What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Democrats and Republicans in Congress on Thursday expressed alarm that the IRS under President Donald Trump may have targeted two of his political ene (1 Viewer)

Link

Another day, another abuse of power.  Those darn non-white, non-hetero, and now all females who don't have control over their own bodies wanting equal rights though, right? 
Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.

 
Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.


When it's your identity, you're vested.  If you haven't opened any other thread, like J6, there's plenty of defending Trump by blaming everyone that isn't white, male and straight. 

For example 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Link

Another day, another abuse of power.  Those darn non-white, non-hetero, and now all females who don't have control over their own bodies wanting equal rights though, right? 


According to your article there's no proof of wrongdoing.  They're basing this accusation on statistics.  Which is valid, and worthy of investigating, but as of now it's just conjecture. 

 
Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.
After quick reflection, you're correct.  I shouldn't have included that part even though I stand by my point of these people being used as a deflection to rile up supporters and ignore Trump's actions.  I'm going to edit out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And what did the IG say about that as well as the article telling you the House Republican investigation found no connection to Obama.  
But why the whataboutism?
Stop it.  They were caught and had to settle       Quit pushing the same falsehoods over and over.  

 
Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.Trump does something wrong, in your first thought is to make it about identity politics. Solid work.
After quick reflection, you're correct.  I shouldn't have included that part even though I stand by my point of these people being used as a deflection to rile up supporters and ignore Trump's actions.  I'm going to edit out. 


My apologies again and thank you @jm192 for calling me out.  It's not productive and wasn't very Christian of me. I need to be better than that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stop it.  They were caught and had to settle       Quit pushing the same falsehoods over and over.  
Literally nothing I stated was false.

This is right in the article you quoted.

“Republicans claimed the targeting of conservative groups showed political bias in the IRS under former Democratic President Barack Obama. House Republican investigators found no connection to the Obama administration, according to a 2014 report.“

And I asked you what the IG said about it in his investigation.

Dont accuse me of spreading falsehoods when I am posting facts.

 
Literally nothing I stated was false.

This is right in the article you quoted.

“Republicans claimed the targeting of conservative groups showed political bias in the IRS under former Democratic President Barack Obama. House Republican investigators found no connection to the Obama administration, according to a 2014 report.“

And I asked you what the IG said about it in his investigation.

Dont accuse me of spreading falsehoods when I am posting facts.
Full stop.  The IRS Admitted it

”The IRS admitted it was wrong when it based screenings of the groups’ applications on their names or policy positions, subjected the groups to heightened scrutiny and delays and demanded unnecessary information from the groups, the agreement in the Washington case said.”

 
Full stop.  The IRS Admitted it

”The IRS admitted it was wrong when it based screenings of the groups’ applications on their names or policy positions, subjected the groups to heightened scrutiny and delays and demanded unnecessary information from the groups, the agreement in the Washington case said.”
I did not dispute the IRS having fault.

HTH

 
Last edited by a moderator:
According to your article there's no proof of wrongdoing.  They're basing this accusation on statistics.  Which is valid, and worthy of investigating, but as of now it's just conjecture. 
True, but statistically very unlikely.  Given that two of these guys got the treatment is pretty damning.  

This was wrong when Obama did it and it's wrong here.  ####### move.

 
True, but statistically very unlikely.  Given that two of these guys got the treatment is pretty damning.  

This was wrong when Obama did it and it's wrong here.  ####### move.
It seems pretty obvious that Trump did this. I’m not sure that Obama is also guilty- that’s not as obvious IMO. 

 
I honestly don't know what to think. It obviously seems very unusual that they both would be subjected to these random audits. But from what I understand there are a ton of safeguards in place at the IRS to prevent exactly these types of abuses, and the McCabe audit occurred after Trump was already out of office (but while the IRS commissioner he had appointed was still in charge). I certainly find it plausible that Trump might have wanted these audits to happen, but I have yet to hear any evidence that he had the power to make them happen.

This is a classic case where immediately jumping to a conclusion, either positive or negative, says more about you than about the underlying story. This is a strange enough set of facts that it clearly merits an investigation, and beyond that we should all wait and see what that investigation produces

 
It seems pretty obvious that Trump did this. I’m not sure that Obama is also guilty- that’s not as obvious IMO. 
I don't think that's obvious. 

