Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Yeah, if anything the controversy on the IRS side should be "they went too far in their investigations" not "they investigated companies with political sounding names." Especially because these companies were applying for a non-tax status that specifically precludes them from being political.
Or the controversy could be that they let these companies succeed when it seems, from an observer's standpoint, that the companies are extremely/primarily political.
Ether way, the current focus is off target.
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!Poll: 76 percent want special prosecutor to investigate IRS scandal
More Media groups decline Holder invite to discuss DOJ subpoena policy
TSA eliminates graphic X-ray shots
Ann Romney: Public feels ‘breach of trust’ amid White House controversies
Why would they not go to the "off the record" interviews? Sure, they would not be able to use information obtained there, but it could point to other sources that are willing to talk "on the record". Or to other bits of information in the Public Domain that have not been brought up yet.
Sure, an "on the record" interview would be more newsworthy, but I don't see why an "off the record" interview is a bad thing.
(And its probably possible that he can discuss the situation in more detail and convince the reporters that those records were taken for legitimate reasons if it is off the record. Especially if there is an ongoing investigation that the DOJ does not want any confirmation of at this time.)
edited 30th May '13 10:57:01 AM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!@ Xopher: Thing is, can an entirely reliable poll ever be made?
Some people aren't sure, or change their mind afterwards, or lie to the pollster, or cannot or do not want to take part in the Poll. And after all, are you likely to interview all the members of a population at the same time, before the results become irreverent? Polls usually come with a margin of error for a reason.
edited 30th May '13 11:10:43 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On...Anyone up for quoting Ezekiel 25:17 back at him?
Or pointing out the fact that Jesus was a socialist?
edited 30th May '13 11:12:19 AM by DrTentacles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhJ7NmU6lJI
I can't tell if this is satire for or against Obama? I can't tell
Ricin letters target Bloomberg, Obama over gun control debate
Fox News won't attend off-the-record meeting on leaks with Holder
Karl Rove: Senator Dick Durbin tried to ‘silence’ us
edited 30th May '13 12:48:21 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016This is a good rebuttal to Rep. Fincher's comment: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2013/05/30/dives-will-always-be-with-us-and-so-will-selfish-rich-jackwagons-who-misquote-the-bible/
Wow. Like, he's not just cherrypicking the Bible. He's not even just cherrypicking the Bible to say the exact opposite of what it was saying in the first place. He's cherrypicking the Bible to say the exact opposite of what it said in order to support an idea that was so abhorrent that Jesus specifically told people to go to hell over it.

In theory, the IRS demanded records that they did not strictly require to do their job of reviewing the groups for compliance with the tax code. In practice, I haven't seen anything to suggest any actual wrongdoing.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"