Lois

[sam4022]

What is your personal opinion, not legal opinion, regarding Lois Lerner? How would you describe her to your children or grandchildren?

Please keep it civil and without profanity.

[ArlJim78]

dishonest, lawbreaking, pompous, political hack.

[FantasticDan]

What is your personal opinion, not legal opinion, regarding Lois Lerner? How would you describe her to your children or grandchildren?Ahh, I can just picture it now.. Christmas Eve maybe, the family gathers around a roaring fire, the hearth decorated with stockings and bells..

I lift one of my grand kids on to my knee. Tell us a story Poppy, she'd say. The one about the snowman who came to life. Or the reindeer whose bright red nose guided Santa's sleigh..

No, none of those tonight, my dear. Tonight you all will hear a scaaary story of a real grinch.. a regular Ebinizer Scrooge!

Ah, a tale of redemption? Of shrunken hearts made three sizes larger.. :jump:

Not this night, my children. Not this night. :(



"Is this story your legal opinion, Poppy?"

:p

[Tom]

A traitor - an enemy of the people, who abused her power for political purposes. The bitch needs to in front of a firing squad.

[GaryG]

A traitor - an enemy of the people, who abused her power for political purposes. The bitch needs to in front of a firing squad.Is there any doubt where she got her marching orders? Functionaries such as she would not have the huevos to do what they did without instructions from the HMFIC.

[davew]

a good civil servant, following orders of a 'perceived' supervisor

loyal to the point of risking jail time to protect her 'bosses'

[Marshall Bennett]

A criminal. Similar in stature to one Richard Nixon. People in government or the justice system should be held to a much higher standard than your average citizen. The punishment should be far more severe for misconduct.
Personally, I hope she rots in prison.

[Clocker]

It is my personal opinion that she committed perjury. She testified under oath, “I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee.”

This statement is not true. (http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/09/lois-lerner-did-print-out-some-emails-after-all/)

Disgraced ex-IRS official Lois Lerner actually printed out some of her missing emails, according to a statement by her attorney.

Lerner’s lawyer Bill Taylor initially claimed that Lerner did not print out and file her emails, as the Federal Records Act required her to do, before they allegedly went missing in a 2011 computer crash and her hard drive was “recycled” by the IRS. Taylor also claimed that Lerner “did not think it was required,” despite clear instructions for employees on the IRS website. But now the story is changing.

[JustRalph]

active key participant in a Tyrannical government

[Clocker]

active key participant in a Tyrannical government

Participant, yes. Key? More like a pathetic pawn, soon to be a sacrificial scapegoat.

And Obama will deny any White House knowledge of her, and claim that all he knows is what he reads in the press. Which he reads in the golf cart en route to the next hole, or on Air Force One en route to the next fund raiser.

[ArlJim78]

she was a key willing participant, not an underling just taking orders. she was the one going to the white house for strategy sessions, she was the one who sent the emails advising everyone to watch what they say in emails, just after the IG investigation began. She should spend time in a federal pen.

[DJofSD]

What is your personal opinion, not legal opinion, regarding Lois Lerner? How would you describe her to your children or grandchildren?

Please keep it civil and without profanity.
She was a member of the Fourth Reich.

[JustRalph]

she was a key willing participant, not an underling just taking orders. she was the one going to the white house for strategy sessions, she was the one who sent the emails advising everyone to watch what they say in emails, just after the IG investigation began. She should spend time in a federal pen.

Exactly right. Her position was one of directing the attack. She was tantamount to being a general in a battle

[rastajenk]

A general who takes orders from the commander-in-chief.

[Tom]

A general who takes orders from the commander-in-chief.

Both are traitors.

[incoming]

psychopathic, a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

[johnhannibalsmith]

sultry

[JustRalph]

This Congress doesn't have the balls...........

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/10/gop-congressman-we-just-filed-a-resolution-directing-the-sergeant-at-arms-to-arrest-lois-lerner-for-contempt/

"Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) announced on Thursday that has filed a resolution directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “arrest Lois Lerner for contempt” over the IRS targeting scandal."

never get passed ........grandstanding again

[TJDave]

sultry

:lol: :lol:

Have you been scheduled for an audit?

[NJ Stinks]

A woman who knew damn well that most of these entities did not not qualify for non-profit status. The fact that she was not PC in her zest to do the right thing for the country would normally be admired by most here.

But righties ditched normal about 5 or 6 years ago. :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

A woman who knew damn well that most of these entities did not not qualify for non-profit status. The fact that she was not PC in her zest to do the right thing for the country would normally be admired by most here.

