• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Issa IRS witch hunt proven to have NOTHING to do with Obama- OOPS

Diggitydeac said:
Any business person with a modicum of intelligence knows that the culture of any organization starts the top. When there is an activity this pervasive, it is indeed a cultural norm, and not an isolated act. Obama could have stopped the targeting immediately when his administration began hearing the complaints. Everyone knows Obama wanted the Tea Party throttled for the 2012 election. Why debate the obvious?
Click to expand...

Saying liberal groups weren't invetigated at the same time really isn't accurate.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-that-fed-tea-party-row.html?alcmpid=politics

This is one of the areas of the tax code that is highly "facts and circumstances" based. So you are going to end up with a wide range of opinions on what types of activities are acceptable and those that are not.

That agent appears to be talking out of her arse, but I have dealt with agents who have had opinions on matters of tax law that, in my opinion, had no basis in tax law. I didn't necessarily conclude that it was some grand conspiracy to deny the taxpayer its rights under the law.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
I think the likelihood that this was some sort of top down edict is very very low. There are conservatives in the IRS. The head at the time was a bush appointee. This is just right wing fantasy that there was some sort of coordinated effort by Obama to target Tea Party groups. The IRS pretty much operates autonomously from the Presidential administration.
Click to expand...

Who was a Democrat, a John Kerry donor, and whose wife is heavily involved in liberal campaign finance causes. Also, if this wasn't a coordinated effort, someone is still going to have to explain why Shulman made over 150 visits to the White House when, during the eight years of the Bush administration, the person in the same role visited the White House once.

I also love how rj's standard for "proof" changes based solely on who is offering it.
 
DeacLaw05 said:
Who was a Democrat, a John Kerry donor, and whose wife is heavily involved in liberal campaign finance causes. Also, if this wasn't a coordinated effort, someone is still going to have to explain why Shulman made over 150 visits to the White House when, during the eight years of the Bush administration, the person in the same role visited the White House once.

I also love how rj's standard for "proof" changes based solely on who is offering it.
Click to expand...

The Shulman visits have already been explained as largely having to do with Obamacare implementation.
 
This has to be the dumbest "scandal" of all time.
 
DeacLaw05 said:
Who was a Democrat, a John Kerry donor, and whose wife is heavily involved in liberal campaign finance causes. Also, if this wasn't a coordinated effort, someone is still going to have to explain why Shulman made over 150 visits to the White House when, during the eight years of the Bush administration, the person in the same role visited the White House once.

I also love how rj's standard for "proof" changes based solely on who is offering it.
Click to expand...

So sworn testimony by someone who is theoretically testifying against his own self interest is not thought of as the strongest type of testimony. Hmmmmm, maybe you should go back to 1L and take some remedial courses.
 
Deacon923 said:
The Shulman visits have already been explained as largely having to do with Obamacare implementation.
Click to expand...

Don't bother them with facts. It gets in the way of the boogeyman and black helicopters.
 
The fiance and I are currently powering through the entire West Wing series. Last night we watched the episode where the GOP-led House committee voluntarily suspended its own hearing (investigating the President's health disclosures) so as not to embarrass Leo, the WH Chief of Staff. We both had a good laugh thinking about how something like that would never happen in today's House. The committee chairs are out to win at all costs, regardless of the futility or dishonesty of their efforts, not to mention the damage it does to their party's credibility.
 
DeacLaw05 said:
Who was a Democrat, a John Kerry donor, and whose wife is heavily involved in liberal campaign finance causes. Also, if this wasn't a coordinated effort, someone is still going to have to explain why Shulman made over 150 visits to the White House when, during the eight years of the Bush administration, the person in the same role visited the White House once.

I also love how rj's standard for "proof" changes based solely on who is offering it.
Click to expand...

So Bush appointed a mole who just lay in wait for a Dem president so that he could orchestrate an illegal campaign against conservative groups and then fall on his sword ruining his career and reputation?
 
RJKarl said:
So sworn testimony by someone who is theoretically testifying against his own self interest is not thought of as the strongest type of testimony. Hmmmmm, maybe you should go back to 1L and take some remedial courses.
Click to expand...

