Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 10:05:58 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

The fact that you have an inferior understanding of the english language is your problem.

Do you mean "English language"? .


I will happily admit to being lazy regarding spelling, capitalization. And punctuation has always been a bona-fide bugaboo.

However since it seems that few are bothering to read the article, let me summarize.

The IRS received applications progressive organizations and 292 conservative ones according to the IG.
The selected 30 percent of the progressive organizations and 100 persecent of the conservative ones for comprehensive review.

I don't recall the numbers of the top of my head, but I believe that all the progressive organizations received approval, and I believe it was within 6 weeks. Most of the conservative organizations are still waiting, after three years.

The prosecution of these comprehensive review takes 3 years. (A huge part of the review involved just sending them to washington and sitting on them for a year until after the elections had passed). The rest of it involved huge, inappropriate intrustions into Americans public lives.

Who were members?...What articles had they ever written or published? For purposes of space, Ill not recount the full list.

So yes, I meant and I mean that the IRS selected conservative organizations to be bear the brunt of their politicized, intrusive "investigations" (which were really nothing more than a fig leaf to deprive political opponents the opportunity to organize prior to the election).

Ie. Selective prosecution.


< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 6/28/2013 10:07:24 AM >

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 10:15:39 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		What were the original raw numbers, first off, was it 292 each of new 50x org applicants? What was the quality of the application and mission statement in each?

I see little in the way of a factual case here, just a lot of untutuored and inumerate blowholing and asswipe, Luckydawg.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 6/28/2013 10:16:20 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 10:26:23 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		I am not luckydawg, nor have I ever been.
This matter has been brought to to the Moderators three times before and if you persist I will bring it again.

For the record I agree with you that all groups should be exposed to reasonable investigation. Thats not what occurred and its not what the issue is.
The issue is that it is abundantly clear that the Obama administration used the mechanisms of power in the IRS/EPA/Justice department against political opponents selectively.

Namely, the irs prevented opposing groups from organizing and receiving donations. There is no other reasonable explanation for applications to be sent for washington for further review - and no action occurs.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 6/28/2013 10:32:44 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 10:27:53 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Go ahead. I will sleep fine tonight, I don't give the glimmer of a good goddamn fuck what you do.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 6/28/2013 10:31:06 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 10:56:28 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
You thought to prosecute meant criminal prosecution. Which isn't the preferred meaning. And as usual you were so arrogant that you didn't look up the meaning - and so quick to mock that you now have egg on your face.

Hold on there. I was going to let this slide with just laughing at you. Now I'm going to have to deal with your ignorance and straw grasping.

Selective pursuit to the finish doesn't make sense.

In your unnuanced opinion. Fortunately you don't write dictionaries.
Also suitable are the meanings of "engagement" or "performing"
quote:



Now actually going to the same dictionary you used for the actual word you used, prosecution not prosecute, what do we find
quote:


1 : the act or process of prosecuting; specifically : the institution and continuance of a criminal suit involving the process of pursuing formal charges against an offender to final judgment


2 : the party by whom criminal proceedings are instituted or conducted


3 obsolete : pursuit

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prosecution

So I was right. Either you have not just an inferior but obsolete command of the English language or you are flat out lying. So which is it?



Feel free to keep arguing. You just keep a topic where you are shown to be wrong and ridiculous alive.

Take for example the sentence, perfectly acceptable "The prosecution of the war proceeded flawlessly". Notice that it has nothing to do with criminal proceedings. It has everything to do with .. "the act of prosecuting". It has a meaning similar to execution, but a different nuance. Ie., quoting miriam, to follow to the end; to engage in; to perform.

It is very clear that you are not bothering to actually read my posts since you will see that the definition of prosecution is already discussed in my original quote. qv.

The formation and meaning of a noun formed by a verb +tion is not difficult. Here's the wiki, for you: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-tion. It means
the act or result of a verb.

Elect - election
Select - selection
Delete - deletion.
act - action

etc.



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 11:53:16 AM   
VideoAdminAlpha


Posts: 3876
Joined: 7/25/2008
Status: offline 		Fast Reply:

Phydeaux is NOT luckydawg. I researched it because it has been stated numeous times. The statement is incorrect, he is NOT luckydawg.

_____________________________


You can't please all the people all of the time.Unfortunately there are times you cannot please any of them :( You can only do your best, and hope they realize that.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:18:01 PM   
papassion


Posts: 487
Joined: 3/28/2012
Status: offline 		Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like "The IRS scandal is not true!" That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.

