What did he know, and how did he know it?
The IRS scandal continues to not “fizzle out.”
14 thoughts on “Austan Goolsby”
Comments are closed.
What did he know, and how did he know it?
The IRS scandal continues to not “fizzle out.”
Comments are closed.
Nothing to worry about; we’ll soon have an announcement from the white house that the white house is uninvolved. After all, Goolsby was the white house economic adviser, and thus nothing whatsoever to do with the white house or administration.
And the white house only found out when they read it in the papers. Of course.
/sarc
On a serous note (sorry, hit the post button too fast) I’d be absolutely shocked if Goolsby is the only member of the senior white house staff involved.
One of the many critical questioned to be answered is how, exactly, white house computers can access confidential IRS tax records in the IRS’s secure system. Who arranged for that capability? Who granted the access?
“White House computers? You must be confused. No White House computers were involved. They’re the Organizing for America computers.
Same ones we used for our brief stint managing the Census in 2009 and tracking the Obamaphones.”
It was so kind of OFA to allow the taxpayers to borrow their machines rather than purchasing machines that would only be used temporarily. Of course for their contribution, OFA would be able to right-off the use and maintenance costs of those machines. However, OFA is a non-profit, so the IRS will just them a refund… /sarc
The American people demand accountability…
…and our ‘leaders’ ROTFLAO.
We are so far down the path of corruption that the only step left is the round up. That’s not a round up of bad guys I’m talking about. I’m talking about a round up of anybody that gets any traction reporting about it.
We’ve already far past the point where our ‘leaders’ can only get elected on the idiot vote which means we no longer have a democracy in any meaningful sense.
That there is no outrage is the outrage.
Oops, and I intended to add…
The elites on the right need to be the first to go. Controlling half of one branch should be enough to get some traction. The fact that it doesn’t is the direct responsibility of the guys on the right who should be fixing things.
? It is getting “some traction”, which is why we are hearing about it. The fact that your first impulse is to punish the right is one of the reasons they can’t do more then that. Politics requires some logrolling, and, alas, too many on the Right see any logrolling as “Rinos! They Must Be Stopped, No Matter the Cost!!!!”, as we saw with Porkbusters, which gave control of Congress to the Democrats in 2008, because the Republicans (with a deficit one tenth the size of any of Obama’s) were, it is to laugh, spending too much money. So instead of a “Bridge to Nowhere” (something governments are actually supposed to do, and costing us millions) we got “Solyndra” (a complete failure, not something government is supposed to do, and what, 26 Billion in loans, with guaranteed losses over a Billion.). This is my example of “the elites on the right need to be the first to go”. Do you have one that did not end in such abject failure?
No. What needs to happen is a calibration of the Permanent Government, which will have to be by the Republicans, (because the Democrats are in complete thrall to the Government Unions) and will only happen when they have solid control (veto proof majority in the Senate, over 2/3rds of the House, the Presidency, and 6 solid votes on the Supreme Court) of the Elected government. Just like it took the Democrats, when they put the permanent government in place. It’s not like the Democrats are really better at politics then the Republicans, it’s just that people like you keep doing these silly purges, which gives the Democrats the huge majorities they need to run amok. Wilson, F.D.R., Johnson, and Obama (who had two+ months of absolute power. Thank God he is so incompetent!). Name a Republican with those kinds of majorities. I can, it was during and after the Civil War. When they had that kind of power, they used it, and we got Reconstruction. When they lost it, thanks again to the purists, Reconstruction ended and we got Democrats and the K.K.K……..
I disagree over porkbusters.
Wrong is wrong, and the republican pork was very wrong.
By far the greatest issue with pork isn’t the cost, it’s the corruption. For example, a Montana cop taking a $20 bribe to “forget” about a speeding ticket isn’t about the $20 or the traffic fine, it’s about the corruption. The same applies to congress.
I’ll give my own former congresscritter, Rick Renzi, as an example. I voted for him because he ran as a fiscal conservative and against pork (and other forms of corruption.). However, in 2006, I got mailers from him, boasting about how much pork he was “bringing home” to the district. Federal $$$ for this or that useless project, or projects where the feds had no business being involved, and lots of them. This was pork, often obtained via “pork swapping”; a congresscritter in another district wants some pork, so he gets it, in return for agreeing to pork for this district (resulting in two happy congresscritters and twice-screwed taxpayers).
So, with my representative, who had run against this form of corruption actively bragging about how much of it he was doing, I could not vote for him. I couldn’t vote for his dem opponent either, and there wasn’t an acceptable third-party choice. So, I had no option but to write in “none of the above” when I voted.
