IRS targeted Tea Party and others--scandal grows

Jiro said:
see Post #14. looks like we'll have to move on.
Click to expand...

Not really, it isn't naive - you don't get my word - IRS is SUPPOSED to not favor political parties, that what they enforce taxes, so I means IRS is neutral on political.
 
Foxrac said:
Not really, it isn't naive - you don't get my word - IRS is SUPPOSED to not favor political parties, that what they enforce taxes, so I means IRS is neutral on political.
Click to expand...

cool. moving on.
 
Foxrac said:
Not really, it isn't naive - you don't get my word - IRS is SUPPOSED to not favor political parties, that what they enforce taxes, so I means IRS is neutral on political.
Click to expand...

so why dont i see liberal groups getting investigated?

I'm sure that there are some, but i don't see it on Internet news... am i missing something?
 
Lukin said:
so why dont i see liberal groups getting investigated?

I'm sure that there are some, but i don't see it on Internet news... am i missing something?
Click to expand...

you can simply look back to Bush Administration and find out.
 
Lukin said:
so why dont i see liberal groups getting investigated?

I'm sure that there are some, but i don't see it on Internet news... am i missing something?
Click to expand...

They did - see my article above.
 
Reba said:
What organizations were audited by the other party? That is, what keywords were being flagged under the prior administration?
Click to expand...

Doesn't have to be the IRS as there are many government agencies. How about this one:

Watergate burglaries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You know, if you find one government wrong you can be sure there are about thirty more.

At least the IRS used legal means..
 
VacationGuy234 said:
Doesn't have to be the IRS as there are many government agencies. How about this one:

Watergate burglaries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You know, if you find one government wrong you can be sure there are about thirty more.

At least the IRS used legal means..
Click to expand...
My question was, during the Bush administration, what keywords did the IRS use to flag liberal groups for audits? Your post has nothing to do with my question.

Watergate was a totally different situation. Also, take note: as a result of the Watergate scandal, the President resigned and the conspirators went to trial. Is that what you suggest happen to this current administration? :hmm:

And, no, the IRS is not using a legal means.
 
Reba said:
My question was, during the Bush administration, what keywords did the IRS use to flag liberal groups for audits? Your post has nothing to do with my question.

Watergate was a totally different situation. Also, take note: as a result of the Watergate scandal, the President resigned and the conspirators went to trial. Is that what you suggest happen to this current administration? :hmm:

And, no, the IRS is not using a legal means.
Click to expand...


I didn't mention the Bust Administration you did, my post was general you chose a specific.

Your question is an attempt to shield other instances.

Yes, the President resigned, but it hasn't stopped corruption in government has it?
 
VacationGuy234 said:
I didn't mention the Bust Administration you did, my post was general you chose a specific.

Your question is an attempt to shield other instances.

Yes, the President resigned, but it hasn't stopped corruption in government has it?
Click to expand...
Shield Watergate? Hardly. Watergate is very out in the open; nothing is shielded.

I never said anything about stopping corruption.

MY point was, there were consequences for the wrongdoers in Watergate; apparently no one expects any consequences for the wrongdoers of the current scandal/s.
 
Reba said:
That's not a news article; it's an opinion piece.

I also read the links within the piece. Things were not exactly what they implied in the first link.
Click to expand...

My point - IRS isn't solely target Tea Party and they do target liberal groups too.
 
Someone on Facebook posted a picture of Obama is impeached in 2013 because of IRS against the conservative party like Nixon in 1973 was impeached due to IRS against Liberal party. Of course, lot of the stuff on Facebook is fake information.
 
Reba said:
Shield Watergate? Hardly. Watergate is very out in the open; nothing is shielded.

I never said anything about stopping corruption.

MY point was, there were consequences for the wrongdoers in Watergate; apparently no one expects any consequences for the wrongdoers of the current scandal/s.
Click to expand...

It wasn't about shielding Watergate. It was about targeting a specific administration.

There are always consequences(If not with this administration then another one). And, this is just the beginning so we don 't know how this is going to turn out. You are basically saying you have no confidence in the President to do anything about it. We'll, the same could be said of any President from any party.

This is what politics is and it is why we have the government we have. It's not pretty, but it works.

EDIT: What baffles me is that people think party affiliation makes you some different type of human? I've never known party affiliation to make anyone a different human being without flaws and I never will.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
It wasn't about shielding Watergate. It was about targeting a specific administration.
Click to expand...
Please note that this thread is a current event. It's not about targeting a specific administration. It's about what's happening now--that is, what is a current event. That's what makes it newsworthy. These are current revelations.

There are always consequences(If not with this administration then another one). And, this is just the beginning so we don 't know how this is going to turn out. You are basically saying you have no confidence in the President to do anything about it. We'll, the same could be said of any President from any party.
Click to expand...
We aren't dealing with any President; we're dealing with the current one, under whose administration this action was taken by the IRS.

This is what politics is and it is why we have the government we have. It's not pretty, but it works.
Click to expand...
Which is why it has to be exposed and dealt with. We can't ignore it and say, "Oh, it's just politics."

EDIT: What baffles me is that people think party affiliation makes you some different type of human? I've never known party affiliation to make anyone a different human being without flaws and I never will.
Click to expand...
That's a broad statement that has nothing to do with this situation. All politicians are imperfect human beings, of course.

I think it's interesting that posters keep dragging in party affiliation to a thread that isn't about party affiliation. The scandal started out as rogue IRS agents taking it upon themselves to target certain agencies for auditing based solely on their conservative names. It needs to be investigated up the chain of command to find out how far it goes. At whatever level it ends, that's where the consequences must land. If it's at the department level, then that's where disciplinary action must take place. We don't know anything about the people involved, so that's why it must be openly investigated.
 
Foxrac said:
My point - IRS isn't solely target Tea Party and they do target liberal groups too.
Click to expand...
If that's still happening, then it too must be investigated and action taken against the guilty persons. If liberal groups are being audited just because they have liberal names, that is also wrong.
 
Reba said:
Please note that this thread is a current event. It's not about targeting a specific administration. It's about what's happening now--that is, what is a current event. That's what makes it newsworthy. These are current revelations.


We aren't dealing with any President; we're dealing with the current one, under whose administration this action was taken by the IRS.
Click to expand...

OK.

Reba said:
My question was, during the Bush administration, what keywords did the IRS use to flag liberal groups for audits?
Click to expand...

Then why did you ask the above ^^^ question?

EDIT: If we can't talk about general things, and this case is just started, it's going to be a short, one sided conversation.
 
Back
Top