15 thoughts on “The IRS Lies And Spin”

  1. We still need know what types of questions the progressive groups were asked. Safe to say it was nothing like conservative groups faced and it would end the idea that groups received equally illegal treatment. We also need to know if a progressive bolo list was used for preferential treatment.

    Looking at the coverage of Democrat reactions to the SCOTUS ruling on the VRA, you think they would be outraged when the Obama administration uses the powers of the state to persecute political opponents. There is even an element of racism to the targeting of TP groups considering the racial and racist attacks leveled at the TP and other conservative groups by Obama and the Democrats. Looks like Jim Crow is alive and well in the party that claims to champion civil rights. Now, their words ring as hollow as they do on war, spending, the economy, and civil liberties.

    But at least Obama didn’t throw us all in prison camps as Jim would say.

  2. Yes, it’s fizzling out. There’s no evidence that the White House had anything to do with this, much less that they used “the powers of the state to persecute political opponents”. This is joining the fake birth certificate, Fast & Furious, New Black Panthers, Joe Sestak, Obamaphones, Homeland Security coffins, Solyndra, the $200m/day trip to India and Benghazi on the scrap heap of imagined Obama scandals.

    But don’t worry, they’ll think of something new next week.

    1. Whether or not Obama gave the order, his administration carried out the persecution. It happened and the IRS has admitted guilt. What hasn’t happened is the people responsible being held accountable.

      So even if it doesn’t go all the way to Obama, there is still some extensive investigation and clean up needed at the IRS. And lets not forget that in at least one case there were more than one federal agency involved, meaning there was inter-agency coordination which had to have come from people who operate above any single agency.

      Pretty much every single thing said by the Democrats and Obama have been wrong on the IRS story. IRS officials have perjured themselves before congress and other have plead the 5th.

      Democrats should be outraged that the Obama administration would act this way.

      How many people did you report to flag@whitehouse.gov? You notice there is a pattern from this administration of intimidation and persecution of what Obama calls, “our enemies.” Didn’t you work for his campaign that is now enjoys the non-profit status that conservative groups were seeking?

    2. There’s no evidence that the White House had anything to do with this

      What branch of government is the IRS part of? There’s a real simple way to demonstrate that the White House didn’t have any part in this. Fire the people responsible and if their infractions rise to the level of a crime, try them in court.

      on the scrap heap of imagined Obama scandals.

      What makes these “imagined” scandals? They happened. How is contributing to the murder of several hundred people in Mexico and the US not a scandal? How is not reacting to an attack on an ambassador and then lying about the attack via proxy not a scandal?

      1. What makes these “imagined” scandals?

        They are “imagined” because there isn’t any convincing evidence of criminal behavior by the person being blamed (in this case Obama). Such scandals still serve a purpose: they stir up righteous indignation among the people who already oppose Obama, and give them additional motivation to work against him. But because they aren’t based on convincing evidence, they don’t change the minds of the politically uncommitted, and they don’t have real world consequences (like criminal charges). And when they go way too far — as with the birth certificate “scandal” — they backfire, making the people pushing the scandal narrative look like bullies and fools, and Obama like someone who will be unfairly accused no matter what he does.

        1. A scandal doesn’t have to be criminal and while there were criminal acts done by the Obama administration, they will not prosecute themselves. It is called corruption and it is another in the long list of issues the Democrats used to gain power. Then they champion the corrupt acts of their party which shows they were never operating on genuine concern about a culture of corruption.

          The same could be said for renditions, torture, women’s rights, genocide, war powers, immigration, civil liberties, privacy and on and on and on.

    3. There’s no evidence that the White House is holding the IRS agents accountable for their abuse of power.

      BTW, I heard on the radio that Patriots fired Aaron Hernandez once he was arrested on charges of murder. Hey Jim, what’s the employment status of Nidal Hasan?

  3. Abu Ghraib was investigated athough it was at no time alleged that the White House had anything to do with it.

    Determining White House involvement if any is only a portion of the investigation. While senior management at the IRS is now known to have been involved, the exact origin of the criteria and exactly who oversaw the implementation it is not yet fully known.

    Also, I have heard no reports in hearings looking into the parallel harassment by EPA, FBI, and OSHA into business owned by some of those who were attempting to organize these 501(c)4 non-profits. Nor have I heard about hearings looking into the IRS audits of preexisting 501(c)3 organizations that took place over the same time-frame.

    1. “Abu Ghraib was investigated athough it was at no time alleged that the White House had anything to do with it.”

      That isn’t how I recall things 🙂

      And even as there were no links to Bush, Democrats claimed there was a torture culture. So it is fitting that people look at Obama’s speeches, laments about not being a dictator, efforts to skirt congress, language of hate and intimidation that actually do create a culture that encourages people in his administration to persecute his political opponents.

      1. That isn’t how I recall things

        Your memory is correct.

        people look at Obama’s speeches, laments

        Abu Ghraib was about official DOD orders on the treatment of enemy combatants, orders that originated with Donald Rumsfeld. It wasn’t about offhand comments in interviews.

        1. An offhand comment let’s us peer into the soul of the speaker and see what lies beneath, isn’t that what Democrats like to say? Obama was just revealing his true self which he has to keep privite lest he go “full bullworth”.

          Rumsfeld didn’t order the abuses at abu ghraib but if your contention is that they created a climate where guards felt they could act that way, then you need to take a closer look at Obama’s own words and actions and those under his direct control in the administration and Democrat party.

          The more we know about how you view past events, the less credible you become when talking about the IRS, voter intimidation, Fast and Furioous, ect.

  4. Jim, 292 Tea Party groups were targeted by the IRS. Only 6 Progressive groups were targeted. That’s like 98% to 2%. Must be good to be in the 2%, eh Jim? Perhaps would should listen to the 98% to determine public policy rather than the 2%? Maybe if 98% of a population says there is a problem, it would be a better bet to believe what they are saying than the 2%, right Jim?

    1. And that poll the other day where almost 30% of Democrats think the TP is a bigger threat than AQ really says something. The TP, with zero acts of violence associated with it, is viewed by many Democrats as being worse than people who regularly cut people’s heads off for being gay, christian, jew, or the wrong type of Muslim.

      Meanwhile, Obama’s own OWS has been busted on at least two plots to blow up bridges and many other occupy members have been arrested with bomb making materials and other weapons.

      Maybe it is time for Obama and the Democrats to dial down their rhetoric and start taking a closer look at the problems in their own party instead of demonizing peaceful protesters, the loyal opposition.

Comments are closed.