Obama Admin knew about IRS doings since early June

[Newbomb 194]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=3&

[Bottomfeeder 244]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

[Newbomb 194]

Impeachment is a political animal. It depends on how bad of a stench this puts on the Democratic party as to whether he is impeached. This will be drug on for close to a year so that it will affect the mid term election. If the Dems house of cards starts smelling too bad they will jettison President Obama. Obama's whole agenda will feel the effects of the scandal. Obama care will be effected by it as the IRS is in charge of it. The IRS is the collection agency of the Socialist State and cannot be shown to have problems. It cannot be shown as being a failed program only a program that was manipulated by failed people. No senator or rep can be seen as supporting the IRS in this or the people that manipulated the system or they will be in danger of ruining their political careers. Even Old Charlie Rangel is out in front of this pushing back against the IRS's actions in this affair.

[TexasTiger 14,543]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

[DKW 86 7,950]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

As was Nixon...

[TexasTiger 14,543]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

As was Nixon...

He resigned first. He would have been convicted.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I'm not trying to debate the definition, but a vote to remove from office is part of the impeachemnt process.

On May 16, 1868, the Senate voted 35 to 19 to remove President Andrew Johnson from office—one vote short of the necessary two-thirds. For many of these 54 senators, this was unquestionably the single most difficult vote of their congressional careers.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/The_Senate_Votes_on_a_Presidential_Impeachment.htm

[TexasTiger 14,543]

I'm not trying to debate the definition, but a vote to remove from office is part of the impeachemnt process.

On May 16, 1868, the Senate voted 35 to 19 to remove President Andrew Johnson from office—one vote short of the necessary two-thirds. For many of these 54 senators, this was unquestionably the single most difficult vote of their congressional careers.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/The_Senate_Votes_on_a_Presidential_Impeachment.htm

Similar to the British system, Article One of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. Unlike the British system, impeachment is only the first of two stages, and conviction requires a two-thirds vote. Impeachment does not necessarily result in removal from office; it is only a legal statement of charges, parallel to an indictment in criminal law

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

[alexava 6,976]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

I got into this argument (why im not sure) with an arshole at work once in front of a few people. it got ugly. of course I won. not really it was my boss.

[homersapien 12,345]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

What?? Forgotten about Clinton already? :-\

[cptau 169]

Not sure there will ever be an impeachment conviction. the 2/3rd vote requirement to convict is so hard to meet in the Senate.

During civil war reconstruction Andrew Johnson was unpopular with the public and from a southern state. He was set up by the congress with a law that Johnson vetoed and Congress then overrode. The law concerning removal of cabinet officers without senate approval was later ruled unconstitutional. Johnson failed to comply with the law and the house impeached him by a large majority vote, but the senate needing a 2/3 rd majority failed to convict by one vote.

Of the 19 senators that voted against conviction, 7 were Republicans. There was some evidence that the 7 had been paid off for their votes. All 7 left the Senate after their elected terms expired

impeachment articles......

• Dismissing Edwin Stanton from office after the Senate had voted not to concur with his dismissal and had ordered him reinstated.
  
• Appointing Thomas Secretary of War ad interim despite the lack of vacancy in the office, since the dismissal of Stanton had been invalid.
  
• Appointing Thomas without the required advice and consent of the Senate.
  
• Conspiring, with Thomas and "other persons to the House of Representatives unknown," to unlawfully prevent Stanton from continuing in office.
  
• Conspiring to unlawfully curtail faithful execution of the Tenure of Office Act.
  
• Conspiring to "seize, take, and possess the property of the United States in the Department of War."
  
• Conspiring to "seize, take, and possess the property of the United States in the Department of War" with specific intent to violate the Tenure of Office Act.
  
• Issuing to Thomas the authority of the office of Secretary of War with unlawful intent to "control the disbursements of the moneys appropriated for the military service and for the Department of War."
  
• Issuing to Major General William H. Emory orders with unlawful intent to violate the Tenure of Office Act.
  
