Republicans know full well that the IRS has been and will continue to be acting as the DNC's muscle.
Fixed. The usual rubes have been conned yet again by a relentless propaganda campaign from the nutter disinformation bubble and professional liars like Issa. Their lies have been exposed again and again, yet like a battered wife, the rubes keep coming back for more. You, yourself, have continued to misrepresent basic facts in the story in spite of being corrected multiple times. It shows just how strong cognitive dissonance can be, how faith can blind one to contradictory fact. I feel sad for you all.
Perhaps you guys could detail for us the exact mechanism used by the Republicans to make Lerner and Obama apologize for attempting to enforce legality. I mean, I know the right seems like a bunch of evil geniuses to you guys, but that seems a pretty major accomplishment even for a bunch of evil geniuses.Actually werepossum is right. Republicans know full well that the IRS is trying to enforce legality and that the Dems are the only major party actually trying to enforce making sure tax exempt status only goes to groups who aren't majority political groups. Hell werepossum even just admitted for us that Republicans are happily trying to protect groups that are committing illegal acts. Thanks for the honestly.
I get bored typing the same information over and over, especially when those demanding answers are also unlikely to read them. So Werepossum, this bump's for you.Yawn. Yes, most everyone agrees using "Tea Party" as a search term was inappropriate. Lerner told her staff to stop as soon as she learned of it. That is not the question. The question is whether there was partisan motivation behind that choice, or if overloaded reviewers chose a poor shortcut in trying to quickly identify applications that needed extra scrutiny due to heavy political activities.
Also remember that this targeting was effective. The Inspector General noted that the vast majority of the ~300 applications pulled for review did, in fact, warrant additional scrutiny due to their political activity. The method was inappropriate, but the results were sound. Also, while you continue to insinuate this keyword match was the only criteria used to target applications, the fact is it wasn't even the primary approach. According to the IG, only about one-third of applications pulled were selected by the controversial BOLO. The other two-thirds were selected using other methods.
Target squad? Please cite something credible to support that phrase. It sounds like the usual loaded hyperbole from the usual wing-nut propaganda peddlers. Much as it may pain some conservative crybabies who think they are above the law, there is nothing wrong with the IRS trying to follow the regulations restricting the sorts of political activities permitted for 501(c)(4) groups.
And yes, liberal groups were targeted too. We know this because some have come forward, just as we found out about some conservative groups targeted. Some of those liberal groups described the same sorts of intrusive questioning the conservative groups reported. We know there was at least one other BOLO list that included terms commonly associated with the left. The only thing we don't know is the ratio of conservative groups to liberal groups because the IG declined to make such a subjective assessment.
But of course that doesn't keep partisan righties from asserting there were no liberal groups on it. Guilty until proven innocent. /snicker
Yes, it's a clue they don't share the right's persecution complex. It's a clue they aren't constantly seeking excuses to attack that evil (D) in the White House.
Perhaps you guys could detail for us the exact mechanism used by the Republicans to make Lerner and Obama apologize for attempting to enforce legality. I mean, I know the right seems like a bunch of evil geniuses to you guys, but that seems a pretty major accomplishment even for a bunch of evil geniuses.
Of course I would spend equal amounts of time scouring over each filing among both liberal and conservative groups. To do otherwise is to assume a bias against one group up front - which is what this is all about.Unfortunately the IRS was attempting to enforce legality in a legal, smart, and straightforward way. They were filtering using terms most likely to be groups that were primarily political and scrutinizing groups that were the most likely to be primarily political. But you know how politics and the law work, oftentimes smart and legal butt heads. So what the IRS did, while the best and smartest idea, was actually illegal.
Seriously, if I were to tell you that 300 groups were going to apply for tax exempt status. That of those 300, 210 were going to be conservative groups with the rest being liberal or party neutral . That of those 300 who were applying that 100 were going to be ineligible for tax exempt status. And that of those who were ineligible, significantly more were going to be conservative than liberal or neutral. And that you had to figure out which ones were ineligible. Would you spend equal amounts of time scouring over the liberal and conservative groups, or would you focus on the swath with the most likely candidates?
As it turns out the answer if you're liberal or neutral is focus on the conservative groups. The answer if you're conservative is allow as many conservative groups to illegally have tax exempt status as possible. The right aren't evil geniuses, just evil.
Of course I would spend equal amounts of time scouring over each filing among both liberal and conservative groups. To do otherwise is to assume a bias against one group up front - which is what this is all about.
We've had this argument as a society on other issues, namely police searches of blacks because most criminals in the given area are black. It does not fly for that, and it should not fly for this. In addition, your example assumes pre-knowledge that conservative groups will be dishonest in significantly greater numbers because you assume the right is evil.
There are apparently two different reasons why the left is okay with and even supportive of this behavior. The first of course is that they believe this is what government should do - use its armed might to enforce their preferences. The second is apparently that they "know" non-proggie groups are evil, so if they have to hold the applications for a few years while someone figures out how, that's better than allowing an alternative view to be heard on equal footing.Political profiling. Good call.
You're still lying, continuing to misrepresent facts to fit your masters' talking points. Good booyyyyy.There are apparently two different reasons why the left is okay with and even supportive of this behavior. The first of course is that they believe this is what government should do - use its armed might to enforce their preferences. The second is apparently that they "know" non-proggie groups are evil, so if they have to hold the applications for a few years while someone figures out how, that's better than allowing an alternative view to be heard on equal footing.
That's the proggie world - statistically arranged diversity of skin color coupled with rigidly enforced uniformity of thought.
I just remembered Issa said he was going to file those contempt charges last Thursday (4/17). I can't find a word about this actually happening, not even in the nutter media. What happened? Somebody posturing again?
I just remembered Issa said he was going to file those contempt charges last Thursday (4/17). I can't find a word about this actually happening, not even in the nutter media. What happened? Somebody posturing again?
My bet would be that Boehner told him 'no'.
Boehner is the one actually in charge here and from what I've read he's been slowing down Issa through the whole process.
Fern
Slowing him down? Issa is right where he wants to be, preaching conspiracy as fact, slinging his tarbrush far & wide. Once the matter goes to the DoJ, it's out of his hands, no longer something he can drag out & wave around as it suits him, particularly when they shove it right back in his face.
Meanwhile, the right wing political money laundering machine is running full blast, the IRS intimidated, which is the whole point entirely.
As Chairman Issa can do wants he wants with his committee. The entire House is another matter and that's Boehner's domain.
I see no reason to discount the reports that Boehner is reluctant to move forward as Issa and some other Repubs want and it has been causing frustration/friction.
Fern
As Chairman Issa can do wants he wants with his committee. The entire House is another matter and that's Boehner's domain.
I see no reason to discount the reports that Boehner is reluctant to move forward as Issa and some other Repubs want and it has been causing frustration/friction.
Fern
I've read that many congressional Republicans are upset with Issa. They believe his behavior has compromised the investigation and hurt them politically.Reports from where?
Of course I would spend equal amounts of time scouring over each filing among both liberal and conservative groups. To do otherwise is to assume a bias against one group up front - which is what this is all about.
We've had this argument as a society on other issues, namely police searches of blacks because most criminals in the given area are black. It does not fly for that, and it should not fly for this. In addition, your example assumes pre-knowledge that conservative groups will be dishonest in significantly greater numbers because you assume the right is evil.
^ LOL
I love the way some people think! It was all done in the name of efficiency!
^ LOL^ LOL
I love the way some people think! It was all done in the name of efficiency!
You extracted a hell of a lot of meaning from just a few words. I don't know whether there was a conspiracy or not any more than you or thraashman know it was merely the innocent result of our government's attempt to be "efficient"...which I happen to find comical in an oxymoronic kind of way....hence the LOL.^ LOL
I love the way some people think! It was all done in a giant conspiracy against me!
