IRS APOLOGIZES FOR TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS

[Rassah]

What is at issue is whether IRS personnel face jail time.

Got it now?

Jail.

Lol, yeah, we both know that's not happening 

[Spendulus]

What is at issue is whether IRS personnel face jail time.

Got it now?

Jail.

Lol, yeah, we both know that's not happening 

No, I don't know that.  If valid criminal charges exist, it'd be a very easy matter for a corrupt administration to pick out some low and middle level personnel as scapegoats.  Problem is some might start singing like canaries.

And the IRS - those are the goons that people would entrust with their medical datasets. 

Wait....now who are the fascists? 

[Rassah]

If valid criminal charges exist, it'd be a very easy matter for a corrupt administration to pick out some low and middle level personnel as scapegoats.  Problem is some might start singing like canaries.

Too much hassle and paperwork. Easier to just "investigate" it until people forget. Last time I remember someone going to jail, it was Scooter Libby, and that guy did some really bad stuff. No way anyone will be sent to jail for this. No way this problem will be fixed and never happen again, either.

[Spendulus]

If valid criminal charges exist, it'd be a very easy matter for a corrupt administration to pick out some low and middle level personnel as scapegoats.  Problem is some might start singing like canaries.

Too much hassle and paperwork. Easier to just "investigate" it until people forget. Last time I remember someone going to jail, it was Scooter Libby, and that guy did some really bad stuff. No way anyone will be sent to jail for this. No way this problem will be fixed and never happen again, either.

I'd agree that all the inclinations from the left and liberal progressives would be to act indignant for a while, then let it be forgot, while if it were a Republican or conservative politician or public figure who had done something wrong, then for the very slightest or alleged wrong, the exact reverse would be done.

Of course continuing a barrage of insinuation that the tea party members were lower than dirt, stupid and ignorant and so forth would assist in this methodology.  The details and operational methods can be found at mediamatters.com, and the talking points are also easy to find.  Feel free to ask if you need help in finding any of these.

<yes I'm being totally ridiculous>

[Rassah]

I'd agree that all the inclinations from the left and liberal progressives would be to act indignant for a while, then let it be forgot, while if it were a Republican or conservative politician or public figure who had done something wrong, then for the very slightest or alleged wrong, the exact reverse would be done.

I don't have much love for democrats or republicans. I'm a libertarian AnCap. Your claim that if it were a republican or conservative politician has been thoroughly disproven during the Bush years. How many people went to jail for torture? For illegal phone wiretapping? I would actually claim the opposite, that Democrats get scrutinized WAY more than Republicans, for the simple fact that, while left-leaning news organizations at least attempt to show themselves as balanced, Republicans have practically all of radio and a well established news organization that blatantly and proudly parades itself as a part of the Republican party. Just based on the number of people screaming at each other in public, the number screaming at Democrats is higher. And neither party shies away from doing illegal things to undermine their opponents, or from trying to take away personal liberties, and neither party is interested in jailing their own.

Of course continuing a barrage of insinuation that the tea party members were lower than dirt, stupid and ignorant and so forth would assist in this methodology.

There is only one group of people I really dislike, and that's conservatives. I mean that by the actual definition of the word, not as a political label. Religious nutcases, communists, status-quo democrats, fundamentalists, social-issues Republicans, and yes, Tea Party. Fuck all those people. I know there's that "first they came for..." , and freedom of speech thing though, but it's hard to defend the freedom of those assholes, when their purpose is to deny everyone else freedom.

[Spendulus]

I'd agree that all the inclinations from the left and liberal progressives would be to act indignant for a while, then let it be forgot, while if it were a Republican or conservative politician or public figure who had done something wrong, then for the very slightest or alleged wrong, the exact reverse would be done.

I don't have much love for democrats or republicans. I'm a libertarian AnCap. Your claim that if it were a republican or conservative politician has been thoroughly disproven during the Bush years. How many people went to jail for torture? For illegal phone wiretapping? I would actually claim the opposite, that Democrats get scrutinized WAY more than Republicans, for the simple fact that, while left-leaning news organizations at least attempt to show themselves as balanced, Republicans have practically all of radio and a well established news organization that blatantly and proudly parades itself as a part of the Republican party. Just based on the number of people screaming at each other in public, the number screaming at Democrats is higher. And neither party shies away from doing illegal things to undermine their opponents, or from trying to take away personal liberties, and neither party is interested in jailing their own.

Of course continuing a barrage of insinuation that the tea party members were lower than dirt, stupid and ignorant and so forth would assist in this methodology.

There is only one group of people I really dislike, and that's conservatives. I mean that by the actual definition of the word, not as a political label. Religious nutcases, communists, status-quo democrats, fundamentalists, social-issues Republicans, and yes, Tea Party. Fuck all those people. I know there's that "first they came for..." , and freedom of speech thing though, but it's hard to defend the freedom of those assholes, when their purpose is to deny everyone else freedom.

Ok with me, as I fall into the 'fiscal conservative' category and don't have a lot of interest in most social issues.  But the use of the term 'conservative' as used today with respect to the IRS targeting of groups is certainly not aligned with your personal definition.

[myrkul]

I'd agree that all the inclinations from the left and liberal progressives would be to act indignant for a while, then let it be forgot, while if it were a Republican or conservative politician or public figure who had done something wrong, then for the very slightest or alleged wrong, the exact reverse would be done.

I don't have much love for democrats or republicans. I'm a libertarian AnCap. Your claim that if it were a republican or conservative politician has been thoroughly disproven during the Bush years. How many people went to jail for torture? For illegal phone wiretapping? I would actually claim the opposite, that Democrats get scrutinized WAY more than Republicans, for the simple fact that, while left-leaning news organizations at least attempt to show themselves as balanced, Republicans have practically all of radio and a well established news organization that blatantly and proudly parades itself as a part of the Republican party. Just based on the number of people screaming at each other in public, the number screaming at Democrats is higher. And neither party shies away from doing illegal things to undermine their opponents, or from trying to take away personal liberties, and neither party is interested in jailing their own.

Of course continuing a barrage of insinuation that the tea party members were lower than dirt, stupid and ignorant and so forth would assist in this methodology.

There is only one group of people I really dislike, and that's conservatives. I mean that by the actual definition of the word, not as a political label. Religious nutcases, communists, status-quo democrats, fundamentalists, social-issues Republicans, and yes, Tea Party. Fuck all those people. I know there's that "first they came for..." , and freedom of speech thing though, but it's hard to defend the freedom of those assholes, when their purpose is to deny everyone else freedom.

Ok with me, as I fall into the 'fiscal conservative' category and don't have a lot of interest in most social issues.  But the use of the term 'conservative' as used today with respect to the IRS targeting of groups is certainly not aligned with your personal definition.

There we go!

Goddam that was hard to parse.

[Rassah]

I'd agree that all the inclinations from the left and liberal progressives would be to act indignant for a while, then let it be forgot, while if it were a Republican or conservative politician or public figure who had done something wrong, then for the very slightest or alleged wrong, the exact reverse would be done.

I don't have much love for democrats or republicans. I'm a libertarian AnCap. Your claim that if it were a republican or conservative politician has been thoroughly disproven during the Bush years. How many people went to jail for torture? For illegal phone wiretapping? I would actually claim the opposite, that Democrats get scrutinized WAY more than Republicans, for the simple fact that, while left-leaning news organizations at least attempt to show themselves as balanced, Republicans have practically all of radio and a well established news organization that blatantly and proudly parades itself as a part of the Republican party. Just based on the number of people screaming at each other in public, the number screaming at Democrats is higher. And neither party shies away from doing illegal things to undermine their opponents, or from trying to take away personal liberties, and neither party is interested in jailing their own.

Of course continuing a barrage of insinuation that the tea party members were lower than dirt, stupid and ignorant and so forth would assist in this methodology.

There is only one group of people I really dislike, and that's conservatives. I mean that by the actual definition of the word, not as a political label. Religious nutcases, communists, status-quo democrats, fundamentalists, social-issues Republicans, and yes, Tea Party. Fuck all those people. I know there's that "first they came for..." , and freedom of speech thing though, but it's hard to defend the freedom of those assholes, when their purpose is to deny everyone else freedom.

Ok with me, as I fall into the 'fiscal conservative' category and don't have a lot of interest in most social issues.  But the use of the term 'conservative' as used today with respect to the IRS targeting of groups is certainly not aligned with your personal definition.

Of course. Someone at the IRS had a personal vendetta against groups they saw as being far-right and opposing their personal political beliefs. I would be against those groups as well, as I see them as being nothing more than fascists. I doubt that whoever was doing it was concerned about the underlying fascism, though, and was probably doing it for much simpler political reasons (e.g. "they are not my party, thus they are the enemy").
My personal definition of "conservative" is one who resists change and wishes to "conserve" things as they are. "Fiscal conservative" is a well established colloquial term, but it also likely doesn't apply to us in a dictionary definition sense, since preserving the current monetary and financial systems is as far from what we wish to accomplish as you could get.

P.S. Sorry for messing up the quote earlier, making it hard to read who said what. Hope this split clears it up for future readers.

[Wilikon]

I remember on one of the "let's talk bitcoin" soundcloud episode that http://www.fr33aid.com/ was mentionned. I do not remember all the details but they started to accept bitcoin because the IRS was making it very difficult if not impossible for them to "regulate" their financial situation based on what they wanted to create. Could fr33aid be one of the targeted victims of that tyranny?