But righties ditched normal about 5 or 6 years ago. :rolleyes:

Yeah, right. But the 98% of left wing groups who applied during the same time period and were approved........were so obviously deserving they granted it almost immediately.

Yeah, that passes the smell test

[NJ Stinks]

Yeah, right. But the 98% of left wing groups who applied during the same time period and were approved........were so obviously deserving they granted it almost immediately.

Yeah, that passes the smell test

You have a link verifying the above statement?

[incoming]

You have a link verifying the above statement?


Would you describe Planned Parenthood or NAACP as being sultry!!

[JustRalph]

You have a link verifying the above statement?

Here's one article, just do a google search it's out here.

USA Today provided the coverage in this article

Link (http://touch.humanevents.com/humanevents/#!/entry/leftwing-groups-sailed-past-the-politicized-irs,51939576da27f5d9d0c5b02c/1)

I know you will bitch about Human Events. But the data came from USA Today

Here's another from HotAir
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2013/08/01/study-100-percent-of-liberal-groups-targeted-by-the-irs-were-approved-just-46-percent-of-conservative-orgs/

".A House Ways and Means Committee staff analysis of the applications of 111 conservative and progressive groups applying for tax exempt status found conservative applicants faced, “more questions, more denials, more delays,” says committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich. That is, when the IRS sent groups letters asking for further information, conservative groups were asked more questions — on average, three times more. All of the groups with “progressive” in their name were ultimately approved, while only 46 percent of conservative groups won approval. Others are still waiting for an answer or gave up."

[dartman51]

A woman who knew damn well that most of these entities did not not qualify for non-profit status. The fact that she was not PC in her zest to do the right thing for the country would normally be admired by most here.

But righties ditched normal about 5 or 6 years ago. :rolleyes:


That's bull shit, and even you know that. If she did nothing wrong, why did she plead the 5th, and why did her computer, and 6 others, that she communicated with, mysteriously crash? :eek: Not only did they crash, but were "recycled", so nothing could be retrieved. Why were these things NOT reported, as required by law? I know you used to work for the IRS, and it sounds like your BLIND LOYALTY, runs as deep as hers. :faint:

[dartman51]

A woman who knew damn well that most of these entities did not not qualify for non-profit status. The fact that she was not PC in her zest to do the right thing for the country would normally be admired by most here.

But righties ditched normal about 5 or 6 years ago. :rolleyes:

You have a link verifying the above statement?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
A woman who knew damn well that most of these entities did not not qualify for non-profit status. The fact that she was not PC in her zest to do the right thing for the country would normally be admired by most here.

But righties ditched normal about 5 or 6 years ago.

Dumbest thing you ever posted.
NO WAY she knew that, and NO WAY she had any right to anything but follow the protocal - she DID NOT.

How about that congressman - forget his name - that SHE started an investigation of him BEFORE he even got the invitation that she objected to?

YOU need to start listening to REAL news.

Are YOU prepared to live under a REPUBLICAN or TEA PARTY government that "damn well knows" things about YOU and acts accordingly?

People like you and that insanely stupid thought process are what is killing this country. Hitler Damn well knew the Juden were the cause of all the problems and took action - just like YOU are condoning here.

Wake up man, think for a change! Do you think for a minute anyone one the right side ( I like the sound of that) would not be hollering if it were a republican administration doing this?

[FantasticDan]

Do you think for a minute anyone one the right side ( I like the sound of that) would not be hollering if it were a republican administration doing this?Wait a sec, wasn't it a republican administration that appointed this woman? And by woman, I mean traitorous bitch who should be shot. Just trying to speak Tom's language for the sake of clarity.. :blush:

[Tom]

Was there a point there, Dan?

If she was appointed by a republican, then that means I DON'T CARE about politics here - just actions. You don't have to blindly follow by party lines - you ARE allowed to think.

Read slowly......this is not about politics.
This is about right and wrong and the LAWS.

You do know that we have laws, right?

[Clocker]

How about that congressman - forget his name - that SHE started an investigation of him BEFORE he even got the invitation that she objected to?


Senator Chuck Grassley, one of the highest ranking Republicans in the Senate.

[Clocker]

Lerner's record appears to be non-political. Her husband is a big attorney, and his firm has sponsored events and done work for the Obama campaign.

There is no doubt that Lerner violated IRS rules and regulations and perjured herself before Congress. And the thing with Sen. Grassley was pure politics.

The only logical explanations are that she was acting in a highly partisan manner, or that she was bought off by the administration, or that she was somehow threatened by the administration. Take your pick.