(in reply to VideoAdminAlpha)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:25:58 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminAlpha

Fast Reply:

Phydeaux is NOT luckydawg. I researched it because it has been stated numeous times. The statement is incorrect, he is NOT luckydawg.

He posts like dawg, he lies like dawg, he argues like dawg. I suppose he must post from a new ip but I'm curious how that proves anything.



When you are a hammer, you tend to look at all problems as nails.
Hence your opinions on how I post et. al. So clearly while I am not luckydawg - you are a real tool.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 6/28/2013 12:26:37 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:26:18 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like "The IRS scandal is not true!" That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.

There was no scandal because none of the groups liberal or conservative should have been approved at all. Then it came out that the reason the Treasury IG report only discussed the conservative groups is because Issa asked for a report specifically on that. IOW Issa knew what was happening, that it happened to groups on both sides and tried to put a fraud over on the citizens of this nation.

Note that Issa has now dropped the matter entirely and is trying to gin up something new on Benghazi.

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:29:38 PM   
papassion


Posts: 487
Joined: 3/28/2012
Status: offline 		You want more selective prosecution? Obama's Departments fining coal companies and power companies up to $600,000 a bird, for birds killed in coal settling pits or on power companies power lines. The Associated Press ran a story that 573,000 birds A YEAR are killed by the "green" windmill farms. Including Hawks, Falcons and Eagles. All federally protected birds! Not ONE fuckin' citation given to the windmill farm industry. Yeah, real FAIR government enforcement!

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:49:23 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like "The IRS scandal is not true!" That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.


No, try again, that never happened. The same person who was in charge of the section who was appointed by W and invited the question apologized. It was done during a Bush appointee oversight. The IRS didn't apologize.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:56:20 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

You want more selective prosecution? Obama's Departments fining coal companies and power companies up to $600,000 a bird, for birds killed in coal settling pits or on power companies power lines. The Associated Press ran a story that 573,000 birds A YEAR are killed by the "green" windmill farms. Including Hawks, Falcons and Eagles. All federally protected birds! Not ONE fuckin' citation given to the windmill farm industry. Yeah, real FAIR government enforcement!


I'm well aware of the figures papassion. I'm just outnumbered.

I'm also aware, for example that when the federal government publishes the figures on the cost per $MW of energy - the federal government "normalizes" the data - ie fudges it in order to make "green" energy appear cheaper and others more expensive.

One quick example. One of the largest costs for building an nuclear reactor has nothing to do with the costs of the concrete, the steel, the uranium. It has to do with political opposition.

Building a nuclear reactor is an expensive proposition. Call it a billion dollars. However, once those funds are committed to that purpose, the company has to secure permits, and endure protests, court challenges etc. And this has been a conscious tactic of the anti-nuclear industry. So the time for completion routeinely exceeds 10 years.

Interest doubles roughly every 7 years. This means that political opposition to nuclear energy more than doubles its cost. But it is these higher costs that are used in the comparison of nuclear energy costs to solar / wind power for example rather than actual costs. Any technology could be subject to the same harassment. It has nothing to do per se with the cost of generating power - and everything to do with political persecution.

Apples to apples comparisons would be nice.

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 12:58:40 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like "The IRS scandal is not true!" That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.


No, try again, that never happened. The same person who was in charge of the section who was appointed by W and invited the question apologized. It was done during a Bush appointee oversight. The IRS didn't apologize.



You try again:

Attending a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association, Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, apologized for the “insensitive” treatment of the groups on behalf of the IRS:

“That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review. The IRS would like to apologize for that.”

- See more at: http://dcxposed.com/2013/05/10/irs-admits-political-profiling-of-conservative-tea-party-groups-apologizes/#sthash.WKkZRzNI.dpuf

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:02:11 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like The IRS scandal is not true! That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.
There was no scandal because none of the groups liberal or conservative should have been approved at all. Then it came out that the reason the Treasury IG report only discussed the conservative groups is because Issa asked for a report specifically on that. IOW Issa knew what was happening, that it happened to groups on both sides and tried to put a fraud over on the citizens of this nation. Note that Issa has now dropped the matter entirely and is trying to gin up something new on Benghazi.
Uh. Logic fail. If none of the groups should have been approved - and liberals selectively were - thats a scandal. If groups should have been subjected to scrutiny - and only conservative gruops were subjected to comprehensive review- thats a scandal. And frankly, despite your assertions, groups that want to organize to teach the constitution are a perfectly valid c(4) purpose.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:03:17 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Do Liberals really think if they spout pure bullshit like "The IRS scandal is not true!" That everyone will forget that the SAME IRS APOLIGIZED FOR PROFILING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS? I wonder why the IRS ADMITTED they profiled if they did not? Libs have a short attention span? Forgot about the IRS admission? Wasn't too long ago.


