 500.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05 ... initially/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Proves this wasn't a bunch of low level IRS employees responsible for this (as if we didn't know that already):

"....The director of the Internal Revenue Service division under fire for singling out conservative groups sent a 2012 letter under her name to one such group, POLITICO has learned.
The March 2012 letter was sent to the Ohio-based American Patriots Against Government Excess (American PAGE) under the name of Lois Lerner, the director of the Exempt Organizations Division...... "
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/l ... z2TPokumLo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

-
That Bush appointee gives money to the DNC
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... topic.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a press conference Tuesday that the White House was notified about the IRS targeting tea party groups “several weeks ago.” This comes a day after President Obama said he found out about it from news reports on Friday of last week.

This wouldn't surprise me that he didn't know...He is clueless

The Passerby President.

That has an apropos ring to it.


Sent from the center of the universe.

This action could be entirely political. It might even be traced back to the WH. But stepped up scrutinazation (not audits mind you) of groups who've publicly sworn to be anti-tax...shocking.

kalm wrote:This action could be entirely political. It might even be traced back to the WH. But stepped up scrutinazation (not audits mind you) of groups who've publicly sworn to be anti-tax...shocking.

The majority of these groups are not anti-tax. For that matter, I'M not anti-tax, either.

It is about thrift, smaller government, and financial sanity. In my experience, the actual anti-tax crowd runs the ideological gamut.


Sent from the center of the universe.

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:This action could be entirely political. It might even be traced back to the WH. But stepped up scrutinazation (not audits mind you) of groups who've publicly sworn to be anti-tax...shocking.

The majority of these groups are not anti-tax. For that matter, I'M not anti-tax, either.

It is about thrift, smaller government, and financial sanity. In my experience, the actual anti-tax crowd runs the ideological gamut.


Sent from the center of the universe.

I couldn't agree more. How do you say it...i'm pro-tax in the sense that I'm not opposed to paying taxes as long as it's fair and the money is well managed. The Congress admonished Wall Street for mismanagement when they are the epitome of mismanagement.

The tax code is so complex that it can and is used as a weapon against anyone. It is also used as a tool for social engineering. That's what most of us "anti-tax" people object to.

"Report: IRS Deliberately Chose Not to Fess Up to Scandal Before Election
"f this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."

NBC's Lisa Myers reported this morning that the IRS deliberately chose not to reveal that it had wrongly targeted conservative groups until after the 2012 presidential election......."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/rep ... 24711.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, now you know the bitch is guilty.....

IRS’s Lois Lerner to take the Fifth

Embattled IRS official Lois Lerner will invoke her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself when she appears before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

In a letter to Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Lerner’s attorney William W. Taylor III cites the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into the issue of whether the IRS singled out tea party and other conservative groups for extra scrutiny.,,,,,,,
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/l ... 91686.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I guess he's evolved.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlUmruKGAAc[/youtube]

Obviously both sides are taking advantage of the 501(c)(4) and should be scrutinized. It's laughable that Crossroads GPS and Organizing For America are "social welfare" organizations.

It's understandable that IRS agents operate under less than clear guidelines when it comes to vetting applications for 501(c)(4) status. Nor is it true that only conservative-leaning groups were scrutinized. Groups with the term "progressive" in their names -- "Progressive Texas," "Progressive Missouri" and "Progressives United" -- also were audited. And if more conservative groups were scrutinized, it's also true that far more exemption applications were filed from the right than from the left. (Note: 501(c)(4) status exempts the recipient from taxes on the contributions it receives; donors get no deduction.)

Enter Rove and the real 501(c)(4) scandal.

While controversy swirls around penny-ante local tea parties, Rove's Crossroads GPS has been operating for years under 501(c)(4) status, in defiance of the law and despite constant demands from reform groups that the IRS investigate its spending. But to be fair, it's not only conservative political action groups that have avoided investigation. The well-endowed, pro-Obama Organizing for America also operates as a 501(c)(4) while the IRS looks the other way.

Here again, the IRS' failure to define "political" gets in the way. These clearly political operations can claim that 51 percent of their expenditures are "educational," though obviously intended to "educate" the public for political and electoral ends.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-ask ... f=politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kalm wrote:Obviously both sides are taking advantage of the 501(c)(4) and should be scrutinized. It's laughable that Crossroads GPS and Organizing For America are "social welfare" organizations.

It's understandable that IRS agents operate under less than clear guidelines when it comes to vetting applications for 501(c)(4) status. Nor is it true that only conservative-leaning groups were scrutinized. Groups with the term "progressive" in their names -- "Progressive Texas," "Progressive Missouri" and "Progressives United" -- also were audited. And if more conservative groups were scrutinized, it's also true that far more exemption applications were filed from the right than from the left. (Note: 501(c)(4) status exempts the recipient from taxes on the contributions it receives; donors get no deduction.)

Enter Rove and the real 501(c)(4) scandal.

While controversy swirls around penny-ante local tea parties, Rove's Crossroads GPS has been operating for years under 501(c)(4) status, in defiance of the law and despite constant demands from reform groups that the IRS investigate its spending. But to be fair, it's not only conservative political action groups that have avoided investigation. The well-endowed, pro-Obama Organizing for America also operates as a 501(c)(4) while the IRS looks the other way.

Here again, the IRS' failure to define "political" gets in the way. These clearly political operations can claim that 51 percent of their expenditures are "educational," though obviously intended to "educate" the public for political and electoral ends.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-ask ... f=politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HuffPo

One of the last rats still on the ship.

-
He did say he would bring the country together

A full 76% want a special prosecutor named; that includes 63% of Democrats.