Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 180

Thread: IRS Apologizes for Targeting Conservative Groups

  1. #61
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,408

    Ignore User
    Wow, Xyxox has never heard of criminal civil rights violations apparently? WTF does he think the USDOJ Civil Rights division does?
    I like hats.

 

  • #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
    So there's no repercussions to violating the supreme law of the land? Huh, I guess there's no point in following it, if there are no punishments for it.
    But the wording of the First Amendment is "Congress shall make no law etc etc..." The enforcement is the Supreme Court. It's not about individual actions.

    Of course you can go to jail for violating the Constitution. They, as government employees, took oaths to support and defend. Violations of that can land you in jail.
    I guess that makes sense.
    Signatures are for losers.

  • #63
    diaglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Stoned Mtn, GA
    Oratio
    36,522

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Mistwell View Post
    Wow, Xyxox has never heard of criminal civil rights violations apparently? WTF does he think the USDOJ Civil Rights division does?
    waste taxpayer money. XxX joined the teaparty.
    FWIW, I'm on the design team and I pretty much find WoW as fun and interesting as banging my head against a brick wall.-- Mike Mearls

    I mean, I never GET any but that would be preferable. --Rel

  • #64
    jowly Tabloid Believer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Province
    Yeah, right. You can't stalk me, yo!
    Oratio
    8,098

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    Someone must go to jail? Please, cite the law that was broken.
    /facepalm/
    Last edited by Tabloid Believer; May 20th, 2013 at 05:24 PM.
    "You think Osama is regretting giving his personal information on the Playstation Network?" - Remathilis

  • #65
    jowly Tabloid Believer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Province
    Yeah, right. You can't stalk me, yo!
    Oratio
    8,098

    Ignore User
    Xyxox.

    If you don't see how this is big deal, I don't even know what to say. Oh wait. I do. John Stewart nailed it.



    With these two latest events, the Democrats (including the President) has taken all of their political capital...taken a dump on it, jerked off in its face, and then lit it on fire.

    And yes - someone needs to go to jail.
    "You think Osama is regretting giving his personal information on the Playstation Network?" - Remathilis

  • #66
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Tabloid Believer View Post
    /facepalm/
    To date, nobody has given me a law that was broken where a jail sentence is the penalty.

    Not a single law.

    IRS regulations were violated, and the penalty for that is being fired from your job.

    But nobody has cited a single law that was violated.

    Do I think there should be a law where this kind of action should be punishable by a jail sentence? Hell yes!

    But currently, what they did violated no law. Even Mistbagger's bogus citation of civil rights violation does not apply in this case.

    If this sort of thing had been directed out of the White House, then the law would have been violated. That was put in place after Nixon pulled this shit. But that is not the case here, so nobody will go to jail, although I expect the firings have only just begun.
    Last edited by Xyxox; May 20th, 2013 at 05:56 PM.

  • #67
    freaking RIPPED Rodrigo Istalindir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Province
    The Grand Duchy of Rodrigonia
    Oratio
    10,591

    Ignore User
    It's pretty clearly a violation of the Hatch Act, and could fall under certain provisions of that (ie 18 USC CHAPTER 29 subs 594, 595, and 601) that provide for criminal prosecution. There's other sections of Hatch where Person A could be subject to criminal penalties if they used their office to direct others to engage in the activity.

  • #68
    Religipster Enkhidu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Dayton
    Oratio
    7,101

    Ignore User
    Here's another tidbit. I tracked it down after hearing some conspiracy theorist punditry.

    Looks like - in addition to some general harassment - that some of the applicants being harassed also had their info fed to ProPublica. Reading between the lines, it's looking like the IRS is being used as a proxy in a partisan fight between Democrats and Republicans, with one side using it for cover and the other using it as a club.

  • #69
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodrigo Istalindir View Post
    It's pretty clearly a violation of the Hatch Act, and could fall under certain provisions of that (ie 18 USC CHAPTER 29 subs 594, 595, and 601) that provide for criminal prosecution. There's other sections of Hatch where Person A could be subject to criminal penalties if they used their office to direct others to engage in the activity.
    That would be about the only possibility, but it's going to be damned difficult to prosecute under the Hatch Act because you will have to prove intent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Enkhidu View Post
    Here's another tidbit. I tracked it down after hearing some conspiracy theorist punditry.

    Looks like - in addition to some general harassment - that some of the applicants being harassed also had their info fed to ProPublica. Reading between the lines, it's looking like the IRS is being used as a proxy in a partisan fight between Democrats and Republicans, with one side using it for cover and the other using it as a club.
    That's some pretty heavy reading between the lines. The leaking of information, though, could be prosecutable, if you could prove who did the leaking. Maybe the FBI should go after ProPublica's phone records.

  • #70
    Religipster Enkhidu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Dayton
    Oratio
    7,101

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyxox View Post
    ...That's some pretty heavy reading between the lines.
    Not all that heavy. You can pretty easily see (just from basic filings!) that some GOP donor groups are abusing the non-profit system. You can also see liberal groups (like ProPublica) actively requesting info on those groups, so that they can openly harass the donors (something that happened during the election).

    Quote Originally Posted by Xxx
    The leaking of information, though, could be prosecutable, if you could prove who did the leaking. Maybe the FBI should go after ProPublica's phone records.
    Supposedly, the IRS has already disciplined (and in some cases, let go) the offending agents. I'll be interested in seeing whether or not the DOJ or the FBI wants to dig into those agents.

  • #71
    diaglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Stoned Mtn, GA
    Oratio
    36,522

    Ignore User
    Quote Originally Posted by Enkhidu View Post
    Supposedly, the IRS has already disciplined (and in some cases, let go) the offending agents. I'll be interested in seeing whether or not the DOJ or the FBI wants to dig into those agents.

    i am more familiar with purchases and it has to do with fraud and the fines are upto $10K plus upto 3 years imprisonment plus termination and loss of benefits.

    the and/or is the discretion of the investigating parties.
    FWIW, I'm on the design team and I pretty much find WoW as fun and interesting as banging my head against a brick wall.-- Mike Mearls

    I mean, I never GET any but that would be preferable. --Rel

  • #72
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,408

    Ignore User

    Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
    Conspiracy Against Rights

    This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).

    Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both

    Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
    Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
    [
    This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

    Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both...
    Last edited by Mistwell; May 20th, 2013 at 07:40 PM.
    I like hats.

  • #73
    Pony Up! Ovinomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Province
    The Paddock
    Oratio
    28,158

    Ignore User
    /Xyxox



    EDIT: man, that smilie's broken, too?

  • #74
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User

  • #75
    toxic Xyxox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Province
    Aurora, IL
    Oratio
    8,633

    Ignore User

  • Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •