DescentBB

It seems that what the IRS clamed to be only 2 rogue agents turns out to be at least 88

Looks like someone didn't properly subtract line 24 from line 71 of their schedule 2013 FU form.

This needed a whole new thread??

LOL! We're facked ^

CobGobbler wrote:This needed a whole new thread??

Yes, because of the lies you and the rest of us have been told about this only involving a few rogue agents. With 88 involved it now becomes a policy established by someone higher up. I suspect all those Whitehouse visits by Shulman (157...155 more than the head of the IRS during Busch's 8 years) are a factor. Until we some of these agents are faced with real jail time, we will never know who did what. A special prosecutor is really really needed here.

Interviews with a regional IRS agent involved in the agency targeting Tea Party groups for additional vetting appear to contradict the White House assertion that rogue agents, not the administration, were behind the effort, according to partial transcripts released Sunday by the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee

The agent in the Cincinnati office, where the targeting took place, told congressional investigators that he or she was told in March 2010 by a supervisor to search for Tea Party groups applying for tax-exempt status and that “Washington, D.C., wanted some cases.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06 ... z2V5nbdeSN

Fox News!?!?!?!

No, I have nothing of value to offer

I can quote the hufpo article if you prefer

woodchip wrote:

CobGobbler wrote:This needed a whole new thread??

Yes, because of the lies you and the rest of us have been told about this only involving a few rogue agents. With 88 involved it now becomes a policy established by someone higher up. I suspect all those Whitehouse visits by Shulman (157...155 more than the head of the IRS during Busch's 8 years) are a factor. Until we some of these agents are faced with real jail time, we will never know who did what. A special prosecutor is really really needed here.

Sucker. Not 157, not even close.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... se/276399/

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/hea ... out-irs-co

the whole issue that got me pissed in the hearings was the bit about the goofy excesses in 'training' expenses, frankly. I damn near had a fit when I heard that they hadn't documented any of the expense vouchers.....really? I have to keep every damned financial record for 7 years, and they don't??

Well what was even worse than the vouchers was the IRS travel panel that booked the highest hotel room rates possible as they got paid a percentage of the total bill.

callmeslick wrote:the whole issue that got me pissed in the hearings was the bit about the goofy excesses in 'training' expenses, frankly. I damn near had a fit when I heard that they hadn't documented any of the expense vouchers.....really? I have to keep every damned financial record for 7 years, and they don't??

That is emblematic of the attitude that the unique mandate/authority of the IRS breeds into its members.

They are above the law in far too many ways.

Imagine the Rodney King beating by the LA Police...the cops brought to justice because of a video taping of the way they broke the rules and beat the man mercilessly.
How do you think it would be to face that police force if the video meant nothing to them because there was no authority to take the video to?
That is the measure of regard the IRS has developed for us and the level of concern they have for justice...little to none.
When someone prevails in a court to have the wrongly applied IRS liens removed and their funds returned the IRS simply refuses to comply. The IRS is immune to the law they don't agree with.


So now you have a bunch of IRS workers who are ideologues who's leader is absolutely contemptuous of his political enemies. Of a large portion of the citizenry. He says things like 'they bring a knife, we bring a gun' when instructing his followers on the way he wants his team to meet the 'enemy' in the campaign to elect him. He openly mocks them as "teabaggers"....bitter clingers clutching their guns and bibles...etc, etc. Hollywood amplifies the animosity legitimizing the attitude and elevating it to the way the 'cool people' treat the opposition. The media covers the leaders ass and that of all his minions.
What is there to fear if you are IRS doing Obamas bidding, solicited or inferred?!?

There are plenty of conservatives who always complained about Bush's 'respect for the office' how he wouldn't attack his opponents that way.
Now it is easy to see why he was right.
The leader sets the tone for the troops and the 'troops' in the beauracracies within our government are following our leaders example to the detriment of all of us.

These incidents are certainly an indictment of the character of our leader but they also serve very well to illustrate why the IRS should be replaced with a simple tax revenue system...flat tax, fair tax, whatever you like.
Remember these outrageous abuses are just the tip of the iceberg. They are what you occasionally catch sight of like a captain steering his ship through the ice field but the body of the 'problem' is much larger and below the surface. The tax code is tens of thousands of pages of injustice and corruption written by slimy politicians buying themselves power.

Issa's not a happy camper and both House committee leaders are having a snit fight. Issa can't find a single fact the proves Obama knew about the IRA targeting and he doesn't want anyone to know it.

Will, most of the IRS employees are long-standing bureaucrats, not ideologues, and the President has very little by way of routine involvement. What alternate universe are YOU ranting about, because it sure isn't the one the rest of us live in? You realize, do you not, that whether the number be 3 or 88 employees, the IRS has THOUSANDS of employees?

callmeslick wrote:Will, most of the IRS employees are long-standing bureaucrats, not ideologues, ...

You are making a completely unfounded assertion. As you often do. Unless of course you know all hose IRS employees and know them to be neutral!