• Making three speeches with intent to show disrespect for the Congress among the citizens of the United States.
  

[Bottomfeeder 244]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

What?? Forgotten about Clinton already? :-\

I remeber the proceedings. A removal from office is part of the article though.

[homersapien 12,345]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

What?? Forgotten about Clinton already? :-\

I remeber the proceedings. A removal from office is part of the article though.

That's right. Dig in. Double down.

Argue what "impeachment" means. :-\

What is it with you folks that prevents you from backing off a mistake, no matter how trivial?

[shabby 2,098]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

[autigeremt 7,260]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

I got into this argument (why im not sure) with an arshole at work once in front of a few people. it got ugly. of course I won. not really it was my boss.

Awkward moment I bet.

[shabby 2,098]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

I got into this argument (why im not sure) with an arshole at work once in front of a few people. it got ugly. of course I won. not really it was my boss.

Awkward moment I bet.

LOL- That is one political argument it's worth taking as dive for

[homersapien 12,345]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

LOL!

Calls for impeachment sound almost like a softening of the GOP position.

[homersapien 12,345]

No president has been, or will ever be, impeached since the debacle of the Nixon Era (they may do door dressing through hearings, but he'll stay in orifice). It's an unsaid rule, just watch.

Impeachment is the bringing of charges.. Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted

I got into this argument (why im not sure) with an arshole at work once in front of a few people. it got ugly. of course I won. not really it was my boss.

Awkward moment I bet.

LOL- That is one political argument it's worth taking as dive for

I hated those moments.

[DKW 86 7,950]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

LOL!

Calls for impeachment sound almost like a softening of the GOP position.

You know, Nixon was riding "high in the polls" at this time in his election too.

But winning 49 to 1 in the Presidential Election in 1972 will definitely leave you higher in the polls than PBO is now.

Anyone remember how that worked out for him?

[TexasTiger 14,543]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

LOL! :bow:/>

Calls for impeachment sound almost like a softening of the GOP position. ;D/>

You know, Nixon was riding "high in the polls" at this time in his election too.

But winning 49 to 1 in the Presidential Election in 1972 will definitely leave you higher in the polls than PBO is now.

Anyone remember how that worked out for him?

Have you identified a crime yet?

[DKW 86 7,950]

http://online.wsj.co...3834357540.html

The Internal Revenue Service's watchdog told top Treasury officials around June 2012 he was investigating allegations the tax agency had targeted conservative groups, for the first time indicating that Obama administration officials were aware of the explosive matter in the midst of the president's re-election campaign.

The disclosure to the Treasury general counsel and the deputy secretary was a cursory one, according to J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration. He said he didn't reveal conclusions of the probe, which was in its early stages, and his disclosure came as part of a routine update to Treasury leaders.

At the time, Republican lawmakers were complaining publicly about alleged IRS targeting of tea-party groups.

The revelation nonetheless raised a fresh set of questions about who was aware of the problem within the Obama administration. It was one of several new details that emerged during a contentious four-hour House committee hearing Friday, held one week after an IRS official revealed at a legal conference that the agency had taken "absolutely inappropriate" actions in targeting conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status for often heavy-handed scrutiny.

Among other disclosures: The conference revelation was itself stage-managed. Ousted IRS acting Commissioner Steven Miller testified he planned it with the director of the division in question. Republican lawmakers expressed amazement that IRS officials didn't tell them first.

The hearing left numerous other fundamental questions unanswered, however, including who ordered the targeting and why it continued so long, pointing to a protracted investigation ahead.

Mr. Miller conceded the agency likely disciplined the wrong employee in one effort to address the problem.

Another was reassigned in the agency's Cincinnati office, but he couldn't provide the employee's name.

Reuters

Steven Miller, the outgoing IRS chief, appears before a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the Internal Revenue Service on Friday.