[davew]

Wait a sec, wasn't it a republican administration that appointed this woman? And by woman, I mean traitorous bitch who should be shot. Just trying to speak Tom's language for the sake of clarity.. :blush:

so did she donate over $100K to both parties?

[FantasticDan]

You do know that we have laws, right?Someone who calls a woman who wasn't been charged or convicted of anything a traitor and says she should be killed is lecturing me about laws?

Classic Tom. Chest deep in a pit of his own shit one minute, on his high horse the next.. :blush: :ThmbUp:

[NJ Stinks]

Let's start with this and then I'll try to respond to some of questions posed above. This is what all these non-profit applicants were trying to get around:

Political activity. If any of the activities (whether or not substantial) of your organization consist of participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, your organization will not qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3). Such participation or intervention includes the publishing or distributing of statements.

Whether your organization is participating or intervening, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each case. Certain voter education activities or public forums conducted in a nonpartisan manner may not be prohibited political activity under section 501(c)(3), while other so-called voter education activities may be prohibited.

Link: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p557/ch03.html

___________________________

Now it is possible that I'm the only one in the room who doesn't believe in fairy tales. But if I was still working for the IRS, the applicants Ralph referenced in Post 24 would have had a hard time getting my stamp of approval. Not saying they wouldn't have had a shot but I wasn't born yesterday either. Apparently, Lois wasn't born yesterday either.

As for Lois pleading the 5th, no doubt her lawyer told her to do it. I don't care that she did - Issa and his gang were trying to protect the wrong people IMO. You know - the ones that wanted a non-profit status even if they did not deserve tax-exempt status.

As for computer crashes, I had them at work. So have most here, I imagine. That the IRS recycles computer stuff seems like SOP. Also, I had no idea that we were supposed print a copy of e-mails. Seems like a huge waste of money and time where I worked.

Now do I like Lois? Nope. She seems like she would be impossible to deal with and work for. Plus if she was more competent at her job, we wouldn't be talking about this crap.

As for auditing of Grassley, that was beyond pathetic. She's not the first executive at the IRS that apparently has no common sense. (Or brains in this instance.)

One more thing. People are in la-la land if they don't believe a letter to the IRS from a Congressman doesn't get immdiate attention. Whether the letter is supporting somebody in their Congressional district in a federal tax matter or complaining about how the IRS is administering a tax law or regulation, I guarantee you a Congressional Letter gets immediate attention and follow-up from IRS management. I never did notice that it mattered what party was in the White House for a Congressional Letter to become a top priorty and I was there over 33 years.

And Tom, when you say I'm wrong, I sleep better at night.

[NJ Stinks]

What the hell is that smiley doing at the top of my last post?

Anybody know how I can get rid of it?

[newtothegame]

Let's start with this and then I'll try to respond to some of questions posed above. This is what all these non-profit applicants were trying to get around:

Political activity. If any of the activities (whether or not substantial) of your organization consist of participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, your organization will not qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3). Such participation or intervention includes the publishing or distributing of statements.

Whether your organization is participating or intervening, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each case. Certain voter education activities or public forums conducted in a nonpartisan manner may not be prohibited political activity under section 501(c)(3), while other so-called voter education activities may be prohibited.

Link: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p557/ch03.html

___________________________

Now it is possible that I'm the only one in the room who doesn't believe in fairy tales. But if I was still working for the IRS, the applicants Ralph referenced in Post 24 would have had a hard time getting my stamp of approval. Not saying they wouldn't have had a shot but I wasn't born yesterday either. Apparently, Lois wasn't born yesterday either.

As for Lois pleading the 5th, no doubt her lawyer told her to do it. I don't care that she did - Issa and his gang were trying to protect the wrong people IMO. You know - the ones that wanted a non-profit status even if they did not deserve tax-exempt status.

As for computer crashes, I had them at work. So have most here, I imagine. That the IRS recycles computer stuff seems like SOP. Also, I had no idea that we were supposed print a copy of e-mails. Seems like a huge waste of money and time where I worked.

Now do I like Lois? Nope. She seems like she would be impossible to deal with and work for. Plus if she was more competent at her job, we wouldn't be talking about this crap.

As for auditing of Grassley, that was beyond pathetic. She's not the first executive at the IRS that apparently has no common sense. (Or brains in this instance.)

One more thing. People are in la-la land if they don't believe a letter to the IRS from a Congressman doesn't get immdiate attention. Whether the letter is supporting somebody in their Congressional district in a federal tax matter or complaining about how the IRS is administering a tax law or regulation, I guarantee you a Congressional Letter gets immediate attention and follow-up from IRS management. I never did notice that it mattered what party was in the White House for a Congressional Letter to become a top priorty and I was there over 33 years.

