Phony scandal alert.

Quote:Sadly, the 18 month investigation into the IRS targeting of conservative groups isn’t over, and it may be worse than anyone thought. A federal judge has broken loose more emails that the DOJ had surely hoped would never surface. The picture it reveals isn’t pretty. The documents prove that Lois Lerner met with DOJ’s Election Crimes Division a month before the 2010 elections.

It has to be embarrassing to the DOJ, which may not be the most impartial one to be investigating the IRS. In fact, the DOJ withheld over 800 pages of Lerner documents citing “taxpayer privacy” and “deliberative privilege.” Yet these internal DOJ documents show Ms. Lerner was talking to DOJ officials about prosecuting tax-exempt entities (yes, criminally!) two years before the IRS conceded there was inappropriate targeting.

Ms. Lerner met with top officials from the DOJ’s Election Crimes Branch in October of 2010. Although Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the DOJ (Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice, No. 14-cv-01239), the DOJ coughed up dirt only on court order. Even then, the DOJ handed over only two pages of heavily redacted emails.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2...8937823176

Cue the standard RWT denial in 3.....2.....1.....

Using the IRS as a political weapon is probably the worst thing I've seen come out of Washington. It's frightening when you think about it.

(12-12-2014 12:28 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Using the IRS as a political weapon is probably the worst thing I've seen come out of Washington. It's frightening when you think about it.

Something that a community organizer would conjure up.

(12-11-2014 10:46 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  Cue the standard RWT denial in 3.....2.....1.....

(12-12-2014 08:25 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 12:28 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Using the IRS as a political weapon is probably the worst thing I've seen come out of Washington. It's frightening when you think about it.

Something that a community organizer would conjure up.

Read this yesterday.

It would appear, that not only was the tax collecting part of his administration involved with targeting "opponents", but that the legal part of his administration participated. Oh joy.

Talk about corruption...........................

Dept of Justice?

You mean that joint the contemptible Withholder runs? They're investigating this? Bet they have a civil rights "attorney" or someone similar doing this "investigation".

Gimme a break. Who's watching the fox watch the henhouse?

Thought I was in the WWE room for a minute.

I was hoping to see (and possibly engage in) some intelligent discussion on what this actually means...what the justice department actually did here that was wrong or different...what Lerner did here that was actually wrong or different.

It stands to reason that someone at the IRS just might want to seek the advice of someone in Justice before criminally charging someone.

I guess no one cared to take the time to think about anything buy finding the cheapest laugh, meme and talking point. Too bad.

(12-12-2014 05:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Thought I was in the WWE room for a minute.

I was hoping to see (and possibly engage in) some intelligent discussion on what this actually means...what the justice department actually did here that was wrong or different...what Lerner did here that was actually wrong or different.

It stands to reason that someone at the IRS just might want to seek the advice of someone in Justice before criminally charging someone.

I guess no one cared to take the time to think about anything buy finding the cheapest laugh, meme and talking point. Too bad.

Sounds like you're blaming us for the piss poor reputations of Holder and Lerner.

(12-12-2014 06:21 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 05:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Thought I was in the WWE room for a minute.

I was hoping to see (and possibly engage in) some intelligent discussion on what this actually means...what the justice department actually did here that was wrong or different...what Lerner did here that was actually wrong or different.

It stands to reason that someone at the IRS just might want to seek the advice of someone in Justice before criminally charging someone.

I guess no one cared to take the time to think about anything buy finding the cheapest laugh, meme and talking point. Too bad.

Sounds like you're blaming us for the piss poor reputations of Holder and Lerner.

Nope...I'm blaming you for making comments on something without understanding anything as to what happened and why...and whether it was out of the ordinary.

(12-15-2014 11:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 06:21 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 05:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Thought I was in the WWE room for a minute.

I was hoping to see (and possibly engage in) some intelligent discussion on what this actually means...what the justice department actually did here that was wrong or different...what Lerner did here that was actually wrong or different.

It stands to reason that someone at the IRS just might want to seek the advice of someone in Justice before criminally charging someone.

I guess no one cared to take the time to think about anything buy finding the cheapest laugh, meme and talking point. Too bad.

Sounds like you're blaming us for the piss poor reputations of Holder and Lerner.

Nope...I'm blaming you for making comments on something without understanding anything as to what happened and why...and whether it was out of the ordinary.

Oh please fill in any blanks. You've demonstrated you're so astute regarding US gov't affairs.