Following the hearing, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R., Mich.), who led the proceedings, expressed frustration and left open the possibility of issuing subpoenas to the IRS. "I think the most interesting revelation was the overall arrogance of the IRS and the lack of information from somebody who was in charge," Mr. Camp said.

The Treasury Department, in a statement, confirmed officials were notified in June 2012 that an audit had begun. It added an underlined sentence, "Treasury strongly supports the independent oversight of its three Inspectors General, and it does not interfere in ongoing IG audits."

Treasury also said Neal Wolin, the deputy secretary, didn't notify anyone outside of Treasury that the audit was under way and that Mr. Wolin and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew "learned about [the inspector general's] findings when they were reported publicly last week." A White House aide said Friday that Treasury officials didn't share the information with White House officials.

In sometimes combative testimony, Mr. Miller also took exception to the idea that the IRS had engaged in targeting conservative groups, pointing out that groups representing other ideologies also were caught up in the extra review.

The inspector general's report said that based on a statistical sample,

"

all

cases with Tea Party, Patriots or 9/12 in their names were forwarded" for extra scrutiny.

Many of the cases were delayed for years.

Lawmakers of both parties questioned his response.

"Throughout this time, the IRS leadership has demonstrated a total disregard for the oversight role of the Congress and this committee," said Rep.

Sander Levin

(D., Mich.), the committee's top Democrat. Mr. Shulman "had an obligation to return to this committee and set this record straight. So did Mr. Miller."

"How was that not misleading this committee?" said Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) to Mr. Miller. "How can we not conclude that you misled this committee?"

"I did not mislead the committee," Mr. Miller responded, adding later, "I answered the question truthfully."

Messrs. Miller and George, the inspector general, said so far they had discovered no evidence that the targeting was politically motivated, and Mr. Miller described it as a bungled way to try and screen applicants.

Later Friday, the woman who posed the question at a conference to IRS official Lois Lerner—the moment last week that first revealed the problems at the IRS—said Ms. Lerner planted the query. Washington lawyer Celia Roady said in a statement that Ms. Lerner provided her the question to ask. She added that Ms. Lerner "did not tell me, and I did not know, how she would answer the question."

The IRS didn't respond to requests for comment from Ms. Lerner, who runs the exempt-organizations unit at the agency.

Mr. Miller said the IRS, meanwhile, had "called to get on the calendar" to also brief the Ways and Means committee—a statement Republicans met with barely disguised disbelief. (Instead of telling the committee, they posed the ridiculous posed question ruse rather than do the right thing and correct the earlier testimony before the committee.)

Mr. Camp and other GOP lawmakers suggested a pattern of efforts to use the IRS to attack conservatives. Those include a White House official's discussion in mid-2010, during a briefing with reporters, of the purported tax-filing status of Koch Industries. Its owners are big donors to conservative causes. The tax-filing status of businesses is often confidential. The White House said in 2010 that the official's statement "was not based on any review of tax filings." It promised not to use the example in the future.

In an interview, Mr. Levin said the IG's report to Treasury officials constituted only "a brief reference," that he doubted was communicated up the chain.

The IRS Internal Review was called for in 2010 and concluded in MAY of 2012 that there was a huge problem. There is a very important and as yet unanswered question of how the White House was using info on the Koch Brothers that probably came from...TAX FORMS.

ALL THE APPLICANTS, ALL OF THEM, WITH TEA PARTY, PATRIOT, ETC IN THEIR NAME WERE SENT FORWARD FOR EXTRA SCRUTINY.

Both parties concluded openly that the IRS was covering this up. Just ask Democrat Sander Levin.

The IRS' statement that they had requested time to come to the committee and explain it was met by total disbelief.

Instead of telling the committee, they chose to use the posed question ruse rather than do the right thing and correct the earlier testimony before the committee.

Take off the rose colored glasses. Read the story. This isnt from Fox. It is from WSJ. The people in the room gave one representative a standing ovation for screaming at Miller the outrage the entire room was feeling listening to the crap testimony.

[autigeremt 7,260]

Good luck, DKW! We are all idiots in the eyes of Texas.