I think the most likely culprit is a MAGA acolyte working within the IRS who took it upon himself, especially given the IRS did similar under the Obama administration.

 
I don't think that's obvious. 

I think the most likely culprit is a MAGA acolyte working within the IRS who took it upon himself, especially given the IRS did similar under the Obama administration.
Probably so…will the house investigate?  IG?

Not sure its needed if its small scale and no indication its anything more than this.  Simple internal IRS look into it is warranted though.

 
I honestly don't know what to think. It obviously seems very unusual that they both would be subjected to these random audits. But from what I understand there are a ton of safeguards in place at the IRS to prevent exactly these types of abuses, and the McCabe audit occurred after Trump was already out of office (but while the IRS commissioner he had appointed was still in charge). I certainly find it plausible that Trump might have wanted these audits to happen, but I have yet to hear any evidence that he had the power to make them happen.

This is a classic case where immediately jumping to a conclusion, either positive or negative, says more about you than about the underlying story. This is a strange enough set of facts that it clearly merits an investigation, and beyond that we should all wait and see what that investigation produces
This is a fantastic post. 

IRS should never be able to be weaponized to go after political opponents. If someone in the agency intentionally targeted these two, they should be removed from their position immediately.

 
IRS should never be able to be weaponized to go after political opponents. If someone in the agency intentionally targeted these two, they should be removed from their position immediately.
Yes, definitely. But from what I understand -- which is limited to what I read in the NYT article that broke this story -- the IRS simply doesn't work that way. Neither the president nor the director can order them to audit an individual, nor can a rando employee slip their folder into the audit pile.

It's certainly possible the safeguards broke down, which is what needs to be investigated. The other thing to keep in mind is that this kind of problem is entirely foreseeable. If you're in charge of audits at the IRS, you're probably spending a fair amount of time thinking about how to reassure people that they aren't politically motivated, since you know that any hint of a scandal would be disastrous for the agency. Which would presumably mean not just safeguards, but also paper trails so you can document exactly how each audit was selected.

 
This is a fantastic post. 

IRS should never be able to be weaponized to go after political opponents. If someone in the agency intentionally targeted these two, they should be removed from their position immediately.
The government in general shouldn't be used to go after political opponents or in the case of Florida against corporations whose societal views don't jive with theirs. 

Too bad nobody thought to put something in the constitution to thwart efforts like these. 

 
I don't really care what comes of this, I'm not sure the president using the IRS to shine a light on people is the worst crime I can imagine. 

But some people were able to Whatabout Obama in this thread, so that's always worthwhile. 

Annnd ohhhhhh by the way, the miserable tax cheat and racist apartment renter's plan backfired, as the IRS wound up cutting a check for overpayment. 👍

 
Last edited by a moderator:
True, but statistically very unlikely.  Given that two of these guys got the treatment is pretty damning.  

This was wrong when Obama did it and it's wrong here.  ####### move.


Sure, which is why I specifically said it was worth investigating.  But, from the article posted people in the IRS are adamant that it couldn't have happened as a targeted action.  I can't imagine there are a lot of people at the IRS who are fans of Trump.  They have no reason to lie.  So, investigate, but let's not go slinging arrows until we have some actual evidence of wrongdoing beyond conjecture based on stats.

 
Sure, which is why I specifically said it was worth investigating.  But, from the article posted people in the IRS are adamant that it couldn't have happened as a targeted action.  I can't imagine there are a lot of people at the IRS who are fans of Trump.  They have no reason to lie.  So, investigate, but let's not go slinging arrows until we have some actual evidence of wrongdoing beyond conjecture based on stats.
I balance that very valid set of statements with knowledge that the odds of this kind of audit are 1/30,000. That it would happen to Comey and McCabe is eyebrow raising.

 
Whoa. That's for real?
Definitely remember reading that, but can't remember where. Maybe in the original NYT piece?

Also, money aside, it sounds like going through one of those audits just sucks. It's tedious, stressful and eats up a lot of time. If someone offered you $350 to go through it, you'd probably turn them down

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top