Barack Obama’s fingerprints are all over it:
One grows weary of stating the obvious, but if President Bush had declared a specific category of citizen groups a “threat to democracy” potentially run by “political operatives” or “foreign-controlled,” and the IRS launched an unprecedented campaign of targeting and intrusive questioning, the mainstream media would have been relentless not only in its independent investigations but in its calls for accountability – at the highest levels.
Was the president of the United States involved in the IRS scandal? He was the one who identified the targets – in the most public manner possible.
This is called “circumstantial evidence.” People are convicted on circumstantial evidence every day.
“attack ads run by shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names”
“millions of dollars” for “attack ads.”
“guided by seasoned Republican political operatives”
Obama isn’t talking about grassroots tea party groups — they don’t spend millions on attack ads. He’s talking about groups like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, which used 501c4 status to conceal the identities of their multi-million dollar donors.
The IRS approved Crossroads GPS’ 501c4 application. You’ve got nothing.
Obama was talking about TP groups. Obama and the Democrats have used these same planned attack lines against all conservative groups. Are we to ignore the conduct of the entire Democrat party?
And just because not every single right leaning group was persecuted by the Obama administration doesn’t mean there was no wrong doing. Don’t forget, the IRS already admitted that the illegal actions took place. What hasn’t happened is anyone being held accountable. In fact, people involved got promotions and bonuses so it really looks like they were rewarded for their actoons. That speaks to culpability on the part of the administration.
You also failed to quote the President accuse his domestic political opponents of being foreign agents, something right out of the book of Castro and Chavez. Much of Obama’s rhetoric would be right at home in Venezuela or Cuba and Democrats defense of their charismatic cult leader as well.
Obama was talking about TP groups
How many TP groups spend millions on attack ads?
accuse his domestic political opponents of being foreign agents
He said that because donor identities were being kept secret, “you don’t know if it’s a foreign controlled corporation”. Which is true, and one reason why we historically haven’t allowed anonymous political donations.
He said that because donor identities were being kept secret, “you don’t know if it’s a foreign controlled corporation”.
Actually, he said that because (as leftists do) he was projecting, based on how he funded his own campaign, in 2008 (and probably 2012 as well), by deliberately turning off the foreign credit-card checks on his web site.
So you’re concerned that foreigners may make anonymous under-$200 campaign donations, but unconcerned that they may make anonymous million dollar SuperPAC donations?
deliberately turning off the foreign credit-card checks
Indicating intent of illegal acts which is just one of hundreds of impeachable offenses this man has committed.
Yes, we know that many of these TP groups were not running hundred million dollar ad campaigns like unions and other Democrat special intrest groups but those TP groups are often accused by the Democrats as having spent these large sums of money regardless of the accuracy of the accusations. Democrats accuse the TP of lots of things that are untrue, like being the KKK.
Democrats wont call what happened in Benghazi or Boston Islamic Terrorism. Terrorism has been removed from the government lexicon, because of progressive multiculteralism, except for when reffering to Republicans and the TP. Think about that. Democrats wont call the Taliban terrorists but they have no problem calling other Americans the Taliban. Democrats treat people who throw acid in the faces of schoolgirls and cut people’s heads off better than Republicans.
The deliberate strategy to link Republicans and the TP to the KKK and the Taliban is really messed up and has no place in our society. It is time Democrats to stop these deliberate acts of dehumanization before it leads to more violence and government abuse by Democrats.
And Democrats complaining about how groups are funded and shadowy donors is very hypocritical. But it just an example of the rules Democrats have for themselves and the rules they make other parties follow.
So if I publicly say “I hope X gets hit by a bus,” and X gets hit by a bus, I can get convicted for murdering X?
Maybe, if all the bus drivers work for you.
Ordinarily, of course not. But if you happen to be the bus driver, or the guy in charge of the bus company, when X gets squished, then oh yeah. It’s means, motive, and opportunity.
No, at best it’s motive. Means = “you can convince somebody to do something illegal for you” and opportunity = “you actually communicated with the driver.”
So if I publicly say “I hope X gets hit by a bus,” some of my employees push X into the street, and X gets hit by a bus, and I protect my employees from prosecution I can get convicted for murdering X?
Chris, I find the erroneous thinking of your analogy to be breathtaking. I fixed this one for you so you can get what the problem is. The missing link above is that your employees were expediting a crime that happens to favor you, which you happened to wish for publicly, and after which you protected them. There’s still some evidence that needs to be obtained to fill out the chain, but this looks a lot more damning when you consider an appropriate analogy.
So if the CEO of Honda says “I hope X gets hit by a car” and a worker on a Honda assembly line hits X with a car, you can convict the CEO of murder?
You’re really not very good at this “analogy” thing, are you?
We already went over this with your last inappropriate analogy. You’re wasting our time and I’m pretty annoyed that you’re not even pretending to have considered my argument.
It’s also worth noting that IRS agents have a duty to not abuse their position of power. An assembly worker doesn’t have that similar obligation. Sure, the assembly worker shouldn’t be murdering people, but it’s not a job requirement to respect that particular law.
Not the best analogy. Obama never said “I hope the IRS singles out Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny” — he wasn’t talking about Tea Party groups at all. He was railing against Citizens United, and the way it opened the door to large scale anonymous political spending.
If the IRS was taking its cues from his public statements it would have denied Crossroads GPS (and the Dems’ own Priorities USA) 501c4 status, but it didn’t do that. So the “evidence” that Obama was using public statements to direct a conspiracy is that the IRS subsequently targeted groups he never mentioned, and ignored the groups he went on and on about.
Who gives a damn if foreigners are spending money to buy ads? cf. The first amendment. Hell, the (American) Tides foundation has been meddling in Canadian politics for years, paying hundreds of groups millions of dollars to astroturf. If you yanks can meddle in everyone else’s elections, don’t get your panties in a bunch when it happens to you.
Lois Lerner has been taped saying she had to look into groups because of Democrat’s views on citizen united. You may say TP groups had nothing to do with that case but Obama, other elected Democrats, Democrat activists, and Democrat party media have all been linking the TP to citizen’s united.
Are we really supposed to forget what Democrats have been saying for the last five years?
Do you have an example of Obama linking Tea Party groups to Citizen’s United?
When Obama’s administration says it, it is the same as him saying it. And Obama uses the same talking points as other Democrats. We all know who he is referring to when he uses those attacks. And we all know those talking points come out of the White House.
Also, Obama is the head of the Democrat party and he is responsible for their conduct that I noted above.
Somewhat tangential…
Citizens United was about the government controlling the speech of a non-government entity. Nothing more, nothing less. Nobody should want the government to be able to control that. To open that door is dangerous beyond words can say. For the Democrats and Obama to rail against that is of the utmost rank stupidity.
Even the ACLU supports Citizens United: https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/aclu-and-citizens-united
There is historical precedent: Will No One Rid Me of This Meddlesome Priest?
Wodun nailed it. It’s about the process of dehumanization. This is pure evil. This is what comes before shoving people into ovens. If you don’t hate evil, you are evil.