If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WUTC Chattanooga)   IRS Chief: There's no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". Is IRSghazigateloo a scandal yet? 'Cause I've got other shiat I need to do, man   (wutc.org) divider line 115
    More: Followup, IRS Chief, IRS, Danny Werfel, misconduct, House Ways and Means Committee  
•       •       •

556 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jun 2013 at 9:54 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



115 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-25 08:35:43 AM
FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.

Now I'm sympathetic to IRS employees. Thanks a lot Obama!
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-25 08:51:51 AM
Didn't we already know this?
 
2013-06-25 08:59:22 AM

vpb: Didn't we already know this?


Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.
 
2013-06-25 09:05:50 AM

RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.


Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.
 
2013-06-25 09:09:27 AM

Diogenes: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.


This sequestration is really hitting everyone hard.
 
2013-06-25 09:12:11 AM

sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.


The IRS chief said there is no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". If I am at my job, and I don't intentionally violate policies and laws, but do so a whole bunch because I just didn't give two shiats, that can still be grounds for termination.
 
2013-06-25 09:13:20 AM

Farce-Side: Diogenes: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.

This sequestration is really hitting everyone hard.


When I was a young'un, I had to pull my dead horse beating sticks direct from the old sycamore tree myself. I didn't have or need any of these commie ObamaSticks.
 
2013-06-25 09:20:07 AM

Farce-Side: This sequestration equustration is really hitting everyone hard.

 
2013-06-25 09:20:52 AM

Farce-Side: Diogenes: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.

This sequestration is really hitting everyone hard.


Especially the poor horses.
 
2013-06-25 09:30:10 AM
All the tired horses in the sun
How'm I supposed to get any impeaching done
Mmmmmmmmmmmmm
 
2013-06-25 09:42:21 AM

Diogenes: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.


I could be wrong but it sounds like they can beat a dead horse to sequestration but they can't make it a scandal?
 
2013-06-25 09:45:00 AM

RminusQ: sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.

The IRS chief said there is no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". If I am at my job, and I don't intentionally violate policies and laws, but do so a whole bunch because I just didn't give two shiats, that can still be grounds for termination.


First off this is not a criminal matter and never has been. No one has suggested any laws have been broken. Secondly there was no policy in place to violate in the first place. So you had lower level managers making judgment calls. Second guess those judgement calls all you'd like but it still ammounts to a failure of management at a higher level.

There is no way that I can believe that every single manager at every level of the org chart is responsible for this. It is either a failure at the top or lower level managers were not following policy. Can't be both.
 
2013-06-25 09:49:16 AM

RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.


The PRISM horse is still alive and kicking, but they don't seem all that interested in beating him.
 
2013-06-25 09:58:37 AM

EvilEgg: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

The PRISM horse is still alive and kicking, but they don't seem all that interested in beating him.


That's because they 'like' PRISM.  If they go kicking that horse in their need to rage at Obama, they may actually kill PRISM by accident.
 
2013-06-25 09:58:45 AM
 
2013-06-25 10:01:51 AM
At this point it's safe to claim that if Issa is involved, it's not a real scandal.
 
2013-06-25 10:04:25 AM

HotWingConspiracy: At this point it's safe to claim that if Issa is involved, it's not a real scandal.


A certain state that sent its economy down the shiatter by electing a former bodybuilder as governor in a recall election spearheaded by a certain car thief/congressional representative may disagree.
 
2013-06-25 10:04:26 AM

sammyk: RminusQ: sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.

The IRS chief said there is no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". If I am at my job, and I don't intentionally violate policies and laws, but do so a whole bunch because I just didn't give two shiats, that can still be grounds for termination.

First off this is not a criminal matter and never has been. No one has suggested any laws have been broken. Secondly there was no policy in place to violate in the first place. So you had lower level managers making judgment calls. Second guess those judgement calls all you'd like but it still ammounts to a failure of management at a higher level.

There is no way that I can believe that every single manager at every level of the org chart is responsible for this. It is either a failure at the top or lower level managers were not following policy. Can't be both.


It may have something to do with that phrase "position of public trust".  In places like the IRS if there's wrongdoing you might have to liquidate those involved solely for the reason that leaving them there would remove public trust in an already shaky organization.

I agree with you that there are inroads for wrongful termination, but I think this is probably the only way that people won't be calling for the heads of everyone on a pike and they realize that.
 
2013-06-25 10:04:49 AM
Government abuse is fine as long as it isn't intentional. Remember this next time one of you argue against wrongful convictions.
 
2013-06-25 10:05:31 AM
Just because all the evidence suggests that Obama was not involved does not mean that Obama was not directly ordering IRS agents to discriminate against Tea Party supporters and sitting in the Oval Office, munching on popcorn, and laughing maniacally while watching his live CCTV feed of agents deliberately hold up processing their applications.
 
2013-06-25 10:06:34 AM
There is always a despicable, treasonous, SCANDAL the Democrats are plotting (especially when in power)... the Republicans just don't know what it is yet.

They did the same thing with Clinton.  Lewinsky was like the 5th scandal that finally got legs.  Now they are trying to pin Benghazi on Hillary. The GOP is playing a long game... the long game is they run the country and you STFU.
 
2013-06-25 10:07:11 AM

EyeballKid: HotWingConspiracy: At this point it's safe to claim that if Issa is involved, it's not a real scandal.

A certain state that sent its economy down the shiatter by electing a former bodybuilder as governor in a recall election spearheaded by a certain car thief/congressional representative may disagree.


To clarify: If Issa is "investigating", it's not a real scandal.

I'm sure he himself has been involved in a few.
 
2013-06-25 10:07:36 AM

sammyk: RminusQ: sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.

The IRS chief said there is no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". If I am at my job, and I don't intentionally violate policies and laws, but do so a whole bunch because I just didn't give two shiats, that can still be grounds for termination.

First off this is not a criminal matter and never has been. No one has suggested any laws have been broken. Secondly there was no policy in place to violate in the first place. So you had lower level managers making judgment calls. Second guess those judgement calls all you'd like but it still ammounts to a failure of management at a higher level.

There is no way that I can believe that every single manager at every level of the org chart is responsible for this. It is either a failure at the top or lower level managers were not following policy. Can't be both.


Except for the leaking of IRS documents to Propublica... which you know... is a crime. But other than the crimes committed, there were no crimes committed.
 
2013-06-25 10:10:50 AM

sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.


I would guess that most got transferred to other positions, not fired.
 
2013-06-25 10:11:46 AM
It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.
 
2013-06-25 10:11:47 AM

NostroZ: There is always a despicable, treasonous, SCANDAL the Democrats are plotting (especially when in power)... the Republicans just don't know what it is yet.


The scandal is that Democrats have the temerity, the absolute GALL, to continue existing.
 
2013-06-25 10:13:15 AM
As I say. When a Republican administration uses the IRS and the EPA to persecute liberals I don't want to hear even one little tiny whine about it from a liberal.
 
2013-06-25 10:13:45 AM

Pants full of macaroni!!: NostroZ: There is always a despicable, treasonous, SCANDAL the Democrats are plotting (especially when in power)... the Republicans just don't know what it is yet.

The scandal is that Democrats have the temerity, the absolute GALL, to continue existing.


No sir.  The GOP needs the Democratic Party to exist.

The scandal is that the Democrats had the unbelievable gall to actually win a national election...twice even...and remove the GOP from power in the Senate and WH.
 
2013-06-25 10:14:24 AM
IRS investigation clears IRS of "intentional wrongdoing".  Well, Ok then.
 
2013-06-25 10:15:50 AM

MyRandomName: Except for the leaking of IRS documents to Propublica... which you know... is a crime. But other than the crimes committed, there were no crimes committed.


They were just trying to get the truth out. Why do you hate transparency?
 
2013-06-25 10:16:37 AM

thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.


Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.
 
2013-06-25 10:17:01 AM

randomjsa: As I say. When a Republican administration uses the IRS and the EPA to persecute liberals I don't want to hear even one little tiny whine about it from a liberal.


They should have every right to whine and you have no basis for being upset about it. The current administration did not use the IRS to persecute "conservatives". Its used key word searches utilizing terms that snarled both "conservative" and liberal leaning groups.

As much as you mouth breathers wants this to be a scandal it's not. It's just more evidence of GOP apologist persecution complex.
 
2013-06-25 10:19:19 AM

thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.


And involved in trying to get the government's aid in keeping the donors' names secret.
 
2013-06-25 10:20:18 AM
Funny how a lot of the noise about manufactured scandals like Benghazi and the IRS went away once the NSA scandal (which is the real deal) hit the news cycle.

But I'm actually OK with the IRS witch hunt, because that organization has been abused too often by both parties (as far back as the Nixon era during the civil rights movements and anti-war demonstrations, and possibly further). It's sad that some people have lost their jobs, but this might encourage those who remain to be whistleblowers next time rather than to put up with this nonsense.

I also think we've only seen the tip of the iceberg on the NSA scandal. Both parties have been trying to make it go away by demonizing Snowden and by claiming that he exaggerated, but the truth of the matter is that Snowden is the most recent (and successful) of a series of NSA whistleblowers who have all pretty much said the same thing. The next presidential race is going to focus on this issue quite heavily, and those who've been on the inside of this mess had better get their spin doctors ready, because it's going to be an ugly debate if you've held a position in Congress or the Obama administration and not taken a stand on this stuff.
 
2013-06-25 10:26:50 AM

Infernalist: Pants full of macaroni!!: NostroZ: There is always a despicable, treasonous, SCANDAL the Democrats are plotting (especially when in power)... the Republicans just don't know what it is yet.

The scandal is that Democrats have the temerity, the absolute GALL, to continue existing.

No sir.  The GOP needs the Democratic Party to exist.

The scandal is that the Democrats had the unbelievable gall to actually win a national election...twice even...and remove the GOP from power in the Senate and WH.


Absolutely!

And if you go back and talk to old Republicans... you'll notice they are still angry and looking for vengence following what happened to Nixon.
They think he was unfairly kicked out of the White House and now want to shame the Democrats the same way.
 
2013-06-25 10:28:12 AM
IRSghazigateloo

Man, I hope that's Scrabble-legal.
 
2013-06-25 10:28:43 AM

randomjsa: As I say. When a Republican administration uses the IRS and the EPA to persecute liberals I don't want to hear even one little tiny whine about it from a liberal.



You sir are a dumblederp and I am sure such will be pointed out several times, as it is every time you post.

Every.

Time.

You like it. You must.
 
2013-06-25 10:28:51 AM

NostroZ: And if you go back and talk to old Republicans... you'll notice they are still angry and looking for vengence following what happened to Nixon.


I thought that was the unofficial reason for the Clinton impeachment. That, or, "it was Bob Dole's turn!"
 
2013-06-25 10:29:20 AM

Doing It for the Monopoly Money: sammyk: RminusQ: sammyk: FTFA:"In Monday's half-hour call, Werfel said the manager at every level in the organizational chart having to do with the exempt organizations had been replaced. "We believe that these individuals should no longer hold a position of public trust within IRS, and therefore we've replaced the leadership in those areas," he said."

Then why did these people lose their jobs?

IANAL but that sounds like a gift wrapped wrongful termination lawsuit. If there was no wrong doing these people should not have lost their jobs period.

The IRS chief said there is no evidence of "intentional wrongdoing". If I am at my job, and I don't intentionally violate policies and laws, but do so a whole bunch because I just didn't give two shiats, that can still be grounds for termination.

First off this is not a criminal matter and never has been. No one has suggested any laws have been broken. Secondly there was no policy in place to violate in the first place. So you had lower level managers making judgment calls. Second guess those judgement calls all you'd like but it still ammounts to a failure of management at a higher level.

There is no way that I can believe that every single manager at every level of the org chart is responsible for this. It is either a failure at the top or lower level managers were not following policy. Can't be both.

It may have something to do with that phrase "position of public trust".  In places like the IRS if there's wrongdoing you might have to liquidate those involved solely for the reason that leaving them there would remove public trust in an already shaky organization.

I agree with you that there are inroads for wrongful termination, but I think this is probably the only way that people won't be calling for the heads of everyone on a pike and they realize that.


I'm wondering how many of them walked away with 6 months pay in return for signing away any claim of wrongful termination.
 
2013-06-25 10:29:22 AM

Cletus C.: thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.

Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.


Why not? If the groups choose names for their organizations that are identified with a political movement, and specifically seek to inject them self into the election process, of course that raises red flags.
 
2013-06-25 10:29:44 AM

Cletus C.: thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.

Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.


What's wrong with that? They get investigated and cleared. I don't want them rubber stamping these groups.

I still can't see what there is to be upset about, even blatantly political organizations got their phony exemptions anyway.
 
2013-06-25 10:30:21 AM

Farce-Side: Diogenes: RedPhoenix122: vpb: Didn't we already know this?

Well, they're running out of dead horses to beat.

Dead horse funding was stricken from the Farm Bill.

This sequestration is really hitting everyone hard.


There is this farm animal that looks completely unaffected by the sequestration though, and there are still plenty of them it seems

ninjamonkey.us
 
2013-06-25 10:30:57 AM
Well, now that it's been revealed that the IRS didn't single out the TeaParty and conservatives, I'm sure we'll get a front page retraction from the "liberal lamestream media" that picked up this story and ran with it.

Hello?  ..... Anyone?  ..... Bueller?
 
2013-06-25 10:33:02 AM

thornhill: Cletus C.: thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.

Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.

Why not? If the groups choose names for their organizations that are identified with a political movement, and specifically seek to inject them self into the election process, of course that raises red flags.


One of those key words was patriot. I could see someone using that in their name without having political motives. Also, Israel. You can't imagine that as nonpolitical?
 
2013-06-25 10:33:10 AM

InmanRoshi: Well, now that it's been revealed that the IRS didn't single out the TeaParty and conservatives, I'm sure we'll get a front page retraction from the "liberal lamestream media" that picked up this story and ran with it.

Hello?  ..... Anyone?  ..... Bueller?


Haha, no. They're already moving on to wondering just how much water is being dumped in Snowden's face by some grizzled KGB vet right now.
 
2013-06-25 10:36:58 AM

randomjsa: As I say. When a Republican administration uses the IRS and the EPA to persecute liberals I don't want to hear even one little tiny whine about it from a liberal.


That's what PRISM is for, which is why republicans like it.
 
2013-06-25 10:37:26 AM

InmanRoshi: Well, now that it's been revealed that the IRS didn't single out the TeaParty and conservatives, I'm sure we'll get a front page retraction from the "liberal lamestream media" that picked up this story and ran with it.

Hello?  ..... Anyone?  ..... Bueller?


shiat, I think we need a retraction from the IRS first.
 
2013-06-25 10:38:14 AM

Cletus C.: thornhill: Cletus C.: thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.

Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.

Why not? If the groups choose names for their organizations that are identified with a political movement, and specifically seek to inject them self into the election process, of course that raises red flags.

One of those key words was patriot. I could see someone using that in their name without having political motives. Also, Israel. You can't imagine that as nonpolitical?


Or maybe they noticed that many groups with "patriot" in their name tended to not qualify for 501c4 status.
 
2013-06-25 10:38:27 AM

Cletus C.: thornhill: It seems pretty clear that the IRS was actually doing its job -- filtering 501(c)(4) applications from groups that were blatantly involved in electioneering.

Apparently, it's not part of their job to just grab names they think might lead them to political motives. You know, you might be putting the screws to perfectly OK groups just because they picked a name that landed them on the list.


It is if those names have an avowed platform behind them that decries taxes.
 
2013-06-25 10:38:55 AM
Seems to me that if I worked for the IRS and an organization with "TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY" in their official name were looking to qualify for tax-exempt status, it'd be wrongdoing on my part to  notensure that they meet the appropriate requirements.

How many groups were denied their requested status again?
 
Displayed 50 of 115 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report