Streaming Live Blog Re: IRS Hearings Scandal

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-21-2013 11:18 AM

Some of the posts are interesting.......

http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-head ... -2-237029/

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » 05-21-2013 09:26 PM

Kbot,

Thanks for the stream - I tried today while at the office and was unable to connect

I'll try again tomorrow - Lois Lerner is testifying and reported to be taking the Fifth.

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-22-2013 10:59 AM

Diogenes wrote: Kbot,

Thanks for the stream - I tried today while at the office and was unable to connect

I'll try again tomorrow - Lois Lerner is testifying and reported to be taking the Fifth.

I heard that on the news last night. From what I heard, she is the individual that conspired with someone from the media, who in turned asked her a question at an event, thus "leaking" this story - allegedly an attempt at a controlled release of information, which has since blown-up in the IRS's collective face.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » 05-22-2013 11:18 AM

kbot wrote: I heard that on the news last night. From what I heard, she is the individual that conspired with someone from the media, who in turned asked her a question at an event, thus "leaking" this story - allegedly an attempt at a controlled release of information, which has since blown-up in the IRS's collective face.

Perhaps the term Cabal would be well used here.

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-22-2013 11:27 AM

Saw this on Rachel Maddow's show (replay early this morning) where she showed how the members of Congress knew about this already - it's been occuring for years now. The section from an audit report that she released:

Oversight of 501(c)(4)–(6) Organizations That Are Politically Active (FY 2013 – New Start – Audit Number: 201310016) Audit Objective: Assess how the EO Function monitors Internal Revenue Code § 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations to ensure political advocacy activities do not constitute their primary activity.

http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditplan ... fy2013.pdf

To me, this isn't so much an issue of the government scrutinizing one group over another - they examine ALL groups, depending on which way the politcal winds blow.

What aggravates me is that they (the government) is even doing this at all. I guess that an argument can be made about what is or is not appropriate in the way of political contributions. But, to me, I see this as just anogher example fo the government over-reaching their original role and becoming more intrusive.

As an example, I heard this story and was livid because, to me this just shows how the government is attempting to run our lives.....

" IOWA CITY, Iowa — When a small anti-abortion group in Iowa sought nonprofit status, the Internal Revenue Service asked its board to promise not to organize protests outside Planned Parenthood and demanded to know how its prayer meetings and protest signs were educational.

Although the Coalition for Life of Iowa's application was ultimately approved in 2009, the tax collection agency's treatment of that and other anti-abortion groups has gotten new attention in the wake of an ongoing scandal over the alleged targeting of conservative groups"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/2 ... f=politics

Now, I know that an argument can be made that these are people expressing their personal opinion and in this context of politicizing abortions and mixing religion and abortion, that they have no right under the law to do this, AND maintain their compliance as an exempt organization.

But, to me, this is an example of the government telling people how to act, and what to thnk, and if they don't follow the government's rules, then they will sic the IRS on them and make their lives a living hell. That the group was not forced to change their activities shows me that the government was wrong and coujld not force peopel to change their deeply held beliefs - but it doesn't seem to stop them from trying.....

Cherry Kelly · Post by **Cherry Kelly** » 05-22-2013 03:44 PM

Iris Lerner will have to go back and TESTIFY - she gave up her 5th amendment right when she spoke out originally.

could be interesting

NOW they are saying could be far more coming...prosecutorial.

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-22-2013 03:58 PM

Cherry Kelly wrote: Iris Lerner will have to go back and TESTIFY - she gave up her 5th amendment right when she spoke out originally.

could be interesting

NOW they are saying could be far more coming...prosecutorial.

I read that - that some members of Congress were saying that once she opened her mouth and started talking that she basically waived here rights. This is turning into what we in the medical profession euphemistically call a cluster f**k

Cherry Kelly · Post by **Cherry Kelly** » 05-23-2013 11:20 AM

kbot -- yes - she spoke - therefore did 'waive those rights' -- and now she will have to testify under oath. Gee do you think she will name names of who ordered it??

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-23-2013 11:26 AM

Cherry Kelly wrote: kbot -- yes - she spoke - therefore did 'waive those rights' -- and now she will have to testify under oath. Gee do you think she will name names of who ordered it??

Doubt it.

Also found fascinating the issue of the Justice Dept combing through telephone records and e-mails of journalists. Seems like the wheels are coming of this wagon......

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-24-2013 12:17 AM

Pelosi: Bush Appointee to Blame for IRS Scandal
Well, no need for further testimony or hearings. This explains everything.

Post by **Fan** » 05-24-2013 12:21 AM

Riddick wrote: Pelosi: Bush Appointee to Blame for IRS Scandal
Well, no need for further testimony or hearings. This explains everything.

nice. done.

wait...

can we have obummer too?

... and clintstone? (is there a better bad name for clinton?)

... can I have Ron Paul back?

Cherry Kelly · Post by **Cherry Kelly** » 05-24-2013 08:48 AM

Gee and Bush appointed both GOP and DEMS - as HE at least tried to be non-partisan. BUT ahh there is this thing. He has been in office how long? and this happened when??

ahh yes...

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-24-2013 09:35 AM

Fan wrote: nice. done.

wait...

can we have obummer too?

... and clintstone? (is there a better bad name for clinton?)

... can I have Ron Paul back?

Would you believe none of the above? Why make things needlessly complicated!

Best to keep it simple. Pelosi knows it, the administration and their operatives knows it, the American people know it. We've been told time and time again, haven't we? By now, it should go without saying.

We all know who's to blame here. Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the AP records, you name it, all roads lead back to the same source of ANY scandalous activity.

All that's left is for Congress to put this all behind us where it belongs...

Well, maybe one more thing. Is it possible to impeach an ex-president?

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-25-2013 10:50 PM

How the IRS Scandal is like 'The Simpsons'
"I didn't do it"!

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 06-03-2013 11:45 PM

IRS Chief Tells Panel 'Primary Mission' Is Restoring Trust
Good luck with that.