12 thoughts on “The IRS Criminality”

  1. The Goolsbee story, still? Give me a break. That charge was ridiculous the day it was made: if anything, making inaccurate claims about someone’s tax filing status is evidence that you haven’t accessed their private records. This is yet another great case study in how the right wing scandal industrial complex operates as a never-ending fundraising grift to separate gullible citizens from their money.

    1. Your problem, Jim, is that you never acknowledge that the Obama Administration and/or Hillary can be guilty of anything. Because of that, you come across as a cultist at best, and a shill at worst.

      1. It isn’t that Jim thinks Obama did something wrong and won’t admit it. Jim thinks Obama did something right and is proud of it. Why won’t the rest of us recognize the legitimacy of Obama’s actions? Same goes for Crooked Hillary.

      2. Nonsense. I’ve acknowledged all along that Hillary Clinton was wrong to use a personal email account for work. I’ve acknowledged all along that Obama shouldn’t have promised people they could keep their plan, “Period”. There are lots of mistakes that both of them are guilty of.

        And I am happy to acknowledge that Goolsbee was wrong to speculate about the Koch brothers’ tax status when he didn’t know what he was talking about. But that’s a far, far cry from illegally accessing their private IRS records. There’s absolutely no reason to think he’s guilty of that.

        1. Except you said that Obama’s IRS should target his enemies and that the IRS was right obligated to do so.

          I’ve acknowledged all along that Hillary Clinton was wrong to use a personal email account for work.

          And yet for the past two days you have been defending her actions as not being wrong.

          I’ve acknowledged all along that Obama shouldn’t have promised people they could keep their plan

          And yet you defend many of the other lies Obama and the Democrats told about Obamacare. You still use many of them.

          There’s absolutely no reason to think he’s guilty of that.

          Except for a long track record of the Obama administration doing things exactly like this.

          1. Except you said that Obama’s IRS should target his enemies and that the IRS was right obligated to do so.

            Nope, I said the IRS should enforce the law on political activities of non-profits, be they on the left or right.

            And yet for the past two days you have been defending her actions as not being wrong.

            Nope, I’ve defended her actions as not meriting criminal prosecution. There’s a difference.

            And yet you defend many of the other lies Obama and the Democrats told about Obamacare.

            That’s pretty vague.

            Except for a long track record of the Obama administration doing things exactly like this.

            There’s an even longer track record of Obama administration opponents accusing them of doing things they never did (Jade Helm, FEMA trailers, Obama’s foreign birth, ACA death panels, the Benghazi stand-down order, etc.).

          2. Nope, I said the IRS should enforce the law on political activities of non-profits, be they on the left or right.

            And yet the vast majority that they went after were “right wing” organizations. The handful of others they did after the fact when the news broke, to try to hide the bias.

        2. When you make such criticisms, it reminds me of the guy in the interview that says, “my greatest flaw is that I work too hard.”

          You are not admitting mistakes, you are admitting minor lapses in judgment.

    2. And yet Obama’s IRS chose obstruction rather than comply with a FOIA. Obama’s IRS doesn’t have a good track record of being honest but they do have an excellent track record of abusing Obama’s enemies, destroying evidence, lying to congress and the courts, and obstructing justice.

      We both know that if any emails between Obama’s IRS and Obama’s other staff once existed, they don’t now.

      1. They didn’t obstruct anything: they searched for a record of an IRS disclosure where one would normally be found. The plaintiff wants them to search White House emails: they are starting from the presumption that the IRS committed a crime, covered it up by using email instead of normal channels, and now they’re upset that the IRS didn’t hand over the imaginary emails that prove their guilt. It’s Red Queen logic: verdict first, trial after.

Comments are closed.