Renzi won anyway, but he didn’t run again, likely due to the investigation into his corruption: unsurprisingly, corruption breeds corruption, and he’d engaged in other forms as well. He was convicted on 17 counts last month after a 5 year legal battle, and is currently awaiting sentencing.
I didn’t call him a RINO, I called him a corrupt bastard. Why on earth should I vote for scum like that? I simply will not.
Are you serous when you say the “bridge to nowhere” is something the government should be doing? Why??? How on earth is that any different from Solydera (except that the bridge would have wasted even more money than the Solydera debacle did)? Both are blatant useless waste, and the only real difference is the bridge to nowhere didn’t actually get built so the money wasn’t spent, and that’s a good thing. I’ve been to Ketchekan (where that idiotic bridge would have been built) and seen firsthand how useless it would have been. I’m glad porkbusters played a role in stopping that outrage, and I thank them for it.
If Republicans can’t keep themselves from that kind of blatant corruption, what the hell use are they?
Frankly, the dynamic I’m seeing is that divided government works better, in the main, than with either party in total control. Every time I consider backing the Republicans all the way, I get a big reminder why they aren’t to be trusted. The party leadership currently pushing the amnesty bill (and trusting the Obama admin to enforce its provisions!) is just the latest example.
If the Republican party wants votes, it would behoove it to come up with a slightly better raison d’etre than “We’re not quite as terrible as the Democrats”.
I’m not a purist. All I ask is that a candidate not be blatantly corrupt and at least refrains from acting in total opposition to their own campaign promises (such as running against something and then flipping to pushing it once elected). Is that too much to ask?
Sorry, Republican pork was not “very, very wrong”. Government = Pork. “Who can doubt “the secret hid, under Cheop’s pyramid”, was that the contractor did Cheops out of several millions”. The founders knew and understood this, which is why we have checks and balances. They knew they would fail if they tried to ban “pork”, but they wanted to keep it under some control. The more you try to ban it, as the Progressives did (to great harm to us), the more Corruption you will see.
Yes, bridges canals, and roads are things the government is supposed to do. It’s why we have “Eminent Domain” in the Constitution as a government power. Or did you think it was granted to make shopping centers? You can argue about whether a particular bridge or road was necessary (the Bridge to Nowhere was a bad example. It was a good idea to develop the island, and the outcry came by the people who were already on the island, and didn’t want to buy the rest of the land, but still enjoy the use of it, aka, “rent seeking”.), but these sorts of things have been the purview of Government for all of recorded history. Yes, I know there have been private bridges and roads. As opposed to Solyndra, which was rent seeking, pure and simple. The fact that much of the Republican base cannot see the difference is a problem……
Does divided government work better? Yes, if you like the Status Quo, the one with the I.R.S. using all of it’s might to get Democrats elected. But I can’t think of a Republican Detroit, either. So given that the current system will not allow for divided government for long, given the obvious corruption of the “Civil Service”, and that the Democrats are in thrall to same, the aware better be pushing for huge Republican majorities (and I do mean huge. Any attack on the “Civil Service” will be fought tooth and nail. Remember Sen. Ted Stevens? Politically assassinated by the “Justice” department, with a pedophile as the core “witness”? They wanted “National Health Care”, and he was in the way, nothing personal. Now imagine what they will do when it is PERSONAL……..).
As to amnesty, it’s one of the reasons I trust the Republican leadership. It’s the right thing to do, and so they are doing it, despite the political hit they are taking. As opposed the the number of “Real Conservatives”, who are more then happy to play “Judge Dredd” and enforce Senator Kennedy’s vile, racist quota system.
They, of course, have. Freeing the Slaves, Civil Rights, National Defense, Pax Americana, Education Reform, Economic Freedom, Free Trade, pick an issue, the Republicans are better then the Democrats, unless you want to get paid off. I am the one pushing “They’re not nearly as terrible as the Democrats”. Again, Detroit. Again, a Tenfold increase in the Deficit, with no idea how much of an increase in “earmarks”, because keeping track of them was a Republican idea, and the Democrats ended it the minute “Porkbusters” gave them control of Congress. As to corruption, Republican scandals involve toe tapping and a man trying to have sex with his wife (Gosh!). Democrat scandals involve murder (Old Ted, again) and treason (pick one. Truman’s utter indifference to the Soviet spying, giving the Atomic bomb to the Soviets, Abascam, where the F.B.I. showed that the Democrats were happy to sell out the country to the Arabs, Clinton giving missile guidance tech to the Chinese). And the Republicans police their own. Nixon was asked by Republicans to step down. How did that work out with Pornstar?
