Watergate v2 (IRS Scandal)

[archibaldcrane]

He's right, what the IRS did was pretty stupid.

[Yabby]

He's right, what the IRS did was pretty stupid.

Yes, but the second I started seeing them take it to the extreme, I stopped caring completely. At some point there is a line, and if you cross it you are now causing more harm from you cause then helping. If they want to do their little witch hunt that is fine, but don't take a serious issue and mix it with bullshit because now they are both covered in shit.

[Plow]

Plow comin' in with the ol' middle ground fallacy again

what the fuck was middle ground about that?

if westborough blames the oklahoma tornado on obama does that mean the tornado was no big deal?

[ringthree]

"Oh Mr. Johnson, it says on here that you're black. It looks like we're gonna have to audit you."

Replace black with conservative.

Yea no big deal though guys. Continue the circle jerk.

Look into the track record of the IRS dealing with progressive groups during the Bush administration.

It's not justified when either side does it, but seriously, trying to racialize this is just moronic.

[Kohan]

Yes, but the second I started seeing them take it to the extreme, I stopped caring completely. At some point there is a line, and if you cross it you are now causing more harm from you cause then helping.

That's been my main concern as well.

EDIT: And naturally, when I read the article linked below, I could only think of this thread, and the general hullabaloo it's related to.

‘Obama Scandals’ Could Actually Hurt Republicans

Republican politicians and activists can barely contain their glee at the simultaneous eruption of three major controversies about the Obama administration.

Conservatives are at a low boil over the administration’s dissembling about its actions after the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. The public is concerned about the targeting of conservative groups by the Internal Revenue Service. And even liberals are outraged by the administration’s heavy-handed investigations of leaks to the news media.

Finally, many Republicans think, the tide is turning against the Democrats. Republican strategists -- and the few conservatives on Capitol Hill who were in Washington during the Clinton years -- are less excited. They fear that the party is about to repeat the mistakes it made in 1998.

Early that year, it came to light that President Bill Clinton had had a sexual relationship with a White House intern and lied about it to the public, to a court in a civil suit and to a grand jury in a criminal case. Congressional Republicans tried to remove him from office. The public hated the idea, and Republicans lost seats in the fall elections. They had been expected to make significant gains because the opposition party usually did in the sixth year of a presidency. House Speaker Newt Gingrich lost his job largely as a result.

History Repeating

Watch the way the Republicans are handling today’s controversies and it’s easy to see how their tactics could backfire again.

[...]

For the rest of the article: ‘Obama Scandals’ Could Actually Hurt Republicans

Among that piece's comments, there was one absolute beauty, and it reminded me of the mindset that could lead to an OP like this thread's...

[Buffy]

Doesn't really deserve it's own thread:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...iref=obnetwork

Best part for me? The IRS, which wants you as a taxpayer to document everything, can't find about 4.6 % of the money they spent on the conference. They have receipts for about 4.1 million, but actually spent about 4.3 million.

Our tax dollars at work!

[Celeras]

Estimates are required to include things that are comp'd, which will account for the difference. You're always given shit when you book a ton of rooms, and its against policy to not include them in your reporting. IE if you get free dinner with a $100 room, you're only covered for 100 minus the dinner price. You have records for a $100 room, the estimate says 100 + dinner.

Rocket surgery I know.

[Xantavia]

If this is true, wonder if certain news organizations are going to quietly drop it. Supposedly a republican on staff at a local IRS agency is the one who started the tea party targeting. http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/...n-staffer.html

[Plow]

If this is true, wonder if certain news organizations are going to quietly drop it. Supposedly a republican on staff at a local IRS agency is the one who started the tea party targeting. http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/...n-staffer.html

Not much to wonder about, Issa wanted a full release and public announcement of the hearing until he found that out; then took steps to block it and is now bitching at people for having released it anyway.

Not even trying to hide the fact that they're trying to hide this.

[zoobernut]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politi...html?hpt=hp_t2

Washington (CNN) -- New disclosures that the Internal Revenue Service targeted liberals as well as conservatives in assessing applications for tax-exempt status have reshaped perceptions of the scandal, shifting the focus away from Republican claims of political villainy.
Investigations by the FBI, congressional committees, the Treasury inspector general's office and the IRS continue, but Monday's revelations bolstered assertions by agency officials and Democrats that the problem was egregious mismanagement instead of intentional misconduct by the Obama administration.

I apologize for the small bump but I thought this was interesting.

I only quoted the first part of the article but basically it looks like the IRS wasn't just targeting conservatives.

[quannum]

this thread should have been about the DOJ seizing AP records, the IRS stuff isn't a scandal, that's just the IRS doing its job.

still applies, 501(c)(4) orgs need to be investigated

[Mrbeansman]

still applies, money laundering fronts need to be investigated

FTFY

[Plow]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politi...html?hpt=hp_t2




I apologize for the small bump but I thought this was interesting.

I only quoted the first part of the article but basically it looks like the IRS wasn't just targeting conservatives.

it does make this whole "controversy" pretty stupid if it was just going after 501c4 in general cuz that shit definitely needed to be done

[Salodin]

Loving how the news stories I see on tv are flipping this around, going "If progressives are targeted too, then why was the GOP raising a stink?" The "experts" on tv were backpedaling soooo hard lol

[Kohan]

it does make this whole "controversy" pretty stupid

It was always stupid, and never an actual controversy. This just further lowers its relevance.

[Plow]

It was always stupid, and never an actual controversy. This just further lowers its relevance.

Sorry, your decision that republicans not liking something means it can't be bad has no bearing on the fact that it is absolutely wrong and a big deal if the IRS is targeting people based on their expressed political opinions.

[Tarage]

Why the HELL am I agreeing with Plow?

[archibaldcrane]

Sorry, your decision that republicans not liking something means it can't be bad has no bearing on the fact that it is absolutely wrong and a big deal if the IRS is targeting people based on their expressed political opinions.

Except they were attempting to target all 501c's with political leanings for extra scrutiny since they are often used for tax-dodging political purposes - their fuckup was the ham-fisted way they did it by pointing towards keywords in the titles.

They aren't targeting them for WHAT they are expressing politically, they're doing a poor job of targeting them for additional scrutiny (as they should) for expressing political things at all.

[Mazmaz]

I think Plow's point was that when we thought they were only targeting Tea Partiers and you all thought it was no big deal, you were wrong.

[Blubbartron]

I think Plow's point was that when we thought they were only targeting Tea Partiers and you all thought it was no big deal, you were wrong.

But if the Tea Partiers were targeted because the Koch brothers are attempting to subvert democracy by funneling money into politics, and these tax-exempt groups would be an ideal way to do it (and simultaneously subvert the IRS by claiming they're donating to a charity with tax-exempt status, which I believe would be a tax write off), it would make complete sense to only target those groups. Without information on why they were targeted, it's impossible to say whether or not it's a big deal. It warranted some investigation, but not absurd accusations like "Obama is trying to shut down Republican groups!"