And Tom, when you say I'm wrong, I sleep better at night.

The smiley is there because even your own post are so ridiculously funny, the computer knows to put them there ...lol

As to your post, I am sure ALL companies try to get around certain things. This is to say that I am sure there are many political affiliated organizations who attempt. That is not the point. The point is that RIGHT WING ONES WERE TARGETED. That's what you all on the left refuse to acknowledge. So apparently Lois WAS born yesterday in not understanding that BOTH sides should of been evenly dealt with in regards to what was acceptable and what was not.

To her hard drive, yeah I am sure that most people have experienced this....it just so happens it was the hard drives that were involved with THIS IRS problem and Lois' emails. Yeah, how many hard drives are there in the IRS and what is the probabilities of it only happening to those involved???? LMAO....I am sure someone with super analytical skills could arrive at something less then a 1% chance of it happening the way it did! But we, the people are suppose to believe it is "normal"...lol

[mostpost]

What the hell is that smiley doing at the top of my last post?

Anybody know how I can get rid of it?
Do you have a cat?

[mostpost]

Let's start with this and then I'll try to respond to some of questions posed above. This is what all these non-profit applicants were trying to get around:

Political activity. If any of the activities (whether or not substantial) of your organization consist of participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, your organization will not qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3). Such participation or intervention includes the publishing or distributing of statements.

Whether your organization is participating or intervening, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each case. Certain voter education activities or public forums conducted in a nonpartisan manner may not be prohibited political activity under section 501(c)(3), while other so-called voter education activities may be prohibited.

Link: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p557/ch03.html

___________________________

Now it is possible that I'm the only one in the room who doesn't believe in fairy tales. But if I was still working for the IRS, the applicants Ralph referenced in Post 24 would have had a hard time getting my stamp of approval. Not saying they wouldn't have had a shot but I wasn't born yesterday either. Apparently, Lois wasn't born yesterday either.

As for Lois pleading the 5th, no doubt her lawyer told her to do it. I don't care that she did - Issa and his gang were trying to protect the wrong people IMO. You know - the ones that wanted a non-profit status even if they did not deserve tax-exempt status.

As for computer crashes, I had them at work. So have most here, I imagine. That the IRS recycles computer stuff seems like SOP. Also, I had no idea that we were supposed print a copy of e-mails. Seems like a huge waste of money and time where I worked.

Now do I like Lois? Nope. She seems like she would be impossible to deal with and work for. Plus if she was more competent at her job, we wouldn't be talking about this crap.

As for auditing of Grassley, that was beyond pathetic. She's not the first executive at the IRS that apparently has no common sense. (Or brains in this instance.)

One more thing. People are in la-la land if they don't believe a letter to the IRS from a Congressman doesn't get immdiate attention. Whether the letter is supporting somebody in their Congressional district in a federal tax matter or complaining about how the IRS is administering a tax law or regulation, I guarantee you a Congressional Letter gets immediate attention and follow-up from IRS management. I never did notice that it mattered what party was in the White House for a Congressional Letter to become a top priorty and I was there over 33 years.

And Tom, when you say I'm wrong, I sleep better at night.
As I understand it the law as written states that if an organization spends ANY of its time or money in support of a candidate or candidates it is ineligible for tax exempt status. Yet the IRS wrote the regulation in such a way as to make it OK to spend some money for such purposes as long as it did not exceed a certain amount. Had they followed the law as written, we would not be having this problem.

Some organizations have chosen to split in two so that one branch can handle the educational side and be eligible for tax exempt status while the other branch supports candidates or causes and pays taxes. Others choose to obfuscate.

[mostpost]

What is your personal opinion, not legal opinion, regarding Lois Lerner? How would you describe her to your children or grandchildren?

Please keep it civil and without profanity.
I never understood why Superman picked her over Lana Lang. :confused:

[Tom]

Someone who calls a woman who wasn't been charged or convicted of anything a traitor and says she should be killed is lecturing me about laws?

Classic Tom. Chest deep in a pit of his own shit one minute, on his high horse the next.. :blush: :ThmbUp:
1. I voiced an opinion.
2. SHE took actions.
3. YOU dodge the issues with BS replies.

HAND.

[PaceAdvantage]

What the hell is that smiley doing at the top of my last post?

Anybody know how I can get rid of it?You might have clicked on it accidentally...I've done it myself...either way, I removed it...

[NJ Stinks]

You might have clicked on it accidentally...I've done it myself...either way, I removed it...

Thanks.

(That damn cat! :) )