Obama on IRS Scandal: I’ve Got No Patience With It

image

At a press conference Zero stated, “If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the practices being reported on then…that’s outrageous,” President Obama said. I’ve got no patience with it, I’ve got no tolerance on it.”

Obama was asked about when he first found out about the IRS targeting of conservative groups. He responded by saying he found out through media reports.

I first learned about it through the same news reports other people learned from,” Obama said.

Zero didn’t specify if that was the most recent round of news reports, or the news reports just prior to the election, or the news reports covering the head of the IRS giving congressional testimony over a year ago

Zero has no patience with it except for the over 2 year patience with it he’s already demonstrated. 

If it is true that Zero just recently learned of this, then that muddle-head has to be the most uninformed and uninvolved president in the history of this nation.  His head of the IRS is dragged to capitol hill and lied to congress and Zero didn’t know this occurred or why? 

This wouldn’t be believable if Zero hadn’t already demonstrated his incompetence and lack of intellectual ability.  But, he has already so it is believable that he’s massively ignorant of the events surrounding his own administration.  What a failure. 

h/t Townhall

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Obama on IRS Scandal: I’ve Got No Patience With It

  1. DirkH says:

    They will fire a nobody who will subsequently be hired by a liberal foundation as reward.

  2. philjourdan says:

    Article 2, Section 1 – he is very afraid.

  3. ThePhDScientist says:

    I wonder if Bush new about the IRS targeting the NAACP when they disagreed with him? This is really nothing new.

    What should be happening is that ALL THE 501c4 POLITICAL GROUPS should be paying taxes! Because most of us, unlike you folks, don’t believe the country can run with no tax revenue…

    • Bruce says:

      The interesting thing is the IRS didn’t find anything. If they had we would have heard about it during the election campaign.

      Why did they find nothing? Could it be they were all law abiding? Shock headline in the NYT: GOP non profits all honest!!!

      Now, the IRS must audit all the left super PACs and non profits. Or they get to do time for racketeering or wire fraud. If they do audit the left, with the SEC and cops looking over their shoulders very carefully, which is what will happen, do you think the IRS will find all the Dem groups to be so squeaky clean? It would be a very interesting exercise.

      • philjourdan says:

        media Matters, Obama’s henchmen, will go the way of Acorn. They have already been shown to be involved in illegal activities. Should the IRS ever give them a close Audit, they will go down.

    • philjourdan says:

      Hmmm, seems I smell a ‘everyone is doing it” excuse coming from the Obama administration. They already tried the “it’s Bush’s fault”, and that was a dud. So now the everyone is doing it (with no proof of Bush doing it) so they can get out of Article 2, section 1.

    • suyts says:

      Ph, I don’t follow your logic there. Because people get together and form an advocacy club, that club should pay taxes? Don’t the all the members presumably pay taxes already? If you and I get together to advocate more stringent educational standards or decide to study and teach about the constitution, we should pay taxes for that? On top of the taxes we already pay?

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        A 501c4 is tax exempt exclusively because it IS DOING SOCIAL WELFARE. The law used to read with NO political activity and then was changed to “limited” political activity. Now tell me is American’s for Prosperity really a social welfare group that should receive millions of dollars tax free? LOL Tell me what their primary social welfare mission is?

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          change that…law was never changed IRS just decided to interpret the law “as primarily” social welfare instead of “exclusively”…

        • kim2ooo says:

          Try to follow along.

          This IRS scandal had nothing to do with criteria … they ALL met the existing criteria and were awarded status.

          This is an ABUSE OF POWERS scandal.

          Try your pea shuffle someplace else.

        • philjourdan says:

          Tell us all where the law says the IRS can discriminate based upon the name of the organization. We would love to see that statute.

      • suyts says:

        The donations these groups receive, both left and right, has already been taxed. Where do you think their money comes from? As far as AFP and the social good that they do, there’s nothing more important than economic freedom. Their advocacy about spending accountability can also be seen as a public good.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Well if you want to change the law then go ahead and petition. But many of us don’t believe or enjoy the big money politics that filters into US elections. I can assure you many of those big money donations are taxed at a lower rate than my salary (if at all).. But the way the law is written…An organization is tax exempt if it is “operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting the common good and general welfare of the people in the community.”

        • philjourdan says:

          Yes, we are well aware of your desire to limit free speech. However it is the law of the land, and the constitution (the document you have never heard of) prohibits the GOVERNMENT from restricting it. Period. The government has no choice in the matter. The IRS violated the law and the Constitution (again, that document you have no clue on).

          Here’s a suggestion for you. Since you appear to be all mouth and no action. STOP GIVING TO ANY ORGANIZATION. That includes criminal organizations like Media Matters, ProPublica, the DNC – every one that was a fence for stolen documents.

          That will get money out of it. But we know what will happen.

          You will jump up and down with more infantile ad hominems, attacking the person, and ignoring the message except for some collateral drool that manages to drip unto it.

          Right popeye?

        • suyts says:

          It’s my understanding that these groups meet that definition. AFP certainly does.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          HAHA NOT AT ALL. If the law, as written, was actually enforced many groups right and left would lose their 501c4 status. I’m certain that after the political element of this fades away you’ll see some members of congress addressing the issue of inappropriate 501c4 status for very political organizations. Carl Levin has been questioning this for years…

        • philjourdan says:

          Apparently the law, as written, is being enforced (the executive branch has no discretion in the matter – DOMA popeye?) However, the fact that only conservative groups were singled out is a direct violation of both the law and the Constitution.

          A Tax exempt status can be revoked. But cannot be denied since no evidence exists the law is violated PRIOR to the groups formation. We do not have a “Pre-Crime” division popeye.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          AFP spent 60 million on TV ads for politics. How is that social welfare?

        • philjourdan says:

          Media matters spent over $100m attacking Fox – same question.

          You are arguing definitions (try a court of law). Everyone else is arguing law. You lose again popeye.

        • ThePhDScientist says:
        • philjourdan says:

          Wonder where they got the source for that? hey! The IRS – Illegally! As an accessory to a crime, they are also criminals.

          And you want to use them as a source? Try al Capone – at least he was an honest crook.

        • suyts says:

          Well, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion on that matter,and it can be argue. Yes, Levin has been trying for some time now. But, again, I don’t know how many times we really need to tax the same money, over and over again.
          But, that’s not the issue before us. The issue is the inequity of the application of law.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Ahh so it is hard to explain 60 million in TV ads as social welfare….Clearly, the law, as written is not being followed and groups on the left and right are inappropriately given tax-free status.

        • philjourdan says:

          Again, non sequitur. The debate is now about the rules of the law. The debate is the inequal application of the law.

          Try to keep up popeye.

        • suyts says:

          No, it’s not hard to explain, I just didn’t see the necessity. If it’s an ad advocating the common good, if it informs, then that assists our social welfare.

          But, again, that isn’t the issue here.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Haha wow you certainly play fast and loose with definitions when it’s convenient. Indeed it is certainly one part of the issue and appears in the inspector generals report…

        • philjourdan says:

          Oh, the IG who DID NOT interview Hillary? yea like that was not a white wash.

          We are going to investigate everyone concerning the crime, except the perp – said the FBI. I can see how that works.

        • suyts says:

          That’s not the issue I’m addressing. This isn’t about how a tax exempt organization is defined. It’s about abuse of power, and not equally applying the law. It’s about a government gone wild and attacking its citizens. It’s about said abuse being allowed to continue for far too long and no one in the administration did anything to stop it and are now pretending they didn’t know anything about it. And, we know it’s a lie.

    • DirkH says:

      ThePhDScientist says:
      May 13, 2013 at 9:06 pm
      “I wonder if Bush new about the IRS targeting the NAACP when they disagreed with him? This is really nothing new. ”

      Look, a squirrel!

  4. kim2ooo says:

    Mr Obama always seems surprised.

    He doesn’t seem to understand [ OR won’t admit ] it’s HIS incubator that allows these surprises

  5. kim2ooo says:

    Ya’ll are aware that this is the same IRS that will oversee Obamacare, aren’t you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s