The number keeps growing (around 500 groups). Obama's brother charity based on the president's name by the way went through in a couple of days... http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/


"The IRS targeting of conservative groups is far broader than first reported, with nearly 500 organizations singled out for additional scrutiny, according to two lawmakers briefed by the agency.  IRS officials claimed on Friday that roughly 300 groups received additional scrutiny. Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that the number has actually risen to 471. Further, they said it is "unclear" whether Tea Party and other conservative groups are being targeted to this day.

We have an answer to that question now, too.  Here's Carol again, quoting the cover letter from the IG's findings, dated yesterday: "A substantial number of applications have been under review, some for more than three years and through two election cycles, and remain open."  Lest you even ask, nobody involved in this scheme has been disciplined (yet); just the opposite, in fact:


John King        ✔ @JohnKingCNN

from #IRS briefing to Hill: no employees involved in inappropriate scrutiny of conservative groups disciplined, one was promoted."

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/05/15/reports-irs-spared-liberal-groups-as-tea-party-languished-more-conservative-orgs-targeted-than-first-thought-n1596864

[Rassah]

I work in government, and if the politics here is any indication of the system as a whole, I can tell you that the bureaucracy is extremely well set up to spread or shift blame. No one is responsible for anything other than their little piece of work, which is dependent on someone else's work. If you screw up, it's always the fault of 10+ other people that either didn't provide you the information in time, or didn't provide the correct information. "It's not my job" is the rule around here. So, with years of practice of shifting and diverting blame for things, I seriously doubt anyone will be finger as having sole responsibility. The most you could get out of a situation like that is someone at the top stepping down for whatever reason, even if they themselves had nothing to do with it either (though you could blame them for having a lack of oversight, as mentioned, it's impossible to see who did what here).

[Wilikon]

10 of 12 IRS offices implicated in scandal are in Washington.


The Treasury Inspector General's damaging report on the IRS-Tea Party scandal has destroyed the administration's claim that low-level workers in a Cincinnati, Ohio office are to blame, revealing that 10 of 12 agency offices referenced in the affair are in Washington.

The report repeatedly references actions taken by the Washington-based Exempt Organizations unit and guidance specialists also in Washington. What's more, the report was researched in the Exempt Organizations offices and the Cincinnati-based Determinations Units, which has received the blame for targeting Tea Party groups.

The audit, for example, probes into how the Cincinnati-based Determinations Unit developed its plan to pay attention to groups with the words "Tea Party," "Patriot," and other phrases used by anti-Obama groups during the 2010 election.

Washington-based offices denied involvement, but did change the "criteria" for groups to target in July 2011. Instead of looking for "Tea Party" groups seeking tax exempt status to investigate, the criteria was broadened to "political, lobbying or [general] advocacy."

However, "the team of specialists subsequently changed the criteria in January 2012" back, apparently without telling their bosses. "Specialists" are both Washington- and Ohio- based.

Popular talk radio host Mark Levin, one of the first to post the IG report online, suggested that the House committees investigating the scandal use the IG's "High-Level Organization Chart of Offices Referenced in this Report" on page 29 in picking who should testify. He suggested that the heads of all 12 be called to testify.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/10-of-12-irs-offices-implicated-in-scandal-are-in-washington/article/2529725

[Spendulus]

I work in government, and if the politics here is any indication of the system as a whole, I can tell you that the bureaucracy is extremely well set up to spread or shift blame. No one is responsible for anything other than their little piece of work, which is dependent on someone else's work. If you screw up, it's always the fault of 10+ other people that either didn't provide you the information in time, or didn't provide the correct information. "It's not my job" is the rule around here. So, with years of practice of shifting and diverting blame for things, I seriously doubt anyone will be finger as having sole responsibility. The most you could get out of a situation like that is someone at the top stepping down for whatever reason, even if they themselves had nothing to do with it either (though you could blame them for having a lack of oversight, as mentioned, it's impossible to see who did what here).

Again, I'd just note that this is currently a criminal investigation.  That says a lot.  That means it's already moved out of the "business as usual" category.

[Rassah]

I work in government, and if the politics here is any indication of the system as a whole, I can tell you that the bureaucracy is extremely well set up to spread or shift blame. No one is responsible for anything other than their little piece of work, which is dependent on someone else's work. If you screw up, it's always the fault of 10+ other people that either didn't provide you the information in time, or didn't provide the correct information. "It's not my job" is the rule around here. So, with years of practice of shifting and diverting blame for things, I seriously doubt anyone will be finger as having sole responsibility. The most you could get out of a situation like that is someone at the top stepping down for whatever reason, even if they themselves had nothing to do with it either (though you could blame them for having a lack of oversight, as mentioned, it's impossible to see who did what here).