That cuts both ways, my friend. I do acknowledge it is possible this was a coordinated conspiracy to get conservatives. I simply recognize that in spite of all the shrill assertions from some, we do not actually have evidence there was partisan intent. We do know that both right- and left-wing applications were selected for additional scrutiny. We do NOT know, however, whether conservative groups were disproportionately selected compared to the relative volume of applications. We do NOT even know how most of the applications were selected; only one-third were picked via the Tea Party BOLO. Two-thirds were selected using different criteria. This has not stopped many on the right, e.g., Darrell Issa and his followers, from consistently misrepresenting facts to present their theories as proven fact. They are lying.
I've worked in large bureaucratic organizations. It is easy for me to believe that IRS workers may have been simply trying to do their jobs and enforce the restrictions on political activity. It is easy for me to see how they might see politically-loaded keywords as a quick and effective way to find questionable political organizations in a pile of otherwise routine applications. It is easy for me to recognize that there may have been no partisan intent at all. Unlike some on the right, however, I will not assert those possibilities as fact. I will wait to see what the FBI investigation finds.
Fair enough, so you are not one of the "conspiracy" theorists. How would you then characterize your beliefs about it? You seem to think "efficiency" is a ridiculous possibility, so what is the flip side of that representing your view?You extracted a hell of a lot of meaning from just a few words.
Please note that I explicitly acknowledge that I do NOT "know" it was innocent. I simply acknowledge it as a reasonable possibility, while remaining open to the findings of a legitimate investigation. Any malfeasance found should be sanctioned or prosecuted as appropriate. I am not willing to convict based on Issa's and Fox's histrionics, however. That's been my point from the beginning.I don't know whether there was a conspiracy or not any more than you or thraashman know it was merely the innocent result of our government's attempt to be "efficient"...which I happen to find comical in an oxymoronic kind of way....hence the LOL.
I think they should grant Lerner amnesty and get to the bottom of this as quickly as possible. I think Issa was the worst possible choice to investigate this matter as well. BTW...I never said that I thought "efficiency" was a ridiculous possibility. And there you go again.Fair enough, so you are not one of the "conspiracy" theorists. How would you then characterize your beliefs about it? You seem to think "efficiency" is a ridiculous possibility, so what is the flip side of that representing your view?
We're largely on the same page, though I lack the legal knowledge to understand all the pros and cons of amnesty. I absolutely agree with getting to the bottom of this. The IRS must never be used for partisan purposes, and IF that is what happened, heads need to roll.I think they should grant Lerner amnesty and get to the bottom of this as quickly as possible. I think Issa was the worst possible choice to investigate this matter as well.
With all due respect, you're nitpicking semantics. You said your "LOL" was because "efficiency" was "comical" and "oxymoronic". I don't think "ridiculous" is an unreasonable synonym.I never said that I thought "efficiency" was a ridiculous possibility. And there you go again.
We know the IRS has SAID only one-third were picked via the Tea Party BOLO; we don't KNOW that because the IRS has been unwilling to provide this supposed list. Presumably counting them is easy, but hitting "FORWARD" or "PRINT" will take a couple years just like providing the rest of Lerner's emails.^ LOL
I love the way some people think! It was all done in a giant conspiracy against me!
That cuts both ways, my friend. I do acknowledge it is possible this was a coordinated conspiracy to get conservatives. I simply recognize that in spite of all the shrill assertions from some, we do not actually have evidence there was partisan intent. We do know that both right- and left-wing applications were selected for additional scrutiny. We do NOT know, however, whether conservative groups were disproportionately selected compared to the relative volume of applications. We do NOT even know how most of the applications were selected; only one-third were picked via the Tea Party BOLO. Two-thirds were selected using different criteria. This has not stopped many on the right, e.g., Darrell Issa and his followers, from consistently misrepresenting facts to present their theories as proven fact. They are lying.
I've worked in large bureaucratic organizations. It is easy for me to believe that IRS workers may have been simply trying to do their jobs and enforce the restrictions on political activity. It is easy for me to see how they might see politically-loaded keywords as a quick and effective way to find questionable political organizations in a pile of otherwise routine applications. It is easy for me to recognize that there may have been no partisan intent at all. Unlike some on the right, however, I will not assert those possibilities as fact. I will wait to see what the FBI investigation finds.