Did you read your own quote? I copied it down below so you can read what you posted. Both Cummings and Issa have been cherry picking testimony that fits their spin and neither has released the full text so people who have not already made up their minds can see the context. I personally do not think this came from the Whitehouse but I do not knowthat for sure yet.

"Cummings and Issa have been releasing portions of interviews that back up their assertions. But neither has released full transcripts, making it difficult to discern a complete story."
 
The two people involved, both self-described conservative Republicans, have each said it was their doing,
 
ONW said:
Oh fucking please. You need to read this book by a certain someone who kept us all from becoming glass because of an ability to apply critical thinking.

"Graham Allison, a political scientist who covered the Cuban Missile Crisis in Essence of Decision, noted the effect of the Tuchman's book on Kennedy, but also its implications for the proper study of decision-making and warfare. Allison created an entire model of decision-making, which he called the "Organizational Process Model," based on such issues as those covered by Tuchman, a model which directly countered game theory and other rationalistic means of explaining events."

Cummings looks like he's in touch with reality, and Issa is playing a PR game for whatever reason (self-interest).
Click to expand...

That some deep shit.

Anyway, Dave Camp, co-chair with Issa and of a completely different style, wants to continue the investigation as do many senior Ways and Means members.

They are trying to coordinate mrs Lerner's return. They will also subpoena Carter Hull.

I say "Bully!" to that.
 
Lectro said:
That some deep shit.

Anyway, Dave Camp, co-chair with Issa and of a completely different style, wants to continue the investigation as do many senior Ways and Means members.

They are trying to coordinate mrs Lerner's return. They will also subpoena Carter Hull.

I say "Bully!" to that.
Click to expand...

Small government FTMFW! And now the IRS gets to collect more of your money to pay for this circus, to prove they were attempting to collect other peoples' money in order to get another politician re-elected. Winning.
 
I can't imagine anything more terrifying than RJ on jury duty. What constitutes proof to him boggles the mind.
 
You mean sworn testimony, against their own interests doesn't hold water with you.

My bad, you still think AIG never did anything wrong. That gives great insights into your ability to tell right from wrong.
 
RJKarl said:
You mean sworn testimony, against their own interests doesn't hold water with you.

My bad, you still think AIG never did anything wrong. That gives great insights into your ability to tell right from wrong.
Click to expand...

Whether or not it "holds water" is immaterial. It certainly doesn't constitute proof. Again, terrifying.
 
What's terrifying is your typical and continuing refusal to understand that if two people testify under I oath,"I did this and here's why I did it" and the evidence shows the did exactly what they say they did that you don't get it.

The admitted what they did. What they admitted put them at risk.

Yep, juries wouldn't believe that.
 
Democrats are afraid of this scandal. As Chuck Todd and Jonathan Turley have both noted "this is the issue that could go nuclear."


Carry on with the investigation. Dave Camp has a long list of witnesses yet to interview. No need to worry if nothing has been done wrong. I, as but one citizen, want to see them get to the root of the program.

The key people are Hofacre, Lerner and Carter Hull.
 
Lectro said:
Democrats are afraid of this scandal. As Chuck Todd and Jonathan Turley have both noted "this is the issue that could go nuclear."


Carry on with the investigation. Dave Camp has a long list of witnesses yet to interview. No need to worry if nothing has been done wrong. I, as but one citizen, want to see them get to the root of the program.

The key people are Hofacre, Lerner and Carter Hull.
Click to expand...

I thought Benghazi was the biggest scandal ever? Or maybe it was the reporter's phone records? Or maybe it was...
 
WFFaithful said:
I thought Benghazi was the biggest scandal ever? Or maybe it was the reporter's phone records? Or maybe it was...
Click to expand...

It is so hard to tell. There is so much delicious red meat for Republicans. You would have thought Obama would space their meals out a bit. The reality is that all of the scandals are worth looking in to. They should not be promoted as the worst scandal since 'x', but they most certainly should not be dismissed.
 
He's just getting them all out of the way at once so Fox pre-ejaculates before 2014.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top