Cummings: Full IRS interview shows White House didn’t direct tea party targeting

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

sure, because the IRS doesn't lie...
gotcha...

Maybe they lied about targeting groups to begin with
Maybe their real name isn't IRS

I just blew your mind, didn't I...

woah...dude...I can hear the colors.

Or maybe not everything is Obama's fault...except for my toothache..thats totally his fault!

I can't believe people actually take the time to defend the IRS, of all things, in order to try and protect their favored politicians.

This country is dead.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Are you Issa-phobic much?

I will wait for Lois Lerner's to testify before believing the WH is off the hook...

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

I have a hard time believing this story because if it were true, then there'd have been no issue. This looks like a stop-gap measure.

It also doesn't explain the hundreds of visits to the Obama WhiteHouse, nor does it explain the director (what's her name) who pleaded the 5th earlier this month.

From Fast & Furious to Benghazi to the IRS scandal, it appears that the administration is blissfully ignorant and that the actual running of the country and implementation of policiy is determined by low-level office-types.

you just described the"Limbaugh Therum"...Rush sees a new example come forward every day.

Originally posted by Riposte
I can't believe people actually take the time to defend the IRS, of all things, in order to try and protect their favored politicians.

This country is dead.

if you do not like the law in which the IRS has to follow, then change it. the IRS people are not stupid, they know that the thousands of applications for 501c4's during 2011 and 2012 were being used to cover up income, and one-sided political expenditures. they were doing their job, and people got called out on it.....by the way, if they had formed 527's, there never would have been this type of scrutiny....
here's the law that the IRS employees were required towww.irs.gov...&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Types-of-Organizations-Exempt-under-Section-501(c)(4) follow:

tell me how tea-party group going after Obama and democrats, SHOULD NOT be targeted?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by supremecommander

 

I don't even feel that hard about Barack Obama.

Careful with all that hate and bitterness....it can eat a person alive, from the inside out. Eat all the hope and color from life....like a plague.

edit on 19-6-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

Don Henley?

If you keep carryin' that anger, it'll eat you up inside,
I've been trying to get down
To the heart of the matter
But my will gets weak
And my thoughts seem to scatter

Post that don't skewer Obama are not welcome here, sir. Please, take your reasonable attitude elsewhere. Thank you.

reply to post by jimmyx

if you do not like the law in which the IRS has to follow

What law? You mean the one in which they have a political agenda to target groups opposed by the Commander in Chief?

reply to post by darkstar111


Yes, and don't forget once upon a time he said the buck stops with him.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

There's a link to the letter in the second source. I included what I determined to be the relevant excerpts from the articles. If you want further detailed information, you have to push a couple buttons

Although we may not think alike politically, I am sure you have a pretty firm grasp on what supporting a thesis means...you have a thesis statement in your title, plus your opening statement makes a claim, characterizing someone as a beggar...you failed to provide support for your opening statement to this OP... if you do not consider that relevant, then at the very best one could only label this a disingenuous attention grabber...more likely, a total fabrication...

I did not lie about anything. Maybe you don't like my opinion, but I didn't lie.

See above...

Again, according to posting guidelines, I can only include so much of the source article. If you want more, read the damn thing.

Disingenuous sophistry AND poppycock to boot...

Your opinions about the president are hardly relevant to this topic.

My opinion about the president is just as relevant to this topic as is yours...your opinion is the Chief Executive occupying the White House is not responsible for the actions of the employees and agencies operating under the aegis of the Chief Executive...your opinion is absolutely wrong...

The Chief Executive is responsible for the actions of all agencies and their employees...

I reiterate...HE is a fraud and his supporters are frauds...