No, try again, that never happened. The same person who was in charge of the section who was appointed by W and invited the question apologized. It was done during a Bush appointee oversight. The IRS didn't apologize.



You try again:

Attending a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association, Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, apologized for the “insensitive” treatment of the groups on behalf of the IRS:

“That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review. The IRS would like to apologize for that.”

- See more at: http://dcxposed.com/2013/05/10/irs-admits-political-profiling-of-conservative-tea-party-groups-apologizes/#sthash.WKkZRzNI.dpuf

quote:

Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, apologized for the “insensitive” treatment of the groups on behalf of the IRS:

“That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review. The IRS would like to apologize for that.”


Learn to read Englische, as she is goodley spokene. That is what I said.

The same person who was in charge of the section who was appointed by W and invited the question apologized. It was done during a Bush appointee oversight. The IRS didn't apologize

That person, is Lois Lerner.

Try again, again.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:05:40 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Those political protests are for very good reasons.

Nuclear plants are never kept up to the standards they should be. See Fukushima Daiichi. We still have no good solution to what to do with the waste. And finally the more nuclear fuel there is the more likely it becomes some will be diverted to bad people.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:18:30 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Those political protests are for very good reasons.

Nuclear plants are never kept up to the standards they should be. See Fukushima Daiichi. We still have no good solution to what to do with the waste. And finally the more nuclear fuel there is the more likely it becomes some will be diverted to bad people.


I don't mind the political protests Ken. I agree they serve a valuable purpose. And I am in favor of people helping to determing public policy.

However the DOE guidelines are supposed to represent a reasonably best case implimentation. And the figures are not "fair" they are unethically shaded toward a green position.


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:22:04 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


No, try again, that never happened. The same person who was in charge of the section who was appointed by W and invited the question apologized. It was done during a Bush appointee oversight. The IRS didn't apologize.



quote:

Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, apologized for the “insensitive” treatment of the groups on behalf of the IRS:

“That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review. The IRS would like to apologize for that.”


She was in charge of the subject area and responsible for it. She was speaking in her official capacity. The IRS apologized.

Again, she also stopped the policy for a few months until she was overruled.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:24:34 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

We live in a day and age when dictionaries are considered old-fashioned and a hindrance to communication. A word means whatever someone's emotions tell them it means.

As someone whose work involves countless dictionary checks each day, I think things are a bit more complex than that.

Language evolves. It always has. That's vividly clear to anyone wading into Chaucer or Shakespeare. A dictionary is a snapshot of a language at a particular moment, not a shrine of eternal definitions. If one is attempting to communicate, it's essential to have some sense of what the word will actually mean to the person hearing or reading it. One could find dictionary entries galore to support intended usage in the following sentences, but only a naif would be stunned by puzzled or even adverse reactions:

-- You're looking very gay [cheerful] today!
-- The Sistine Chapel is an awful [awe-inspiring] example of Renaissance artistry.
-- Consumption [tuberculosis] is a tragedy.
-- My brother-in-law is a cad [bus conductor].

In terms of dictionaries, it may bear noting that (if Wikipedia is correct) they were a relatively recent development in English. (So, for that matter, is standardized spelling.) For much of the language's vibrant life, people used their wits, memories, and shared understanding to sort out what words meant. Today's dictionaries also vary in their approach to language--some prescriptivist (what words should mean), others descriptivitist (how people actually use words).


quote:

It won't surprise me if dictionaries are called "racist" one of these days, and dismissed as a tool of eeeevil white people trying to control speech.

Oh my.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution - 6/28/2013 1:29:34 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		By a W appointee. A person responsible apologized. The IRS has not, because they haven't actually did anything wrong, or it remains to be seen.

When JimBobBillyBoy apologizes for us fining BP for spilling oil, the Legislative Branch of the US Government did not apologize.


And I was commenting on your punctilious usage of the word 'prosecution' looks like you run luke-warm though. Perhaps it was accidental after all.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 6/28/2013 1:34:00 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: IRS - Selective Prosecution Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125