So where are all the IRS-Obama Scandle People now that the Truth is coming out?
- Thread starter piezoe
- Start date
IRS auditor reaffirms that conservatives, not liberals, were targeted
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/irs-auditor-reaffirms-conservatives-not-liberals-w/
Treasury: IRS targeted 292 Tea Party groups, just 6 progressive groups
http://washingtonexaminer.com/treas...ups-just-6-progressive-groups/article/2532456
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/irs-auditor-reaffirms-conservatives-not-liberals-w/
Treasury: IRS targeted 292 Tea Party groups, just 6 progressive groups
http://washingtonexaminer.com/treas...ups-just-6-progressive-groups/article/2532456
Whoops.
IRS auditor reaffirms that conservatives, not liberals, were targeted
The IRSâ auditor told Congress this week that it stands by its determination that conservative groups were uniquely singled out for special scrutiny by the tax agency, rebutting Democratsâ contention that liberal groups also were targeted.
The Treasury Departmentâs inspector general for tax administration (TIGTA) sent a letter Wednesday to congressional Democrats telling them that while several liberal groups may have gotten extra scrutiny, the IRS didnât necessarily target those â but it did do so for conservative groups.
âTIGTA concluded that inappropriate criteria were used to identify potential political cases for extra scrutiny â specifically, the criteria listed in our audit report. From our audit work, we did not find evidence that the criteria you identified, labeled âProgressives,â were used by the IRS to select potential political cases during the 2010 to 2012 timeframe we audited,â Inspector General J. Russell George said.
He said that while 30 percent of groups that had the word âprogressiveâ in their name were given extra scrutiny, 100 percent of groups with âtea party,â âpatriotâ or â9/12â in their names were pulled out for strict scrutiny, which involved what the IRS since has said were invasive and inappropriate questions.
Democrats have argued that the IRSâ scrutiny of applications for tax-exempt status hit both ideological sides equally, which would cut at the GOPâs argument that it was politically motivated. Instead, Democrats have said the scrutiny is the natural result of a jump in applications after campaign finance rules changed following the Supreme Courtâs ruling in the Citizens United case.
But Mr. Georgeâs letter suggests thatâs not the case.
âWhile we have multiple sources of information corroborating the use of tea party and other related criteria we described in our report, including employee interviews, e-mails, and other documents, we found no indication in any of these other materials that âprogressivesâ was a term used to refer cases for scrutiny for political campaign intervention,â Mr. George wrote.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-conservatives-not-liberals-w/#ixzz2XQV88ESv
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
IRS auditor reaffirms that conservatives, not liberals, were targeted
The IRSâ auditor told Congress this week that it stands by its determination that conservative groups were uniquely singled out for special scrutiny by the tax agency, rebutting Democratsâ contention that liberal groups also were targeted.
The Treasury Departmentâs inspector general for tax administration (TIGTA) sent a letter Wednesday to congressional Democrats telling them that while several liberal groups may have gotten extra scrutiny, the IRS didnât necessarily target those â but it did do so for conservative groups.
âTIGTA concluded that inappropriate criteria were used to identify potential political cases for extra scrutiny â specifically, the criteria listed in our audit report. From our audit work, we did not find evidence that the criteria you identified, labeled âProgressives,â were used by the IRS to select potential political cases during the 2010 to 2012 timeframe we audited,â Inspector General J. Russell George said.
He said that while 30 percent of groups that had the word âprogressiveâ in their name were given extra scrutiny, 100 percent of groups with âtea party,â âpatriotâ or â9/12â in their names were pulled out for strict scrutiny, which involved what the IRS since has said were invasive and inappropriate questions.
Democrats have argued that the IRSâ scrutiny of applications for tax-exempt status hit both ideological sides equally, which would cut at the GOPâs argument that it was politically motivated. Instead, Democrats have said the scrutiny is the natural result of a jump in applications after campaign finance rules changed following the Supreme Courtâs ruling in the Citizens United case.
But Mr. Georgeâs letter suggests thatâs not the case.
âWhile we have multiple sources of information corroborating the use of tea party and other related criteria we described in our report, including employee interviews, e-mails, and other documents, we found no indication in any of these other materials that âprogressivesâ was a term used to refer cases for scrutiny for political campaign intervention,â Mr. George wrote.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-conservatives-not-liberals-w/#ixzz2XQV88ESv
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
In peizeo's defense, when one only gets his news from liberal outlets he can't possibly know the honest facts in the matter. We can't condemn him for ignorance when the sources he uses refuse to give him the full and honest story. Ignorance is bliss for a liberal. 
BTW, I see another IRS official has pled the 5th before Congress this morning. "Nothing to see here. Just move along, folks."
BTW, I see another IRS official has pled the 5th before Congress this morning. "Nothing to see here. Just move along, folks."
Isn't that the same inspector general that's been in charge of the investigation all along? So are you surprised that he is now trying to cover his ass after saying "well he didn't ask we to look at those." --idiot!
And now we have "extra scrutiny" versus "targeting" . Isn't this rather insulting to your innate intelligence (whatever may be left of it.)
Wouldn't you want to know what fraction of the 100% non-qualifying applications from blatantly political organizations were from "conservative" groups versus what % where from "left wing looney groups". Seems it was roughly 80/20. I would look for that ratio in the targeted/extra scrutiny ratio if I was doing this investigation.
The IRS could make this problem go away just by following their rules and rejecting 100% of the application from political groups.
And now we have "extra scrutiny" versus "targeting" . Isn't this rather insulting to your innate intelligence (whatever may be left of it.)
Wouldn't you want to know what fraction of the 100% non-qualifying applications from blatantly political organizations were from "conservative" groups versus what % where from "left wing looney groups". Seems it was roughly 80/20. I would look for that ratio in the targeted/extra scrutiny ratio if I was doing this investigation.
The IRS could make this problem go away just by following their rules and rejecting 100% of the application from political groups.
Individuals such as Piezoe are sheep headed for serfdom. And too naive to see it.
Hardly! I'd start by firing the inspector general and getting someone who understands statistics and that there is no difference between "singled out for extra scrutiny" and "being targeted."
I've just learned the ratio was 15 conservative political organizations applying for every 1 progressive group. Incredible! GO IRS!!! Throw them all in jail for perjury.