Though I suspect the WH was fully aware (and to some degree, directing) the goings-on at the IRS, the problem is much worse. The IRS is so imbued at all levels with folks that will do whatever it takes to support ‘Big Gov’ that it’s no longer needed that direction for some time. Think of it as the ‘Skynet has become self-aware’ moment – the IRS will destroy all enemies without any centralized planning. And it’s not just the IRS – the EPA is just as bad when it comes to dealing with those that don’t think as they collectively do.
At this point, all that’s left for options is to pull the switch, terminate the IRS. Getting Congress to eliminate the IRS is, um, a long shot, so I suspect we’re just plain screwed.
People of like mind were put in command.
The rank and file bureaucrats have parallel interests in destroying conservative groups.
Enemies were clearly identified.
And early scandals like the new black panthers dismissal and Fast and Furious made it apparent that lawlessness in service of the regime won’t be punished.
With all that, especially the last, what happened with the IRS, EPA, etc. should be expected, no direct orders needed.
Your request seeks access to the types of documents for which there is no public interest that outweighs the privacy interests
But of course since revealing the Koch’s private tax information was in the public interest, it’s all good, right Austan?
Baghdad Jimmy’s “fizzle” isn’t working out right, huh Jim? What’s fizzling out is the opinion that the 2012 election wasn’t stolen. As more and more information filters out, that opinion will first become a minority, and eventually find its way into the land of parody. As in:
“Yeah, the Obama presidency sure was transformative all right. Two terms for the price of one!” or
“Who knew Yes We Can meant Yes We Will, Or Else.”
I was not arguing that the government has no role in transportation infrastructure, I was arguing against the bridge to nowhere. Of course the government has some role in transportation infrastructure (though a bridge within a state ought to be a state, not a federal, matter, unless it’s on a federal roadway).
In case anyone reading this is unaware, the bridge to nowhere was planned for the small town of Ketchekan, Alaska, to connect it with an island on the other side of a deepwater waterway. The island contains 50 odd homes and the local airport, and there is a ferry service. The bridge would have cost well over a billion; it would have had to be a very high bridge due to the fact that the waterway takes large ships, including cruse ships, and it’s a long way around unless you use it.
What most don’t know is that Ketchecan is in the Alaskan panhandle, where it, like many towns and cities (and even the state capitol) do not have a road connection to anywhere. The only way in and out with a land vehicle is via ferry. Ketchecan has about 11 miles of road, total, and no road connections to anywhere. Building a billion dollar bridge there (a bridge to nowhere, from nowhere) would have been an exercise in abject stupidity, and such things need to be fought.
Do you seriously believe that the Republicans, if given full control, would tackle the inherent rot in government? Given their propensity for caving in and taking the path of least resistance, I rather doubt it. If I believed they’d even seriously try, I’d think otherwise, but the party leadership has gone back on its word far too often for me to trust them now. Remember when the R’s had both houses and the white house last time? Did they even lift a finger against the rot you describe, or did they become democrats-lite and give us even more big government, such as medicare part D, banning light bulbs, etc? They became part of the problem. So, while the status quo of divided government is deeply flawed, it’s the least bad option from my point of view. Oh, I’d much prefer a divided congress with an R white house, but I’m highly skeptical on giving the R’s total control again, and the current lies and fraud by the R party leadership and the likes of Marco Rubio serve only to reenforce that view.
Amnesty is the right thing to do? By what metric? The nonsense that this will give R’s an electoral advantage by increasing net R votes via a larger hispanic R vote? There is no evidence, none, that this would work, and you can look back at the polling data from Reagan’s amnesty until now for proof. It should also be a clue that the democrats keep saying that the R’s need to do this for their own good. Hint; D’s aren’t inclined to help the R electoral prospects.
Amnesty will also hurt wages and unemployment due to simple supply and demand (hurting the lower income Americans hardest of all). It’ll also create a budget disaster in a decade or less, because the overwhelming majority why would be given amnesty are poor, and poor people use more government services than their taxes pay for.
You want total R control, yet you think creating million of new voters who vote overwhelmingly democrat is a good idea?
It’s very easy to say “Amnesty is the right thing to do” but I can’t fail to note that no one who says that seems able to come up with a reason why. I suspect there’s a reason for that; it’s a disaster.
Last year, Harry Reid stated that Mitt Romney paid no taxes. Either he was lying out his ass (very likely) or he had access to Mitt’s tax returns. Sounds like he should also be investigated unless he publically admits he was lying the whole time.