Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Now THIS is refreshing!
Message
From
07/12/2016 21:32:58
 
 
To
07/12/2016 16:50:41
General information
Forum:
Politics
Category:
Articles
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01644600
Message ID:
01644700
Views:
44
>First of all, there's been no evidence that Obama was involved in that.

That line of "no evidence of Obama being involved" has been used time and time again and it doesn't hold water. This occurred under his administration.

The last four IRS commissioners of record (Shulman, Miller, Werfel, and now Koskinen) have provided testimony ranging from demonstrably dishonest to downright ridiculous about the pattern of targeting and their record keeping. Remember that the IRS commissioner reports directly to the Treasury Secretary, who is fifth in line for the Presidency. Close enough?

The IRS Chief Counsel (Wilkins, a political appointee) met with Obama in the Roosevelt room for hours back in 2012 - just two days before the IRS changed internal guidelines for approving tax-exempt applications. Aside from the alarming connection here, the IRS also violated federal law. When they changed guidelines, they were supposed to notify the IRS Taxpayer Advocacy Group. They did not - which lead to huge confusion amongst Tea Party/Conservative Groups. THAT ALONE could have landed Lerner and Wilkins and the IRS commissioner in jail.

And it's already common knowledge that the IRS and DOJ were working with different Democratic members of Congress on different conservative/tea party groups. Remember that the IRS/DOJ got caught red-handed feeding information regarding "True the Vote" to the office of Elijah Cummings. Regardless of whether Cummings had personal knowledge is irrelevant.

Tamar, I have to be blunt - your concerns about Trump and political power in his administration don't hold water if you're not willing to even acknowledge a compelling and alarming fact pattern of abuse of power (and retribution after Citizens United) under the administration that you clearly provide excuses for. This dismissive "there's no evidence that Obama was involved" means that one should have a hard time taking any of your concerns about Trump seriously.

So given all this, I think it's in especially poor taste for you to attack Marcia with this "if you think ABC and XYZ, then you're not as smart as I thought".
Previous
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform