Liberal Forum

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by RichClem. View it anyway?Misty>>>>

Ignoring the IRS's repeated violations of conservative Americans' Constitutional rights. That the IRS specifically targeted groups that opposed Obama-care, promoted the Constitution, advocate small government or oppose homosexual marriage. And the fact that Obama is Chief Law Enforcement Officer whose legal obligation is to oversee and prevent abuses like this. This was no accident. Even if it is never connected to the White House, it's Obama's thuggish Chicago style of politics and was what he wanted. Impeach! Impeach! Impeach! Hey asshat, you do know that everything you listed the constitution, Obama-care, gay marriage. They are all political. There is no social welfare in any of those. If that is what they were about than they should have been investigated and they should have been denied. 501 4 is specific and meant for those groups who engage is acts for social welfare. Who might run an occasional ad to further their goals. It was not created to hide black money for political endeavors. Gee ...the dems asked that the IRS investigate a "social welfare" group that was founded by Karl Rove..Oh noes...Karl Rove isn't political (sarcasm) and those ads that his "social welfare" group produced with the same cast and verbiage as the ads his "political" group produced, why that is just a coincidence. Rove is innocent.(blazing sarcasm)

Ignoring the IRS's repeated violations of conservative Americans' Constitutional rights. That the IRS specifically targeted groups that opposed Obama-care, promoted the Constitution, advocate small government or oppose homosexual marriage. And the fact that Obama is Chief Law Enforcement Officer whose legal obligation is to oversee and prevent abuses like this. This was no accident. Even if it is never connected to the White House, it's Obama's thuggish Chicago style of politics and was what he wanted. Impeach! Impeach! Impeach! Hey asshat, you do know that everything you listed the constitution, Obama-care, gay marriage. They are all political. There is no social welfare in any of those. If that is what they were about than they should have been investigated and they should have been denied. 501 4 is specific and meant for those groups who engage is acts for social welfare. Who might run an occasional ad to further their goals. It was not created to hide black money for political endeavors. Gee ...the dems asked that the IRS investigate a "social welfare" group that was founded by Karl Rove..Oh noes...Karl Rove isn't political (sarcasm) and those ads that his "social welfare" group produced with the same cast and verbiage as the ads his "political" group produced, why that is just a coincidence. Rove is innocent.(blazing sarcasm) Hey moonbat, they still qualify as tax free, as do liberal groups, few if any of whom were denied status, audited or harassed. If not, why not? This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act.

Hey asshat, you do know that everything you listed the constitution, Obama-care, gay marriage. They are all political. There is no social welfare in any of those. If that is what they were about than they should have been investigated and they should have been denied. It is not up to the IRS to determine beforehand if group is political or if it is not. They are supposed to assume requests are made in good faith. So de facto, the IRS was specifically picking out conservative groups and delaying, bulling and intimidating them. It was a violation of Americans' civil liberties. This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. Obama wanted to use the IRS and other branches of government, as well as widespread cheating by the Democrat Party to steal the election. IRS Tried To Keep the Tea Party From Winning By Larry Kudlow When you get right down to it, the political targeting and stalling of tax-exempt applications by the IRS was an effort to defund the Tea Party. Rick Santelli, a Tea Party founder and my colleague, made this point first. I've taken it a step further: The IRS took the Tea Party out of play for the 2012 election to avoid a repeat of 2010 and another Tea Party landslide. There are a lot of numbers out there. Some say Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status averaged 27 months for approval, while those from liberal groups averaged nine. In one extreme case, according to the Washington Post, the IRS granted the Barack H. Obama Foundation tax-exempt status in a speedy one-month timeframe.Yet some conservative groups waited up to three years, and some still haven't received approval. There can be only one reason for this. The IRS was trying to put them out of business. Thus far, there's not one wit of contradictory evidence. Think of this: If the IRS wasn't politically targeting conservative groups, why did its leading spokespeople lie before Congress? .....But who was the quarterback in all this? Who managed the targeting operation in the IRS? It could have been Sarah Hall Ingram. She served as commissioner of the IRS' tax-exempt division between 2009 and 2012. And she got a $100,000 bonus for her efforts. And now - incredibly - she's running the IRS' Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) office http://www.realclear...ing_100329.html And now Obama has appointed her to oversee Obama-care. IRS Official in Charge During Tea Party Targeting Now Runs Health Care Office http://abcnews.go.co...th-care-office/ Which resolves the question whether Obama tacitly or explicitly encouraged this gross violation of Americans' rights.

If not, why not? This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. No political action is not the same as community service. No they should not be allowed tax exempt status. And there is not one bit of evidence that anyone outside of the IRS knew about the filter being used to sort through the huge influx of new applications. It is not impeachable unless the President did it, not IRS underlings in Ohio. The folks on the right keep saying that liberal political groups with liberal political names got rubber stamped right through....I challenge you all to name one with a reputable source.

It is not up to the IRS to determine beforehand if group is political or if it is not. They are supposed to assume requests are made in good faith. So de facto, the IRS was specifically picking out conservative groups and delaying, bulling and intimidating them. It was a violation of Americans' civil liberties. This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. Obama wanted to use the IRS and other branches of government, as well as widespread cheating by the Democrat Party to steal the election. Oh so they are supposed to just accept things on good faith? Why do they have auditors? Why do they have investigators? Why even have rules? No they are not supposed to just accept anything on good faith, hence the application, hence the whole process. I know you cannot accept that he won, narrow margin and all, Obama won and so the election was stolen. Sorry you ran an asshole who lost. Try a better candidate next time. Try not excluding Hispanics and women through your rhetoric and legislation, they do vote.

If not, why not? This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. No political action is not the same as community service. No they should not be allowed tax exempt status. Bulls***. Liberal groups operate under the same guidelines, few if any of which were harassed. This has been the law, the standard for decades. Obama's IRS ignored that and attempted to interfere in a presidential election, at the explicit demands of Democrats as Obama looked on and did nothing. And Obama's rhetoric, promotion of one top IRS official, repeated vilification of not only Citizens United but conservative donors gave explicit guidelines to a will IRS. His IRS. And there is not one bit of evidence that anyone outside of the IRS knew about the filter being used to sort through the huge influx of new applications. Bulls***. It has now been revealed that top Obama officials knew, never mind that many, many public complaints had been made going back a couple years. It is Obama's Constitutional obligation either directly or through his officials to pay investigate and rectify it. As a Chicago thug, he knew it was happening and wanted it to. It is not impeachable unless the President did it, not IRS underlings in Ohio. It wasn't IRS underlings. Don't kid yourself. It went right to Washington. The folks on the right keep saying that liberal political groups with liberal political names got rubber stamped right through....I challenge you all to name one with a reputable source. The names of some have been cited. The delay for liberal groups, off the top of my head, was less than half of conservatives, and I haven't seen one single example of intimidation of any liberal groups.

Bulls***. Liberal groups operate under the same guidelines, few if any of which were harassed. This has been the law, the standard for decades. Obama's IRS ignored that and attempted to interfere in a presidential election, at the explicit demands of Democrats as Obama looked on and did nothing. And Obama's rhetoric, promotion of one top IRS official, repeated vilification of not only Citizens United but conservative donors gave explicit guidelines to a will IRS. His IRS. Bulls***. It has now been revealed that top Obama officials knew, never mind that many, many public complaints had been made going back a couple years. It is Obama's Constitutional obligation either directly or through his officials to pay investigate and rectify it. As a Chicago thug, he knew it was happening and wanted it to. It wasn't IRS underlings. Don't kid yourself. It went right to Washington. The names of some have been cited. The delay for liberal groups, off the top of my head, was less than half of conservatives, and I haven't seen one single example of intimidation of any liberal groups. "The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status. One of those groups, Emerge America, saw its tax-exempt status denied, forcing it to disclose its donors and pay some taxes. None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected. Progress Texas, another of the organizations, faced the same lines of questioning as the Tea Party groups from the same IRS office that issued letters to the Republican-friendly applicants. A third group, Clean Elections Texas, which supports public funding of campaigns, also received IRS inquiries." http://www.washingto...liberal-groups/ This is what listing an example and citing a source looks like. Just saying they have been listed somewhere is useless ****.

This is what listing an example and citing a source looks like. Just saying they have been listed somewhere is useless ****. Your own source admitted that "at least three" liberal groups had problems, likely delays. So far, 500 conservative groups have complained, many of which were bullied, intimidated, made illegal demands of. Wake up, geez.

Your own source admitted that "at least three" liberal groups had problems, likely delays. So far, 500 conservative groups have complained, many of which were bullied, intimidated, made illegal demands of. Wake up, geez. Not a single one of those political wolves in social welfare sheeps clothing were denied though, were they? But one of the liberal groups was.

Your own source admitted that "at least three" liberal groups had problems, likely delays. So far, 500 conservative groups have complained, many of which were bullied, intimidated, made illegal demands of. Wake up, geez. Not a single one of those political wolves in social welfare sheeps clothing were denied though, were they? But one of the liberal groups was. Hey, great job at ignoring the mountain of evidence of ethical if not criminal wrongdoing in order to focus on one detail. Typical liberal.

Nairn said that The U.S. prosecutors in Washington should immediately convene a grand jury with two missions: first, coming to the aid of the Guatemalan attorney general, who has just been ordered by the court to investigate all others involved in Ros Montt’s crimes, by releasing all classified U.S. documents about what happened during the slaughter, which U.S. personnel were involved, providing to the Guatemalan attorney general a list of all Guatemalan army officials and security force officials who were on the payroll of the American CIA, and then proceeding to issue indictments against U.S. officials who acted in the role of accessory or accomplice to the crimes for which Ros Montt has already been convicted.The top officials of the Reagan administration who made the policy-President Reagan is deceased, but his top aides, including Elliott Abrams and many others, are still alive; the U.S. CIA personnel on the ground who worked within the G2, the military intelligence unit that coordinated the assassinations and disappearances; the U.S. military attachs who worked with the Guatemalan generals to develop this sweep-and-massacre strategy in the mountains. There would be hundreds of U.S. officials who were complicit in this and should be subpoenaed, called before a grand jury and subjected to indictment. And the U.S. should be ready to extradite them to Guatemala to face punishment.Little Miss Marxist has denied for years that she's a leftist. Except that she walks, talks and lies like a leftist.Indict Reagan officials? I can't think of a single time I've seen a liberal demand that.The Left's Cold War Revenge in GuatemalaThe history behind an absurd court ruling that Gen. Rios Montt is guilty of genocide.By now even casual readers of Latin American news know that a Guatemalan court has ruled Gen. Efran Ros Montt guilty of genocide against the Ixil Indians during the 16 months from March 1982 to August 1983 that he was the country's head of state. More difficult to learn from ubiquitous press reports is how far the narrative used to convict the 86-year-old Mr. Ros Montt departs from reality.The 36-year war between communist guerrillas and the Guatemalan state that ended with peace agreements in 1996 was bloody and torturous. Both sides committed atrocities. Thousands died. Indians and mixed-race Guatemalans living in rural areas experienced the brunt of the violence.Guatemala's former dictator Jose Efrain Rios Montt stands in the courtroom before the judge enters to read the verdict in his genocide trial in Guatemala City, Friday, May 10, 2013. The Guatemalan court convicted Rios Montt on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity, sentencing him to 80 years in prison. The 86-year-old former general is the first former Latin American leader ever found guilty of such a charge. The war between the government and leftist rebels cost more than 200,000 lives and ended in peace accords in 1996. (AP Photo/Moises Castillo)Yet the claim that the Guatemalan state, led by the general, engaged in genocide—that is, an attempt to destroy totally or partially the Ixil people or displace them—is not supported by the facts. On the contrary, a serious reading of the history suggests that the general bested the guerrillas by empowering those Indians who did not want anything to do with the upper-middle-class ideas of revolution that were being foisted on them. The trial of Mr. Ros Montt, 30 years after the fact, is more a score-settling exercise by the international left than a search for truth and justice.....Some army units, often made up of ethnic Indians, did indeed engage in massacres, village burning and the destruction of crops. This happened "without a doubt, in various places, especially in parts of the Quich [region] when the army thought that the local population supported the guerrilla," according to Mr. Sabino. But it was "in no way a policy of the state nor a war strategy," he explains, because it would have been directly contrary to solving the problem as it was diagnosed. ...In the trial, the prosecution presented the testimony of numerous Indians who had been victims of the violence. But their stories could not prove genocide.Neither did the prosecution's "experts," mostly foreigners of the leftist persuasion who were not actually witnesses to any alleged acts of genocide. They were used to advance the prosecution's case that the army strategy "to exterminate" subversives was the same thing as an attempt to "exterminate" the Ixil people.The absurdity of this has not been lost on many Guatemalans, including Gustavo Porras, a former guerrilla intellectual. He signed a letter, with others, calling the charge "a legal fabrication" and asserting that it could threaten the peace.Ixil people and others from the region who still view Mr. Ros Montt as a hero have been holding protests against the verdict. It's not the first time they've shown support for him.When he ran for president in 2003, he lost. But in the three municipalities of the Ixil Triangle, he not only beat 10 other candidates but perhaps more important trounced former guerrilla leader Rodrigo Asturias 13,451 to 1,202. That hasn't been reported in the international press much, if at all, either.http://online.wsj.co...BelowLEFTSecondIn other words, the region in which this supposed genocide occurred voted more than 10:1 for the General little Miss Marxist claims committed genocide.Even a moonbat might be able to figure that out.

Oh so they are supposed to just accept things on good faith? Why do they have auditors? Why do they have investigators? Why even have rules?No they are not supposed to just accept anything on good faith, hence the application, hence the whole process.I can't believe that Clem actually said that the IRS is supposed to assume that requests for tax exempt status are made in good faith. ROFLHe also said that few if any liberal groups were denied tax exempt status, implying that Tea Party groups were denied.Actually not a single Tea Party organization was denied tax exempt status.He's a veritable font of misinformation.

One of the most touching videos I have ever seen.

I can't believe that Clem actually said that the IRS is supposed to assume that requests for tax exempt status are made in good faith. ROFL And cited a credible source to back that claim up. What have you got, other than your troll bulls***? He also said that few if any liberal groups were denied tax exempt status, implying that Tea Party groups were denied. Actually not a single Tea Party organization was denied tax exempt status. I don't recall if I used the word "denied," but denying or delaying them tax exempt status until after the election is a gross abuse of power and an impeachable act. Apparently the public is so outraged over what they know so far, even Democrats are acting as if they care. So what will you do not, give us a vocabulary lesson over the difference between "deny" and "delay?" Troll. He's a veritable font of misinformation. Hilarious coming from someone who's told every lie the Democrat Party has put out for many years now. Say, was there evidence in the boxes and boxes and boxes of EVIDENCE that Schippers, House Impeachment Managers and staff collected for months? That you denied was evidence? Speaking of "misinformation."

Will 'Weather Weapon' Talk Finally Drive GOP Away From Alex Jones?Wednesday night on The Rachel Maddow Show, host Rachel Maddow questioned conspiracy theorist Alex Jones' assertion that a "weather weapon" deployed by the U.S. government caused the massive tornado that devastated Moore, Oklahoma on Monday. She questioned whether this, at last, would be the thing that proves to be so outlandish as to finally dissuade the members of the Republican Party who have been supporting Jones and advancing his crackpot theories on Capitol Hill.In late April, Sens. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Frank Lucas (R-OK) co-sponsored a bill to limit the amount of bullets the federal government can buy. The legislation is based on a debunked fringe theory that the Department of Homeland Security is hoarding ammunition in order to hobble the ability of citizen soldiers on the right to overthrow the government."Yes, this is the same federal government that already stockpiles, say, Abrams tanks," said Maddow, "and armed drones and giant intercontinental missiles that carry nuclear weapons. All that, yes, but it's an excess of bullets that congressional Republicans have decided is the really worrying firepower."Those Republicans got that idea from Infowars, Alex Jones conspiracy website and radio show, the same Alex Jones who believes the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the Boston Marathon bombing were both false flag terrorist operations by the U.S. government."At every tragedy, the Infowars-Alex Jones world thinks they see conspiracy," said Maddow. "Mondays devastating, record-breaking tornado in Moore, Oklahoma killed two dozen people, flattened a community. Devastating, right? Now, I am not kidding, the same conspiracy theory folks are peddling the idea the tornado was a conspiracy."She then played audio of Jones saying, "Tornadoes are way down. Of course, they lie that they're way up to get carbon taxes, but I don't know if this was a weather weapon or not. They can, with the right weather conditions, they can create and steer groups of tornadoes."Jones speculated that if witnesses "50 miles out" from the storm saw "aircraft in and around the clouds spraying and doing things," then clearly, the government was behind the tornado."But who knows if they did?" he conclude. "Thats the thing.""Who knows?" Maddow mocked. "Who knows if the U.S. government uses a secret, made-up 'weather weapon' that only exists in the mind of - yeah, that's the thing, right?"This particular theory is so ridiculous on its face, she said, that Jones should be "disqualified from participating in Republican Party politics." This "crackpot" theory should be enough to get his ideas out of the public square and out of Congressional hearings."He said the tornado was a conspiracy. The tornado. Can we agree it is over now, Republicans, going on his show, really?" she asked. "Can we agree? Please?"Watch the clip at link in title.So when do the hearings on weather weapons start?The hearing on Alex Jones' conspiracy theory about the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) ammunition acquisitions actually inspired new legislation that's now before Congress. On April 26, U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) introduced bills in both chambers of Congress in order to limit federal agencies from stockpiling ammunition.

Merged Flying Monkeys with Little Miss Marxist's Manifesto.

Merged Flying Monkeys with Little Miss Marxist's Manifesto. It's already on Drudge. Earthshaking news.

Were you just sitting there waiting for me Puss?What a pathetic sad life you must have.

Were you just sitting there waiting for me Puss? What a pathetic sad life you must have. I've been all over the board for days, troll, having a lot of fun. Yet you think it's all about you. Get over yourself.