6 thoughts on “First They Came For The Tea Parties”
” Z Street … connected to Israel.”
.
I was under the mad misconception that as a COUNTRY, we were “connected to Israel.” Or at least we were before January of 2009.
.
.
“COMMENTARY (a non-profit) received a letter from the Internal Revenue Service threatening the revocation of the institution’s standing as a non-profit due to a claim that on our website we had crossed the line in the 2008 election from analysis to explicit advocacy of the candidacy of John McCain for president.”
.
So it’s OK for 99% of black churches and the NAACP and a thousand other well known liberal groups to openly advocate for any (D), BUT doing so for McCain was almost a violation. I despise a dual standard.
Bear in mind that Z Street was already suing the IRS for discriminating against them, and that the trial was already either past, or well into, discovery phase. And clearly, the IRS lied during said discovery phase.
That little detail could prove VERY interesting in its own right.
What we need to know is if the data gained from the intrusive questioning of political dissidents by the IRS was then passed on to Democrat party activists. It is the detailed type of information that Obama for America was collecting. And considering they way donors were attacked during the last cycle, it wouldn’t be surprising if it was a coordinated effort.
I want to know why the Obama admin made such an issue of Romney’s tax returns. My guess then was that they had, via illegal access, found something embarrassing (which is not the same as something illegal).
I’m now almost sure that’s the case, and if so, it’s illegal as hell.
Frankly, I would not have believed that there could be a widespread partisan vendetta within the IRS, or any other federal agency, due to the number of people who would have had to keep the secret.
Clearly, I was wrong.
So, I have to wonder… was the election stolen? Did these blatantly illegal acts have enough impact to change the result? I don’t know, but it is surely possible. At the very least, Obama’s side tried damn hard to steal the election via the IRS and other illegal moves.
But don’t worry. We can count on the IRS administering ObamaCare fair and impartially, right?
[/sarc]
And one of the impeachment charges against Nixon was using the IRS to harass and audit his enemies and to uncover things about them. The questionaires sent to the Teaparty groups had already been likened to “opposition research.”
But the Clintons survived numerous such scandals, such as the one with all the FBI files collected by a “lowly staffer.”
” Z Street … connected to Israel.”
.
I was under the mad misconception that as a COUNTRY, we were “connected to Israel.” Or at least we were before January of 2009.
.
.
“COMMENTARY (a non-profit) received a letter from the Internal Revenue Service threatening the revocation of the institution’s standing as a non-profit due to a claim that on our website we had crossed the line in the 2008 election from analysis to explicit advocacy of the candidacy of John McCain for president.”
.
So it’s OK for 99% of black churches and the NAACP and a thousand other well known liberal groups to openly advocate for any (D), BUT doing so for McCain was almost a violation. I despise a dual standard.
Bear in mind that Z Street was already suing the IRS for discriminating against them, and that the trial was already either past, or well into, discovery phase. And clearly, the IRS lied during said discovery phase.
That little detail could prove VERY interesting in its own right.
What we need to know is if the data gained from the intrusive questioning of political dissidents by the IRS was then passed on to Democrat party activists. It is the detailed type of information that Obama for America was collecting. And considering they way donors were attacked during the last cycle, it wouldn’t be surprising if it was a coordinated effort.
I want to know why the Obama admin made such an issue of Romney’s tax returns. My guess then was that they had, via illegal access, found something embarrassing (which is not the same as something illegal).
I’m now almost sure that’s the case, and if so, it’s illegal as hell.
Frankly, I would not have believed that there could be a widespread partisan vendetta within the IRS, or any other federal agency, due to the number of people who would have had to keep the secret.
Clearly, I was wrong.
So, I have to wonder… was the election stolen? Did these blatantly illegal acts have enough impact to change the result? I don’t know, but it is surely possible. At the very least, Obama’s side tried damn hard to steal the election via the IRS and other illegal moves.
But don’t worry. We can count on the IRS administering ObamaCare fair and impartially, right?
[/sarc]
And one of the impeachment charges against Nixon was using the IRS to harass and audit his enemies and to uncover things about them. The questionaires sent to the Teaparty groups had already been likened to “opposition research.”
But the Clintons survived numerous such scandals, such as the one with all the FBI files collected by a “lowly staffer.”