Again, I'd just note that this is currently a criminal investigation.  That says a lot.  That means it's already moved out of the "business as usual" category.

So, who went to jail when IRS targeted Martin Luther King? Or for having them audit Paula Jones under Clinton? Or when they targeted John Birch Society under Kennedy? Or the slew of political opponents under Nixon and a slew of liberal organizations and churches under G W Bush? It's as if this is a new thing.

Since this has started back in 2010, I'm going to put on my tinfoil hat and come up with a theory. What does Obama have to gain from targeting Tea Party groups? Answer is almost nothing. On the other hand, establishment Republicans have considered the Tea Party a huge threat from the start. Tea Party does populist politics and astroturfing really well, attracting common Joe Shmoe, but pick really awful, terrible candidates. Most of the Tea Party candidates that won primaries in 2010 were downright fucking nuts, and most of them didn't win, because they only appealed to the loony fringe. Republicans fought them during the primaries, and were always under a threat from the Tea Party of being primaried in otherwise safe "red states," which would divide the vote, and cause the state to turn blue (which actually happened in 2010). So, some high ranking Republican Senators and/or House members secretly instructed the IRS to target Tea Party groups, and make it as hard for them to raise money and participate in politics as possible. As a result, they were able to regain a lot of the seats they lost in the 2012 elections. And if they get caught, they can just blame it on Obama, since it would be "obvious" to everyone that he is the "Scary Black Man™ who is only in office because he cheated, and he is the only one with incentive to attack Tea Party I mean Republicans."

I'm sure that's not what happened, because I doubt politicians are smart enough to think up of something like that, but this theory would make much more sense than Obama wanting to target the Republican's third party black sheep himself. Of course, major political parties NEVER screw with politics by attacking their own fringe or supporting the fringe of their opponents. Except that time Democrats attacked the Green party and Republicans ran adds supporting them in every election...

[tiberiandusk]

SuperPACS buying elections. They should be looking into them.

[Spendulus]

I work in government, and if the politics here is any indication of the system as a whole, I can tell you that the bureaucracy is extremely well set up to spread or shift blame. No one is responsible for anything other than their little piece of work, which is dependent on someone else's work. If you screw up, it's always the fault of 10+ other people that either didn't provide you the information in time, or didn't provide the correct information. "It's not my job" is the rule around here. So, with years of practice of shifting and diverting blame for things, I seriously doubt anyone will be finger as having sole responsibility. The most you could get out of a situation like that is someone at the top stepping down for whatever reason, even if they themselves had nothing to do with it either (though you could blame them for having a lack of oversight, as mentioned, it's impossible to see who did what here).

Again, I'd just note that this is currently a criminal investigation.  That says a lot.  That means it's already moved out of the "business as usual" category.

So, who went to jail when IRS targeted Martin Luther King? Or for having them audit Paula Jones under Clinton? Or when they targeted John Birch Society under Kennedy? Or the slew of political opponents under Nixon and a slew of liberal organizations and churches under G W Bush? It's as if this is a new thing.

Since this has started back in 2010, I'm going to put on my tinfoil hat ...

Well, that you did....

[Rassah]

The head of the IRS has resigned (aka was fired), even though he likely had nothing to do with this, since he was somewhat newly appointed, and this started years ago. So... there you go.

[myrkul]

The head of the IRS has resigned (aka was fired), even though he likely had nothing to do with this, since he was somewhat newly appointed, and this started years ago. So... there you go.

Blame (for getting caught) has been assigned, back to business as usual.

[tcp_rst]

So is this really a "conservative vs less-conservative" issue as some in the thread imply or is the larger issue about waste, fraud and abuse in government generally?  'Cause God knows conservative groups in America are gonna ride this all the way through the next election cycle as if no conservative-run government has ever done the same sorts of things.  Outrage about this specific incident should be more broadly directed otherwise it's just more of the same partisan crap.

[Spendulus]

So is this really a "conservative vs less-conservative" issue as some in the thread imply or is the larger issue about waste, fraud and abuse in government generally?  'Cause God knows conservative groups in America are gonna ride this all the way through the next election cycle as if no conservative-run government has ever done the same sorts of things.  Outrage about this specific incident should be more broadly directed otherwise it's just more of the same partisan crap.

Following the wise advice to never fight your enemy when he's engaged in shooting himself in the foot, I don't think any particular work is in order.  Maybe except fixing a big heap of popcorn.  An extra large biggie supply, dripping with real butter and high in salt.  Then it's time to watch the circus.

The problem with useful idiots is of course that they are, well,....

idiots....

I mean, we've got the IRS thing, the AP thing, the Fast and Furious thing, Bengazi. 

What the FUCK???

[RodeoX]

I'm by no means a conservative. But This is so wrong. Someone needs to take a big fall for this. Saying that it was not political is just not credible.  Shame on the IRS.