Started By
Message

re: Obama Justice Department Was Involved In IRS Targeting

Posted on 12/12/14 at 9:56 am to
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35395 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 9:56 am to
quote:

It was focused on groups of a particular ideology that were in opposition to the sitting President on the eve of an election.........hence the word "Targeting".
Thank you for the answer. But that seems to be squarely in the IRS's court. The DOJ talking about an investigation with the IRS is something that you would expect on the surface.

The fact that Lerner is the head of the division and she clearly has no idea about penalties or privacy concerns in dealing with her work is what is truly amazing.
Posted by CherryGarciaMan
Sugar Magnolia
Member since Aug 2012
2497 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 9:58 am to
quote:

ere is a Senator Whitehouse???


Yea.

He's from RI.

Met him at a screening of a legalization of drugs movie with Richard Branson.

Typical liberal. Stuffy, arrogant, and a know-it-all.
Posted by MrLarson
Member since Oct 2014
34984 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 9:59 am to
quote:

The fact that Lerner is the head of the division and she clearly has no idea about penalties or privacy concerns in dealing with her work is what is truly amazing.


Are you saying she just made an honest mistake out of her own ignorance?
Posted by Jake88
Member since Apr 2005
68217 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:03 am to
It's funny how the author thinks it's worse than anyone thought. Conservatives know this goes to the top just like they knew the administration was grubering about the ACA.
This post was edited on 12/12/14 at 10:05 am
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35395 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:06 am to
quote:

Are you saying she just made an honest mistake out of her own ignorance?
Honest mistake would be a stretch. Did she know what she was doing was wrong? Possibly. Did she care? Unlikely.

She strikes me as a person who was never really good at anything but kept lots of contacts so she kept getting pushed up in management roles. Then she finally got pushed into a position where she just had too much access and no ones around to correct her.
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:08 am to
quote:

The fact that Lerner is the head of the division and she clearly has no idea about penalties or privacy concerns in dealing with her work is what is truly amazing.


This level of credulity in our populace is crucial in order to have a situation where we all sit around nodding in silent agreement when a President of the United States of flipping America says something like "Well, this is the first I've heard about it. I read it in the paper this morning just like you all did."
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123896 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:09 am to
quote:

The fact that Lerner . . . clearly has no idea about penalties or privacy concerns in dealing with her work
That is about as much a "fact" as are assertions Gruber was just some insignificant dude who happened to work on the ACA.

Lerner is a lawyer for Godsakes.
Posted by McChowder
Hammond
Member since Dec 2006
5222 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:19 am to
quote:

Thank you for the answer. But that seems to be squarely in the IRS's court. The DOJ talking about an investigation with the IRS is something that you would expect on the surface.

It's what you would expect in a vacuum. But remember, this came on the heal of this sequence of very public events.......

quote:

"The complaint says the senators interfered with executive branch agency proceeding, misused official resources for campaign purposes, gave at least the appearance of impropriety, and engaged in conduct that might reflect poorly on the Senate.

“All of these actions appear to have been undertaken for electoral, rather than official purposes – Sens. Durbin and Schumer, in particular, have openly stated as much,” the complaint says. “Additionally, Sen. Levin’s repeated requests for information, after being explicitly informed that the information could not lawfully be disclosed, violate Paragraph 2 of the Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service. We request that the Committee, in accordance with its mandate, investigate each violation accordingly and impose appropriate sanctions.”

The complaint states that in 2010 after the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, and after Democrats failed to pass further campaign finance restrictions in the Senate, President Barack Obama talked about groups that “pose as non-for-profit, social welfare and trade groups,” and “[e]very single one of them, virtually, is guided by seasoned, Republican political operatives.”

“Within days, a member of the United States Senate abused his office to advance his political party’s midterm election campaign efforts by using official resources to pressure the Internal Revenue Service to investigate certain conservative organizations that Democrats had not been able to silence with legislation,” the complaint says

Levin, the chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, had 14 correspondence to and from IRS officials from March 2012 to March 2013, where he urged the IRS to probe the nonprofit groups.

In the closing weeks of the 2010 midterm election, Durbin wrote then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman complaining that “one organization whose activities appear to be inconsistent with its tax status is Crossroads GPS,” the conservative organization affiliated with former Bush White House advisor Karl Rove.

Durbin’s office issued a press release that called for the “IRS to investigating spending by Crossroads GPS.” The House Oversight Committee found that IRS official Joseph Urban circulated the Durbin press release within the agency. The other senators – Schumer, Bennet, Franken, Merkley, Shaheen, Udall and Whitehouse – co-signed letters to Shulman on Feb. 16, 2012 and again on March 12, 2012, demanding action against Crossroads GPS."

LINK

Obama called for investigations into groups "guided by seasoned, Republican political operatives". Senate democrats were open about who they wanted to target specifically. The acting IRS comish at the time said it had an impact on the departments targeting of conservative groups.