The examples I gave, and many other incidents show that many IRS employees have quit an attitude and these recent incidents regarding the selective persecution of conservatives is obviously the result of IRS personnel using their authority to excercize an ideological intimidation!
You can proclaim to know otherwise because that is what you want the narrative to be but the actual evidence doesn't support your story.

and the President has very little by way of routine involvement. What alternate universe are YOU ranting about, because it sure isn't the one the rest of us live in?

I never said he did anything to direct this attitude. However, in this universe he has outwardly exhibited contempt for his political opponents numerous times and he and his 'justice' department have shown that they dont prosecute their own and that leadership has emboldened those employees who you think are magically unbiased to help their team by pushing the envelope. Do you really think only conservatives produce the Oliver Norths and G Gordon Liddy's of the world?!

I should know better by now than to expect you to look at it without your party loyalty trumping objectivity.

You realize, do you not, that whether the number be 3 or 88 employees, the IRS has THOUSANDS of employees?

Yes, but I didn't know that you know all of them and can vouch for their lack of any ideological bent, all thousands of them! You must be one busy man making all those friends and staying abreast of their daily decisions...how they effect their treatment of citizens in the application of their duty!

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Will, most of the IRS employees are long-standing bureaucrats, not ideologues, ...

You are making a completely unfounded assertion. As you often do. Unless of course you know all hose IRS employees and know them to be neutral!

]
and you are basing the claim that most are ideologues on what, exactly? Look, I tried to be nice and avoid calling your assertion ludicrous, but really, that is exactly what it is.

Your obviously ignoring the fact that the ones in charge are the only ones that need to be idealogs. Which as more is known, appears to be the case with the IRS. Lois lerner point in case, she targeted conservative groups while she was with the FEC and now we have the IRS doing the same under her watch. Wow talk about coincidence

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Will, most of the IRS employees are long-standing bureaucrats, not ideologues, ...

You are making a completely unfounded assertion. As you often do. Unless of course you know all hose IRS employees and know them to be neutral!

]
and you are basing the claim that most are ideologues on what, exactly? Look, I tried to be nice and avoid calling your assertion ludicrous, but really, that is exactly what it is.

I said there are a bunch of them that exhibit the elitist behavior. That has been instilled into their standard practices as a result of the agency's 'above the law' mandate. You ascribed that to mean I said majority are ideologues because it makes your silly claim slightly more plausible. But it is silly to imply, as you did, that being a long term beauracrat some how exempts one from holding to any ideology! They are humans first therefore they bring their personal biases to work with them every day....
If their leader, of the same political bent, is unrepentant in his persecution of the opposition and proven to excuse bad be havior in the name of his cause they follow his lead with zeal! They are 'bring that gun to the knife fight' as he instructed them to do.

I'm basing my claim on numerous reports of behavior that are contrary to your assertion otherwise. Documentation in multiple news sources of IRS abuse that goes back a very long way. And recent reports that show that attitude is behind some very partisan abuse!
Im not just expressing my belief as fact the way you do. You can easily find the reports of over zealous IRS activity.

As proof of the contrary you have offered what?
The threat of calling my point ludicrous?!?
Oh dear! Slick is getting all puffed up and is prepared to go all out with the name calling?!?!
Lol, go ahead, that is sure to be a compelling argument.

Will Robinson wrote:So now you have a bunch of IRS workers who are ideologues

Will, this is the line I specifically questioned. 88 out of 12,000 isn't a 'bunch', nor is there ANY PROOF whatsoever that someone at or even NEAR the White House planned this whole thing. It was, I will agree with you, one of a zillion reasons to simplify the tax code and pare the IRS down a lot.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:So now you have a bunch of IRS workers who are ideologues

Will, this is the line I specifically questioned. 88 out of 12,000 isn't a 'bunch', nor is there ANY PROOF whatsoever that someone at or even NEAR the White House planned this whole thing. It was, I will agree with you, one of a zillion reasons to simplify the tax code and pare the IRS down a lot.

I'm assuming the 88 represents the ones that have been identified as having abused their power recently regarding the selective intimidation of conservative non profit groups?

First off, 88 is a bunch! 88 cops who suddenly start beating up redheads is a bunch....88 pilots out of thousands who suddenly start raping flight attendants is a bunch...

Secondly, my initial post about the IRS wasn't just about the 88 or just the recent abuse. I believe I mentioned the way they seize people's funds and property and even after prevailing in court, and then prevailing in all the IRS appeals we have citizens who can't get their funds and property back years into the process! The IRS simply refuses to comply and there is no mechanism to force them to do so.

The idea that when accused by the IRS you instantly have lost the presumption of innocence with the burden of proof switched from the prosecution to the defendant is outrageous and it has created a monster in terms of the attitude the IRS takes toward us citizens.

What a bunch of screwups. They've managed to add insult to injury.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/news/irs-un ... 21268.html

I may have been on that list someplace.......oh, well, I see it more as a curiousity rather than anything too threatening. At least so far......