[DKW 86 7,950]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

LOL! :bow:/>

Calls for impeachment sound almost like a softening of the GOP position. ;D/>

You know, Nixon was riding "high in the polls" at this time in his election too.

But winning 49 to 1 in the Presidential Election in 1972 will definitely leave you higher in the polls than PBO is now.

Anyone remember how that worked out for him?

Have you identified a crime yet?

How about lying to Congress?...i submit that is arguably proveable at this point.

The rest of the stuff, the White House sharing the Koch Brothers records in 2010 etc will be the nails that tie all this together with the White House.

The completely unbelievable answers to the committees on Friday are bearing this out. The Outrage coming from the Democrats is heartening.

Sander Levin seems absolutely enraged at the blase' answers and the blase' ways the IRS officials were not in any hurry to the inform the oversight committee of the errors of their previous testimony is just too much.

I really think we are very very early in misuse of the IRS. THAT is criminal.

The AP wiretaps are being seen by the Press as interference in their ability to work with witnesses and informants. That is an illustration for the Press about Benghazi that backs up the foot dragging on security clearances for attorneys and intimidation and demotion of whistleblowers in Benghazi.

That is witness tampering and intimidation. THAT is also criminal.

Nixon would be proud.

[shabby 2,098]

Considering this from you're linked article

"The disclosure last summer came as part of a routine briefing of the investigations that the inspector general would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Treasury officials stressed they did not know the results until March 2013, when the inspector presented a draft."

Don't you think your thread title is poorly phrased at best or deliberately deceptive at worst. You yokels keep talking impeachment. Even your party leaders realize how much damage that does for 'your side'. Some blogger stated the Republican dilemma perfectly. When everything evokes such righteous anger from your base, people stop listening to your complaints. Any ill deeds performed by the IRS will not be linked to the white house for a simple reason: They weren't directed by the white house. Meanwhile, Obama continues to ride high ratings on the Gallup daily tracking poll obviously demonstrating that this 'outrage' is not directed at the president despite the hysteria and conspiracy theorists of the right. The right = always angry about everything. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is not a native citizen. Obama edited Benghazi talking points. People stopped listening at your faux outrage. Your hand has been over played. You've got no one but yourself to blame.

LOL! :bow:/>

Calls for impeachment sound almost like a softening of the GOP position. ;D/>

You know, Nixon was riding "high in the polls" at this time in his election too.

But winning 49 to 1 in the Presidential Election in 1972 will definitely leave you higher in the polls than PBO is now.

Anyone remember how that worked out for him?

Have you identified a crime yet?

How about lying to Congress?...i submit that is arguably proveable at this point.

The rest of the stuff, the White House sharing the Koch Brothers records in 2010 etc will be the nails that tie all this together with the White House.

The completely unbelievable answers to the committees on Friday are bearing this out. The Outrage coming from the Democrats is heartening.

Sander Levin seems absolutely enraged at the blase' answers and the blase' ways the IRS officials were not in any hurry to the inform the oversight committee of the errors of their previous testimony is just too much.

I really think we are very very early in misuse of the IRS. THAT is criminal.

The AP wiretaps are being seen by the Press as interference in their ability to work with witnesses and informants. That is an illustration for the Press about Benghazi that backs up the foot dragging on security clearances for attorneys and intimidation and demotion of whistleblowers in Benghazi.

That is witness tampering and intimidation. THAT is also criminal.

Nixon would be proud.

Where exactly did Obama lie to congress? Further, wire taps? When did that happen? I thought they seized phone records and with a court warrant. How again is that illegal? it's Obama's impeachment that's being called for. Seems like there should be a shread of evidence that he committed an impeachable crime. Hyperbole seems to be the word for the day around here.

[shabby 2,098]

Republicans were notified about the IRS investigation in July of 2012. Seems that 'executive branch cover up claim' is the first to fall under the light of facts:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/republicans-informed-of-irs-investigation-last-year/