Cruz to Holder: Appoint an Independent Prosecutor in IRS Scandal

[Yurt]

why am i not surprised jakestarkey is taking the left's side on this

 

[mudwhistle]

The far right reactionaries are interested only in power not "in the good health and prosperity and sound government of this country"

Your posts are really good, and really untrue. Now if you're talking progressives you'd be spot on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

why am i not surprised jakestarkey is taking the left's side on this

Show where I took "the left's side".

You can't.

I am taking the side of America from responsible conservatives to responsible liberals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right reactionaries are interested only in power not "in the good health and prosperity and sound government of this country"

Your posts are really good, and really untrue. Now if you're talking progressives you'd be spot on.

The far left is as corrupt and power mad as is the far reactionary right, yes.

 

[rightwinger]

What has Ken Starr been up to?


I thought Republicans had him on permanant retainer anytime they wanted to create a crisis

 

[zeke]

Why should there be a special prosecutor?

There is no evidence of any malice.

If you want to clean up our government at the federal level you need them to be above reproach.

After all, even the suspicion of an Executive Branch using the government departments as a tool for political persecution is almost as serious a crime as there could be. It undermines the people's faith in the effectiveness of every aspect of that government.

Without that faith there will eventually come contempt and then actual physical challenges.

We need to maintain confidence in our public servants or we all will lose. Big time.

EDIT: That's why I believe even Gov. Christie's scandal needs to be completely investigated. So we can move on one way or the other.

Even though I believe the Dems really are trying to assail Christie in order to even the odds for a Hillary run in 2016.

That big bold sentence is funny as hell. Have you seen the approval ratings of Congress?
Obama? You want to close the gate when the horse done got out.

Don't think closing that gate now will do any good.

What we NEED is to vote every incumbent in EVERY office in the land, out of office.

Start over.

 

[Synthaholic]

Yet, no suspicion exists.

Exhibit A - How Liberals fail to grasp obvious facts when deductive reasoning is required.

It is beyond their ability to comprehend.

Synthaholic, if there was no suspicion, Cruz would not have called for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion you'd have no one anywhere supporting Cruz' call for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion your comment would have produced no objections. Instead it would have been met with the sound of *crickets*.

I know. I know. You're not REALLY that stupid. You are just practicing until you are able to impress your stupid media icons at MSNBC that you are just as stupid as they are.

I nominate this as the stupidest USMB statement of 2014.

 

[Yurt]

why am i not surprised jakestarkey is taking the left's side on this

Show where I took "the left's side".

You can't.

I am taking the side of America from responsible conservatives to responsible liberals.

hilarious, you want me to back up my claims when you never do....

until you back up your claims, you don't get to ask me to back up anything

 

[Mojo2]

The far right reactionaries are interested only in power not "in the good health and prosperity and sound government of this country"

You must have exhausted your own talking points so you have now resorted to re-cycling the criticism aimed at you.

Very Progressive of you.

AlGore would applaud your green thinking being applied to political "discourse."

Now all you need to do is to sell your tactic to al Qaeda and then you can retire a wealthy troll.

See?

You are living the dream.

 

[Mojo2]

Yet, no suspicion exists.

Exhibit A - How Liberals fail to grasp obvious facts when deductive reasoning is required.

It is beyond their ability to comprehend.

Synthaholic, if there was no suspicion, Cruz would not have called for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion you'd have no one anywhere supporting Cruz' call for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion your comment would have produced no objections. Instead it would have been met with the sound of *crickets*.

I know. I know. You're not REALLY that stupid. You are just practicing until you are able to impress your stupid media icons at MSNBC that you are just as stupid as they are.

I nominate this as the stupidest USMB statement of 2014.

Oh, don't be so modest.

You aren't prohibited from choosing your own utterances.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mojo2 has trouble realizing his own comments condemn him.

That is a typical problem with far right and far left hypocrites.

 

[Yurt]

jakestarkey has trouble realizing his own comments condemn him for the democrat he is.

 

[Mojo2]

Why should there be a special prosecutor?

There is no evidence of any malice.

If you want to clean up our government at the federal level you need them to be above reproach.

After all, even the suspicion of an Executive Branch using the government departments as a tool for political persecution is almost as serious a crime as there could be. It undermines the people's faith in the effectiveness of every aspect of that government.

Without that faith there will eventually come contempt and then actual physical challenges.

We need to maintain confidence in our public servants or we all will lose. Big time.

EDIT: That's why I believe even Gov. Christie's scandal needs to be completely investigated. So we can move on one way or the other.

Even though I believe the Dems really are trying to assail Christie in order to even the odds for a Hillary run in 2016.