Why do you think the DOJ was suddenly interested in prosecuting 501c's? Seriously.
Posted by Lsupimp
Ersatz Amerika-97.6% phony & fake
Member since Nov 2003
78582 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:21 am to
I think you are naïve . I think she was placed at her position by The Administration precisely because she was ideologically hostile (proven by her emails) and ethically vacuous. And then once there, directed by The Administration to gum things up for the Administrations' political enemies (again-this is already proven) prior to the elections.

This administration sought nothing less than the destruction of various "Tea Party" groups. It did it by peddling a false Narrative to "friendly" media, leaking information to "friendly" media and finally by ILLEGALLY targeting through GOVERNMENT COERCION, those who opposed it.

When this becomes accepted fact, 10 years after this fundamentally lawless administration is gone, you guys on the Left will say you knew it all along.

Bottom line-when the next Republican Administration adopts all these shitty illegal techniques, The Left will need to STFU. And I'm actually at the point with all this that I actually am beginning to hope The Republicans double down on this shite, so there will be a national consensus, and a CORRECTION back to Good Government and an Executive Branch which is faithful to The Rule Of Law. Because right now, Libs are reveling in this shite like it's Thanksgiving gravy.

Short-sighted frickwads.
Posted by Paluka
One State Over
Member since Dec 2010
10763 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:31 am to
quote:

Posted by mmcgrath


You really give her the benefit of the doubt? After all of the sideways, arse backward shite that has gone on?
Posted by dante
Kingwood, TX
Member since Mar 2006
10669 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:31 am to
quote:

I think she was placed at her position by The Administration precisely because she was ideologically hostile
You are partly correct...She is an ideologue as proven by her work as an attorney with the Federal Election Commission. You are wrong that she was placed in this position by this administration. She has been in that position since 2005.

Those who are defending Lerner by saying she is incompetent are the naive ones.
quote:

This administration sought nothing less than the destruction of various "Tea Party" groups. It did it by peddling a false Narrative to "friendly" media, leaking information to "friendly" media and finally by ILLEGALLY targeting through GOVERNMENT COERCION, those who opposed it.

Barry stood in front of the nation during his State of the Union address and called out the Supreme Court for their ruling on Citizens United. He called for ACTION.....and the minions responded.
Posted by Lsupimp
Ersatz Amerika-97.6% phony & fake
Member since Nov 2003
78582 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:33 am to
Your correction is duly noted.
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:33 am to
quote:

I think she was placed at her position by The Administration precisely because she was ideologically hostile (proven by her emails) and ethically vacuous. And then once there, directed by The Administration to gum things up for the Administrations' political enemies (again-this is already proven) prior to the elections.


She began as Director of the Exempt Organizations Division in January 2005.
Posted by Lsupimp
Ersatz Amerika-97.6% phony & fake
Member since Nov 2003
78582 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:38 am to
Fixed it:
quote:

I think she was GIVEN THE ANTI-TEA-PARTY ASSIGNMENT by The Administration precisely because she was ideologically hostile (proven by her emails) and ethically vacuous
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:44 am to
I think she let the "right people" (no pun intended) know that she was, like John Lurch Kerry, "reporting for duty".
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:47 am to
quote:

Barry stood in front of the nation during his State of the Union address and called out the Supreme Court for their ruling on Citizens United. He called for ACTION.....and the minions responded


Yeah, it was on national TV fer crying out loud, for everyone to see. Not just Univision.

Posted by dewster
Chicago
Member since Aug 2006
25346 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:47 am to
quote:

nothing will come of this because of one thing: the race card!


I don't care if nothing happens to Obama. I want to ensure that no administration in the future can use entities like the IRS to penalize and harass their political opponents again.
Posted by dante
Kingwood, TX
Member since Mar 2006
10669 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:52 am to
quote:

I don't care if nothing happens to Obama. I want to ensure that no administration in the future can use entities like the IRS to penalize and harass their political opponents again.

The problem with agencies like the IRS and the EPA is the liberal cancer has been deeply imbedded for years and years. Every President can change the leadership at the top but its career employees that run the day to day operations.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35395 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:53 am to
quote:

That is about as much a "fact" as are assertions
I'll concede that. But I have run into a pretty dumb lawyer from time to time, so it's not out of the realm of possibility.
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
51593 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Honest mistake would be a stretch. Did she know what she was doing was wrong? Possibly. Did she care? Unlikely.


Considering the initial excuse of the targetting being done only by a couple of "rogue agents" in Cincy, I think it's not unfair to assume she knew. Had that excuse never been floated, I could be willing to give her some benefit of doubt.

quote:

She strikes me as a person who was never really good at anything but kept lots of contacts so she kept getting pushed up in management roles. Then she finally got pushed into a position where she just had too much access and no ones around to correct her.


Change "person" to "ideologue" and we are in complete agreement.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram