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.

(Examiner)   You can retire, but you can't hide. Newly-released emails of IRS' Lois Lerner reportedly show that she committed a felony by sending private information about those conservative groups to the FEC. That's a no-no, of course   (examiner.com) divider line 390
    More: Followup, Lois Lerner, Fe C, Federal Election Commission, IRS, watchdog journalism, Judicial Watch, confidential information, felony  
•       •       •

2467 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Nov 2013 at 10:04 AM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-02 02:16:58 PM

mjm323s: Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?


The investigative committee already had this evidence.  Judicial Watch is only getting this after a FOIA request back in August for documents dating back to 2009.  You really think Issa overlooked this while JW has broken this case wide open?
 
2013-11-02 02:17:23 PM
When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama.  People responsible for electing this administration into office for another four years typically refuse to believe that the current government is as crooked as any of them have been in the past.  There is something to be said about the great integrety of people who will admit when they've farked up.  Libs just won't do that - and usually because they're uninformed.
 
2013-11-02 02:18:45 PM

ChicagOpinion: When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama


wut
 
2013-11-02 02:19:07 PM

ChicagOpinion: When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama.


Issa must also be in bed with Obama then.  Now excuse me while I scrub my brain of that image.
 
2013-11-02 02:19:16 PM
Wow, the RW victim complex never sleeps, does it?

Again, the only "Scandal" involved here is the the way the GOP have tried to gin up one fake scandal after another including the bogus IRS thing, Benghazi, arugula etc.
 
2013-11-02 02:20:19 PM

skullkrusher: verbal_jizm: skullkrusher: verbal_jizm: skullkrusher: jaytkay: skullkrusher: Doctor Funkenstein: skullkrusher: jaytkay: "...according to the Washington Examiner and a host of media sources..."

[imageshack.us image 250x272]

it's like a badge of honor for you guys. Amazing.


...

a couple of clicks is all it took to get to the source of the info. Why don't you go through that and debunk the claims?

another wall of the echo chamber

PDF of the source emails and faxes

place this in the "birther and other nonsense" pile.

like I said. Badge of honor.


i1277.photobucket.com
 
2013-11-02 02:21:23 PM
Man, the trolling is getting thick down here at the dregs of the thread.
 
2013-11-02 02:21:29 PM

cameroncrazy1984: mjm323s: Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?

Well considering what the "evidence" is, you'd have to specify if the evidence had the same credibility as that put forth by JW.


Let's say it was evidence they were sharing your personal banking information, hypothetically
 
2013-11-02 02:22:00 PM

cameroncrazy1984: ChicagOpinion: When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama

wut


What he was saying in his post is that Liberals will only pay attention to sources that are vetted and credible. They refuse to listen to the the urine soaked guy with tin foil on his head and is screaming at clouds. He has a problem with this.
 
2013-11-02 02:24:19 PM

mjm323s: cameroncrazy1984: mjm323s: Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?

Well considering what the "evidence" is, you'd have to specify if the evidence had the same credibility as that put forth by JW.

Let's say it was evidence they were sharing your personal banking information, hypothetically


Except that this isn't that.
 
2013-11-02 02:24:58 PM

ongbok: cameroncrazy1984: ChicagOpinion: When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama

wut

What he was saying in his post is that Liberals will only pay attention to sources that are vetted and credible. They refuse to listen to the the urine soaked guy with tin foil on his head and is screaming at clouds. He has a problem with this.


Well that make complete and total seeauuuughhh.
 
2013-11-02 02:25:00 PM

mjm323s: Let's say it was evidence they were sharing your personal banking information, hypothetically


I don't think anyone is going to get up in arms about your hypothetical situation unless there's a quote from a prosecutor or actual official of some sort saying they're taking a look into it. Even Issa didn't look at the emails as a possible instance of law breaking.
 
2013-11-02 02:28:32 PM

mjm323s: jaytkay: mjm323s: I'll agree that it is not a great source but it is not the only one that has brought it to the public forum.

There is one source, Judicial Watch.

All the other "sources" are pointing to the same Judicial Watch claims.

Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?

Apparently Judicial watch has some credibility for the news outlets blogs if they are sourcing them.

ChicagOpinion: When the libs don't like a story, they criticize the source - knowing the source won't be a major source because they're all in bed with Obama.  People responsible for electing this administration into office for another four years typically refuse to believe that the current government is as crooked as any of them have been in the past.  There is something to be said about the great integrety of people who will admit when they've farked up.  Libs just won't do that - and usually because they're uninformed.


Thanks for chiming in, Scott.
 
2013-11-02 02:29:14 PM

mjm323s: Mark Levin a democrat.


lolwut?

You mean this guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin
 
2013-11-02 02:36:06 PM

grumpfuff: mjm323s: Mark Levin a democrat.

lolwut?

You mean this guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin


I think he means Sander Levin.
 
2013-11-02 02:38:15 PM

skullkrusher: I've just handed you the actual emails so you can decide for yourself? OK, like I said. Badge of honor.


"Decide for yourself" isn't a concept we apply to whether felonies have been committed.
 
2013-11-02 02:38:16 PM
No dog in this fight, but I guess Lerner would rely on the exception to the disclosure prohibition found at IRS code 6103(h)(4)

(4) Disclosure in judicial and administrative tax proceedings
A return or return information may be disclosed in a Federal or State judicial or administrative proceeding pertaining to tax administration, but only-
(A) if the taxpayer is a party to the proceeding, or ....

Maybe they could argue that the application for exempt status is an administrative tax proceeding to which the taxpayer was a party?  Seems a bit of a stretch.  The law has a 70's era clause that says if the White House or its appointees (federal agencies) want return info, the President has to sign for it personally.  But the FEC is an independent agency, not sure how it fits in.
 
2013-11-02 02:38:39 PM

verbal_jizm: mjm323s: Let's say it was evidence they were sharing your personal banking information, hypothetically

I don't think anyone is going to get up in arms about your hypothetical situation unless there's a quote from a prosecutor or actual official of some sort saying they're taking a look into it. Even Issa didn't look at the emails as a possible instance of law breaking.


Not necessarily, Lerner resigned. in the Washington Times Article I posted earlier, additional information was being requested and a case can still be building.
 
2013-11-02 02:41:52 PM
The only thing these fake-ass "scandals" lying pieces of right-wing filth keep trying to gin up are doing is driving everyone into the arms of the Democrats. Keep it up, assholes.
 
2013-11-02 02:42:16 PM

mjm323s: Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?


No

mjm323s: Question for ya: if this was a banking CEO that was caught doing some illegal stuff and after they resigned the Huffington Post New York Times found some additional evidence that would help in pressing charges, would that be different?


Yes

And they didn't find anything additional, the emails are from a FOIA request so the government already had the information in question. Unless you're asserting that the congressional investigation somehow neglected to request email records.
 
2013-11-02 02:42:30 PM

mjm323s: verbal_jizm: mjm323s: Let's say it was evidence they were sharing your personal banking information, hypothetically

I don't think anyone is going to get up in arms about your hypothetical situation unless there's a quote from a prosecutor or actual official of some sort saying they're taking a look into it. Even Issa didn't look at the emails as a possible instance of law breaking.

Not necessarily, Lerner resigned. in the Washington Times Article I posted earlier, additional information was being requested and a case can still be building.


Washington Times, huh? I don't think I'll be holding my breath.
 
2013-11-02 02:59:04 PM

bigsteve3OOO: It hurts to admit that the progressive leadership is as dirty as the GOP.  The worst part must be that they never pass any law that actually takes money from the rich and gives to the poor.  Look at Obama care.  The 1% are not impacted to the extent that the middle class person is.  Why is that?  Could it be that they work for the same masters as the GOP?  I think so.


See?  This is the smart way to get libs disillusioned.  I mean, of course, it helps if you are a little less transparent, but it's a lot better than screaming that Obama lied in trying to get the ACA passed when the entire case against it was a grotesque pastiche of lies.

8/10.  Good work!
 
2013-11-02 03:03:21 PM

HeadLever: Also much of the reason Democrats seemingly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory after that government shutdown debacle.


"POSTSCRIPT: There's also a very weird result (on slide 20) showing that voters in Republican districts are more eager for their representatives to work with President Obama than voters in Democratic districts. I have no idea what to make of this. In fact, it's so strange that it makes me wonder if there's something wrong with this poll. "

Thank you for contributing.
 
2013-11-02 03:04:33 PM
mjm323s: in the Washington Times Article I posted earlier, additional information was being requested and a case can still be building.Sexy chicken. I can't quit you.
 
2013-11-02 03:25:28 PM

Fart_Machine: grumpfuff: mjm323s: Mark Levin a democrat.

lolwut?

You mean this guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin

I think he means Sander Levin.


So he's not wrong, he's just stretching the truth.

http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/press-release/levin-statemen t- lois-lerner%E2%80%99s-resignation-irs
 
2013-11-02 03:30:05 PM
grumpfuff:

Err, for clarification. Best I can tell, Sander called for Lerner's resignation because these groups(both liberal and conservative) were approved in the first place, NOT because of the Republican witch hunt.
 
2013-11-02 03:31:03 PM
So somebody actually seriously thinks the moral of the parable of the Boy Who Cried Wolf is that if some asshole repeatedly lies to you, and says there's a wolf and it's really a toy poodle or nothing, you are supposed to believe him every time, because someday there really will be a wolf.
Like Cosby said: brain damage.

Just as an aside - the moral of that parable is that you SHOULDN'T BE A LYING ASSHOLE.
 
2013-11-02 03:44:47 PM

jso2897: So somebody actually seriously thinks the moral of the parable of the Boy Who Cried Wolf is that if some asshole repeatedly lies to you, and says there's a wolf and it's really a toy poodle or nothing, you are supposed to believe him every time, because someday there really will be a wolf.
Like Cosby said: brain damage.

Just as an aside - the moral of that parable is that you SHOULDN'T BE A LYING ASSHOLE should never tell the same lie twice.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-11-02 03:52:37 PM

dookdookdook: TFA is an almost-factless outragegasm linking to another outragegasm which in turn links to a 176 page .pdf document that I have no intention spending 3 hours examining in detail to determine just exactly how full of shiat subby et. al. is.

/post decent links or don't expect people to take you seriously.


Yeah.  it is a tough slog.   But buried in there is

Cash .......... $973,262.64
Total Assets .. $973,262.64
Liabilities ... $0

Nice 'non-profit' Jerb!


/Not sure why The Examiner thinks Non-profit's
IRS filings are private.  Such things are public records and  are cited in the press frequently.  That is part of the tradeoffs in going the non-profit status route.
 
2013-11-02 03:53:09 PM

cirby: TheWhoppah:
This shiat again?

No, this shiat still.

No, stalling for a year or three, then saying "that's old news" doesn't work any more, especially when you keep on doing the same things...


WE'VE GOT HIM

THIS TIME WE'VE REALLY REALLY GOT HIM
 
2013-11-02 03:55:04 PM

mjm323s: Here let me help you be an informed citizen... http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/23/lois-lerner-irs-official -tea-party-scandal-retires/?page=all


Let me stop you right there.
Your link doesn't work, but all I need to know is in the address. Tea Party Scandal. The one that was entirely fabricated by Darryl Issa's cherry picking?

mjm323s: You keep proving my point by referencing this linked article and claiming that what happened is not an issue because the article is biased. I'll agree that it is not a great source but it is not the only one that has brought it to the public forum.


No, you keep proving mine. I never said there is no issue. I said that those bringing the issues are not concerned with fixing them, regularly lie about them, and have proven time and time again they aren't worth listening to.
Even if they begin with a legitimate complaint, it quickly, sometimes immediately, changes gears in order to score political points. The first farking sentence of the article makes it sound like Lerner was Obama's direct appointee/employee rather than part of an independent agency and put there by George Bush. If that's the kind of disingenuous bullshiat that's going to be peppered throughout the piece, I'm better off stopping there.

When one side isn't trustworthy, isn't operating in good faith, they deserve all the scorn and ridicule they get, not an equal seat at the big boy table.
 
2013-11-02 03:55:40 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: The only thing these fake-ass "scandals" lying pieces of right-wing filth keep trying to gin up are doing is driving everyone into the arms of the Democrats. Keep it up, assholes.


This.

It's going to be a cold day in hell before the GOP regains any semblance of common sense or the White House. And no amount of fake scandals will give them back their reputation.
 
2013-11-02 04:02:59 PM

draa: A Dark Evil Omen: The only thing these fake-ass "scandals" lying pieces of right-wing filth keep trying to gin up are doing is driving everyone into the arms of the Democrats. Keep it up, assholes.

This.

It's going to be a cold day in hell before the GOP regains any semblance of common sense or the White House. And no amount of fake scandals will give them back their reputation.


You also notice the timing of the release of this story is at the end of the week so that it has a chance to make the rounds and gain some steam over the weekend before the Left gets a chance to publicly tear it apart.
 
2013-11-02 04:04:01 PM
The IRS has become Obama's Stasi at this point.

(I saw an actual comment on Politico saying that a few weeks ago.)
 
2013-11-02 04:06:53 PM

grumpyguru: See, this is the problem with fark, the best article doesn't always get greenlit. The actual emails from judicial watch might help.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-conte nt/uploads/2013/10/2325_response - 11.pdf

Kind of hard to deny wrongdoing once you look at it. Warning 176 pages.


My gosh!  This contains actual printouts of pages from America Future Fund's internet web site!

Shocking that the IRS could just hand THIS out to any Tom Dick and Harry that says please!

This is obviously private and confidential information and they were never intended to be seen by everyone who might be snookered into sending AFF some cash!
 
2013-11-02 04:07:40 PM

ongbok: draa: A Dark Evil Omen: The only thing these fake-ass "scandals" lying pieces of right-wing filth keep trying to gin up are doing is driving everyone into the arms of the Democrats. Keep it up, assholes.

This.

It's going to be a cold day in hell before the GOP regains any semblance of common sense or the White House. And no amount of fake scandals will give them back their reputation.

You also notice the timing of the release of this story is at the end of the week so that it has a chance to make the rounds and gain some steam over the weekend before the Left gets a chance to publicly tear it apart.


While I agree in theory, 99% of the people who are outraged over this aren't gonna let things like "facts" stop their outrage.
 
2013-11-02 04:16:53 PM

Zeb Hesselgresser: Alinsky:  "Does this particular end, justify this particular means?"

In the case of  keeping Mitt Romney out of the White House,apparently it did.


How so? Did the FEC fine any of these groups during the election? Were any of them prevented from spending the money for their candidate? Were they denied 501c status? How did any of this impact the campaign?
 
2013-11-02 04:23:54 PM
ZOMG! Ameircan Future Fund has be totally doxed and pwned by Guidestar!  Like they think there should be public record of non-profits or something!!1!!


http://www.guidestar.org/organizations/26-0620554/american-future-fu nd .aspx


/for the humor impaired, Guidestar.org is a site that has information on charities and other 501 organizations, including stuff that is public records

//I bet I could make a 128 page pdf from the stuff on there.  pretty damning, eh?
 
2013-11-02 04:31:29 PM

elchip: The IRS has become Obama's Stasi at this point.

(I saw an actual comment on Politico saying that a few weeks ago.)


For a moment there I thought you'd accidentally logged in as your alter-ego. . .
 
2013-11-02 04:32:49 PM

elchip: The IRS has become Obama's Stasi at this point.

(I saw an actual comment on Politico saying that a few weeks ago.)


Also, what's wrong with being Stasi?

img5.bdbphotos.com
 
2013-11-02 04:36:48 PM
The Majority of Fark commenters believe their liberal side is beyond reproach. They discredit the source or take the conversation to how republicans are bad rather than researching both sides and determine what is facts and what is editorial from both sides.

To say one side is always right and the other is always wrong in politics is complete ignorance... I'm not going to change your mind on this but if you even consider reading another article from the other side to get perspective, I'll think I have accomplished something today.
 
2013-11-02 04:39:48 PM

mjm323s: The Majority of Fark commenters believe their liberal side is beyond reproach.


When trying to make an argument, please don't use an easily-debunked talking point as your opener.
 
2013-11-02 04:42:45 PM

mjm323s: To say one side is always right and the other is always wrong in politics is complete ignorance


Good thing nobody here is saying that.
 
2013-11-02 04:42:57 PM

mjm323s: The Majority of Fark commenters believe their liberal side is beyond reproach. They discredit the source or take the conversation to how republicans are bad rather than researching both sides and determine what is facts and what is editorial from both sides.

To say one side is always right and the other is always wrong in politics is complete ignorance... I'm not going to change your mind on this but if you even consider reading another article from the other side to get perspective, I'll think I have accomplished something today.



You mean like how you claimed a Democrat called for her resignation, I posted about how you were stretching the truth, and you totally ignored it?

Or like how other people did do that research, did post facts, did point out what was editorial, and you just ignored them?

How's the weather up on that cross? Would you mind coming down and having an actual, honest debate?
 
2013-11-02 04:45:36 PM
i mean what even you libby libs have to admit is that liberals have butts

and poop comes from those butts

and poop is icky
 
2013-11-02 04:47:06 PM

Fart_Machine: This was reported back awhile ago.  The whole kerfuffle was that it was sent through personal e-mail accounts to do official business.  But this is the Examiner and they have to spin it for persecution factors.


It says the information on her emails was received after a public records request from Judicial Watch.

It seems obvious the IRS should not be sharing personal information with anyone unless by court order. Thus, the illegality of that, if it's what she did.

If she was sharing only information from conservative groups then it seems obviously political.

The knee-jerk dismissal of anything that may make the administration look bad is tiring.
 
2013-11-02 04:48:19 PM

mjm323s: RyogaM: I'll wait for an indictment to be made before I'll even try to independently determine the legality or illegality of the acts alleged, and I'm an attorney.  Good luck to all you non-lawyer, internet investigators in your attempt to determine what laws were violated by which acts by which parties.  You're going to need it.

As a lawyer I have no doubt you understand the law better than I. But as a taxpayer I would really hope that it is pretty cut and dry that you don't share personal tax information. Seems simple enough.


There's where it drops. It wasn't Fred Garvin's tax information, it was a lobbying group applying for tax-sheltered status.
 
2013-11-02 04:48:44 PM

grumpfuff: mjm323s: The Majority of Fark commenters believe their liberal side is beyond reproach. They discredit the source or take the conversation to how republicans are bad rather than researching both sides and determine what is facts and what is editorial from both sides.

To say one side is always right and the other is always wrong in politics is complete ignorance... I'm not going to change your mind on this but if you even consider reading another article from the other side to get perspective, I'll think I have accomplished something today.


You mean like how you claimed a Democrat called for her resignation, I posted about how you were stretching the truth, and you totally ignored it?

Or like how other people did do that research, did post facts, did point out what was editorial, and you just ignored them?

How's the weather up on that cross? Would you mind coming down and having an actual, honest debate?


I didn't really understand your post. I read it He called for her resignation due to mismanagement. Not sure how calling for resignation can be confused. It seemed like the 2nd paragraph he did try and save political face.

I should have prefaced my first sentence by saying based on my readings of the comments in this thread. I don't think I'm better than anyone just adding my opinion. The same thing can be said on any similar conservative news site
 
2013-11-02 04:57:20 PM
If she broke the law, prosecute her. 

...that is all...
 
2013-11-02 04:58:21 PM

mjm323s: grumpfuff: mjm323s: The Majority of Fark commenters believe their liberal side is beyond reproach. They discredit the source or take the conversation to how republicans are bad rather than researching both sides and determine what is facts and what is editorial from both sides.

To say one side is always right and the other is always wrong in politics is complete ignorance... I'm not going to change your mind on this but if you even consider reading another article from the other side to get perspective, I'll think I have accomplished something today.


You mean like how you claimed a Democrat called for her resignation, I posted about how you were stretching the truth, and you totally ignored it?

Or like how other people did do that research, did post facts, did point out what was editorial, and you just ignored them?

How's the weather up on that cross? Would you mind coming down and having an actual, honest debate?

I didn't really understand your post. I read it He called for her resignation due to mismanagement. Not sure how calling for resignation can be confused. It seemed like the 2nd paragraph he did try and save political face.


The 2nd paragraph WAS his statement. The very first sentence of his statement blatantly disagrees with you

"Lois Lerner is being held responsible for her gross mismanagement of the IRS tax-exempt division, which led to improper handling of applications for tax-exempt status, whether conservative and progressive. "

Admittedly, I read a bit more on other sites(you know, that "research" thing you talked about), and he's upset with her because these groups were approved in the first place, not because of the increased scrutiny like you were implying.

(as a side not, "whether conservative and progressive?")

I should have prefaced my first sentence by saying based on my readings of the comments in this thread. I don't think I'm better than anyone just adding my opinion. The same thing can be said on any similar conservative news site

Then you obviously haven't been reading the same thread as me, because there are a lot of refutations of your, and other, conservative statements grounded in fact. They are conveniently being ignored or dismissed out of hand, while instead focusing on the "stopped reading right there" comments.
 
Displayed 50 of 390 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report