That big bold sentence is funny as hell. Have you seen the approval ratings of Congress?
Obama? You want to close the gate when the horse done got out.

Don't think closing that gate now will do any good.

What we NEED is to vote every incumbent in EVERY office in the land, out of office.

Start over.

I'm down wit dat, too!

But the same guys who created our Constitution also created a solution for the situation we have today.

Anyone who loves and respects and reveres our Constitution should be interested in using the mechanism provided IN THE CONSTITUTION for addressing an oppressive government.

It allows us to take our country back.

Article Five of the Constitution:

Article Five of the United States Constitution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification.[1]

Amendments may be adopted and sent to the states for ratification by either:

Two-thirds (supermajority) of both the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States Congress;

OR

By a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds (at present 34) of the states.


To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either (as determined by Congress):

The legislatures of three-fourths (at present 38) of the states;

OR

State ratifying conventions in three-fourths (at present 38) of the states.

Article Five of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Mojo2]

Baseless accusations do not equal "suspicion". If they did, we could say that you are suspected of collecting dog shit to use as a base for your sausage gravy.

I said it, so there must be suspicion.

Well, I'll spring the trap now instead of later.

Looks like there WAS more than suspicion.

Lots more.

When the Treasury dept. I.G. found wrongdoing and questionable activities Obama was 'SHOCKED' and promised to investigate!

When Atty. Gen'l Holder heard about the I.G. report he was "SHOCKED" and promised an investigation.

Well, 18 months later and no one has been convicted.

Yeah, there's an excuse.


Ever spend any time around ex-cons?

Some of them are kinda peculiar in that they regularly have excuses for everything that goes wrong in their lives or their area of responsibility.

Not excuses for the sake of explaining what happened and why, but excuses to avoid being held responsible.

And the more afflicted the ex-con, the more excuses they seem to have.

Think about this for a moment...

Think of the person or persons you know who regularly offer up the most excuses as a matter of course and you'll find that person may also be the least trustworthy of all your acquaintances.

They are never at fault. You can never get a straight answer from them.

The idea isn't that you are looking for them to be on the defensive all the time. It is more a case of noticing a correlation between someone who 'always' has an excuse for everything and that person's trustworthiness.

Well, have you ever noticed Obama and his administration seems to ALWAYS have an excuse for this or that or the other when something goes wrong or when they are caught doing something wrong?

They are never at fault.

And they are habitual liars.

Just wanted to alert you all to what's happening.
Oh, I almost forgot.

Here. Enjoy!

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's findings

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that inappropriate criteria had been used by IRS personnel to select certain applications for tax exemption status for further review and that inappropriate procedures were applied against organizations based on their names or policy positions.[16] According to the audit, beginning early in 2010, front-line IRS agents violated IRS policy by failing to handle tax matters in an impartial manner that would promote public confidence:

The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued. Although the processing of some applications with potential significant political campaign intervention was started soon after receipt, no work was completed on the majority of these applications for 13 months.... For the 296 total political campaign intervention applications [reviewed in the audit] as of December 17, 2012, 108 had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied, and 160 were open from 206 to 1,138 calendar days (some for more than three years and crossing two election cycles).... Many organizations received requests for additional information from the IRS that included unnecessary, burdensome questions (e.g., lists of past and future donors).[16]

The Inspector General concluded that "although the IRS has taken some action, it will need to do more so that the public has reasonable assurance that applications are processed without unreasonable delay in a fair and impartial manner in the future."[16]

The Washington Post described the audit report as having found that some IRS employees were “ignorant about tax laws, defiant of their supervisors and blind to the appearance of impropriety.”[87]

Criticism of the inspector general

J. Russell George, the Treasury Department Inspector General who had alerted lawmakers to the IRS's improper behavior, was criticized by Republican lawmakers, who said that because inspectors general are required to notify Congress via agency heads when wrongdoing is discovered—and in serious cases must do so within 7 days—he should have notified Congress in 2012, prior to the election that year.[88] Inspector General George, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, responded by saying that the audit had not been complete, and that in his view, "to ensure fairness and to ensure that we are completely accurate with the information that we convey to Congress, we will not report information until the IRS has had an opportunity to take a look at it to ensure that we're not misstating facts."[88]

2013 Congressional investigation

Following the Inspector General's report, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform began an investigation into the IRS. Additionally, the House Committee on Ways and Means expanded its ongoing 2011 investigation into IRS political targeting to include the BOLO keyword targeting allegations.

On May 15, the House Oversight Committee requested that Holly Paz, John Shafer, Gary Muther, Liz Hofacre and Joseph Herraz be interviewed beginning May 20, 2013.[89]

On May 22, 2013, in an opening statement to the House committee chaired by Representative Darrell Issa, Lerner stated: “I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations. And I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee." Lerner then invoked her Fifth Amendment right against compelled testimony and refused to testify.[90] Issa later asserted that Lerner had waived her Fifth Amendment rights by giving partial testimony and that he intended to call her back into the hearings.[91][92] Congressman Trey Gowdy agreed with Issa. Gowdy stated: "She [Lois Lerner] just waived her Fifth Amendment right. You don't get to tell your side of the story and then not be subjected to cross examination — that's not the way it works. She waived her right to Fifth Amendment privilege by issuing an opening statement. She ought to stand here and answer our questions."

Law professor James Duane told New York Magazine that Gowdy's assertion was "extremely imaginative" but "mistaken" because a person who is involuntarily summoned before a grand jury or a legislative body may selectively invoke the right to silence.[93] Law professor Alan Dershowitz took a different view, arguing: "You can't simply make statements about a subject and then plead the Fifth in response to questions about the very same subject," and asserting that "[o]nce you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have waived your Fifth Amendment right".[94]

In a May 22, 2013 testimony before Congress, former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman stated that he had frequently visited the White House during 2010-2011, but he denied having discussed the targeting of conservatives with anyone in the White House.[95][96] His testimony was criticized by several columnists.[97][98] Some media outlets and lawmakers asserted that Shulman had visited the White House up to 157 times; however, The Atlantic reported that that represented the number of times Shulman was cleared by the Secret Service to visit the White House or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not necessarily the number of times Shulman actually arrived; visitor sign-in logs can confirm only 11 visits between 2009 and 2012, though the number is likely higher because the sign-in system does not capture every visitor, particularly at large events. Shulman was regularly scheduled for events like the biweekly health-care deputies meeting that would have had a standing list of people cleared to attend.[99]

2013 IRS scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You realized that your previous comment was borderline retarded......and you went looking for something that would pass as "suspicion" so you could pretend like you were setting a trap of some kind.

You should take after some of our less original nutters here and simply post links. Your comments are not impressive.

Weak minded nutter. Try harder.

Oh, okay.

So you ARE able to see through bullshit.

Then please tell us why you fell for Obama's bullshit?

And why are you here STILL DEFENDING his bullshit?

Hmmm?

 

[Mojo2]

What has Ken Starr been up to?


I thought Republicans had him on permanant retainer anytime they wanted to create a crisis

That's your main problem.

Your mind is in the sewer so much it makes you a shitty stinker...er, thinker.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Yeah, let's send a clear and unmistakable message to all who might be tempted to treat the presidency as a dictatorship with a set of perks which include use of the departments of government as his own personal partisan enforcers, that there will be no consequences for snatching freedoms from the citizens of this country.



And you assume that it was just the IRS trying to "muddle their way through a bad court ruling..."

Yeah???

So, let's confirm your assumption.

Investigate.

I'm sure they'll all appreciate the opportunity to clear their names and reputations.

NO, I don't assume it. I go with what the investigations they've done so far have proven. That the decision to place Tea Party groups under additional scrutiny were made by BUSH appointees, and in many cases, it was justified because they weren't applying for the right tax exemption.

Hey, here's something else, because you kind of glossed over my point about Walsh, Starr and Fitzgerald. Did any of these guys ever find out anything about their respective cases that we didn't already know from the initial reporting/investigations.

I'll make it easy for you. Nope. They didn't. Instead, they all went off on weird tangents when they couldn't make their cases against their original targets.

I'll go with a nice conservative one so you can understand. Lawrence Walsh got convictions of Ollie North and Admiral Poindexter, which were IMMEDIATELY thrown out because those guys testified with immunity.

Walsh then spent the next few years trying to get Cap Weinberger. Weinberger didn't know jack about the "Contra" part of Iran-Contra and the Iran part, he thought was a really terrible idea. (And it turned out he was completely right!)

 

[Synthaholic]

Synthaholic, if there was no suspicion, Cruz would not have called for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion you'd have no one anywhere supporting Cruz' call for an investigation.

If there was no suspicion your comment would have produced no objections. Instead it would have been met with the sound of *crickets*.

I know. I know. You're not REALLY that stupid. You are just practicing until you are able to impress your stupid media icons at MSNBC that you are just as stupid as they are.

I nominate this as the stupidest USMB statement of 2014.

Oh, don't be so modest.

You aren't prohibited from choosing your own utterances.

So, you believe that Ted Cruz would never engage in a witch hunt?

How old are you?