IRSS (Internal Revenue Schutzstaffel) Gruppen news summary

Because there is no tyrannical abuse of power, only smears and lies by "elements" on the right to make it appear so.

Can you provide a single fact that supports the conservative notion that the white house directed the IRS to use certain key words to find applications that appear questionable as nonpartisan social welfare groups in an attempt to gain tax exempt status?

Did not think so.

LadyJazzer wrote: Why do you, as usual, have no FACTS to back up your charges, and nothing but your standard Obama-Derangement-Syndrome attacks?

I would hope Obama and Jarret are smart enough to cover their tracks if they did use the IRS as a partisan goon squad.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Because there is no tyrannical abuse of power, only smears and lies by "elements" on the right to make it appear so.

Can you provide a single fact that supports the conservative notion that the white house directed the IRS to use certain key words to find applications that appear questionable as nonpartisan social welfare groups in an attempt to gain tax exempt status?

Did not think so.

And even if it didn't go all the way to the White House it would still be wrong to be prejudiced based on political or religious affiliation.

FredHayek wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Why do you, as usual, have no FACTS to back up your charges, and nothing but your standard Obama-Derangement-Syndrome attacks?

I would hope Obama and Jarret are smart enough to cover their tracks if they did use the IRS as a partisan goon squad.

Classic example of the conservative smear and lie attack. No facts, false allegations, used to smear fine American public servants. But then again, this what you expect from conservatives.
So tell us Fred, is there a single piece of evidence that would link the President or Ms. Jarrett with the use of key words by IRS employees to search for questionable applications for tax exempt status claiming nonpartisan social welfare groups?

I notice our "high value information" poster has failed to comment on the latest exposure of the questionable tactics by Issa and conservatives of only leaking information that creates an appearance of impropriety when the entire information makes it clear that there was no such impropriety.

FredHayek wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Because there is no tyrannical abuse of power, only smears and lies by "elements" on the right to make it appear so.

Can you provide a single fact that supports the conservative notion that the white house directed the IRS to use certain key words to find applications that appear questionable as nonpartisan social welfare groups in an attempt to gain tax exempt status?

Did not think so.

And even if it didn't go all the way to the White House it would still be wrong to be prejudiced based on political or religious affiliation.

There was no prejudice as the evidence has clearly shown. Instead, the key words were used to ensure that all of the similar applications for tax exempt status claiming non partisan, non political social welfare organizations were treated uniformly and fairly. I am sure that if liberal organizations were popping up in large quantities using similar phrases, that similar key word searches were used to group them together for uniform examination.

Do you personally believe that it is appropriate for Tea Party groups to claim that they do not engage in partisan political activity in order to gain tax exempt status? How many non Republican politicians were supported by Tea Party groups?

Of course Obama wasn't involved in the IRS partisan attacks his DC intelligence people didn't even inform him about this before the press did. Dog? Naive enough to believe Barack found out about this the same time you did? And if you think the POTUS was out of the loop on this what does that reveal about his team? 1) They like to keep him in the dark? 2) They don't know what is going on either? I know if I covered up something like this from my boss I would be in trouble. He doesn't like to be surprised. Looks like Obama isn't very hands on.

There was evidence of harassment but you just choose to ignore it. Just read this thread. The IRS even admitted it.

FredHayek wrote: There was evidence of harassment but you just choose to ignore it.

Nope, there was no such evidence. If there was, I am sure that you would provide a link to it. Nope, just made up smears with no factual basis.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Nope, there was no such evidence. If there was, I am sure that you would provide a link to it. Nope, just made up smears with no factual basis.

When you're in a hole, you should stop digging, Fred...

Page one this thread.