Democrats Pull Political Stunt to Cover IRS Scandal

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
I know exactly what circumstantial evidence is, and so do Americans that is why almost all
of them want a special prosecutor appointed. All you have to do is read something
other than Politico the huffington post or MSNBC crap or you would know this.
maybe start with Wikipedia...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/30/poll-americans-want-special-prosecutor-for-irs-scandal/
Also, what the hell is politico? And who gets their news from MSNBC? That place really isn't much better than Fox; just in a different direction.
 

greentrip

New Member
toolwoman was my moniker for you when your barely literate ass was posting your nonsense around here under the hilarious handle of "thecoolman", remember?

:lol:

What kind of drugs are you on...special K or acid
There is something seriously wrong with you!
I have only been on this forum a couple of weeks
in which time I have noticed you're continuously on line and continuously calling people names. In fact you have probably called over a 100 people here a bigot or a racist in the 2 weeks I have been here.
In all seriousness are you suffering from an illness
that you should be taking medication for?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
What kind of drugs are you on...special K or acid
There is something seriously wrong with you!
if only, my angry little amiga.

people like you are too stupid to even post competently on the internet, much less assume a new writing style.

the unattributed copy and pastes were a dead giveaway too.

welcome back for however long this account lasts you.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
LMAO
YES!!!
Buck needs a special test.
His elevator no longer reaches the top floors.
that attempt at a burn was so lame that even my dead grandfather is shaking his head.

i advise you to consult red1966 for advice on burns, he is beyond expert on the subject.
 

GOD HERE

Well-Known Member
that attempt at a burn was so lame that even my dead grandfather is shaking his head.

i advise you to consult red1966 for advice on burns, he is beyond expert on the subject.

  • You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to UncleBuck again.




 

Nutes and Nugs

Well-Known Member
that sig of yours, your neverending obsession with expressing your aversion to anal play, and constant imagining of gay sex involving me paints a very clear picture about you.
My sig is your bullshit.

It's funny as fuck and I love it.

Keep posting.
55,000 is coming soon.
You should write jokes for Jimmy Fallon, he needs all the help he can get.
 

greentrip

New Member
Still waiting for your stunning mountain of evidence that could only be misconduct, Green.
Keep looking but you might have to take off the blindfold 1st.
I don't need to show it to you. The circumstantial evidence is every wear even Wikipedia has it.
I suspect you choose to ignore it. It points right to Obama!
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
Keep looking but you might have to take off the blindfold 1st.
I don't need to show it to you. The circumstantial evidence is every wear even Wikipedia has it.
I suspect you choose to ignore it. It points right to Obama!
I read the opening statement on the wiki and saw this:
"Further investigation revealed that certain terms and themes in the applications of liberal-leaning groups and the Occupy movement had also triggered additional scrutiny, though possibly at a lower rate. The only known denial of tax-exempt status occurred to a progressive group."

So we're back to square one, your circumstantial evidence indicates there may be a scandal (That maybe seems generous.). Much like finding a finger print at a murder scene; you need something more before you have anything to stand on.
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
Keep looking but you might have to take off the blindfold 1st.
I don't need to show it to you. The circumstantial evidence is every wear even Wikipedia has it.
I suspect you choose to ignore it. It points right to Obama!
Oh wait, there's more.
"Over the two years between April 2010 and April 2012, the IRS essentially placed on hold the processing of applications for 501(c)(4) tax-exemption status received from organizations with "Tea Party," "patriots," or "9/12" in their names. While apparently none of these organizations' applications were denied during this period, only 4 were approved. During the same general period, the agency approved applications from several dozen presumably liberal-leaning organizations whose names included terms such as "progressive," "progress," "liberal," or "equality." (However, the IRS also targeted several progressive- or Democratic-leaning organizations for increased scrutiny, leading to at least one such organization, called Emerge America, being denied tax-exempt status."

Huh, so the only one denied tax-exempt status was, in fact, a group more likely to support the people you seem to think were targeting folks.

Damn, that's interesting.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
501c4 groups technically have to be "exclusively" for social welfare. but decades ago, it got changed to "primarily" for social welfare.

so it's a good bet that the tea party just suddenly became interested in social welfare rather than individualist objectives and decided to pitch in a hand.

this makes much sense and explains exactly why darrell issa kept withholding the information that elijah cummings eventually had to reveal.

logic, motherfuckers. this can be the only explanation for why someone would invoke their constitutional rights amidst a modern day mccarthy witch hunt.
 

Nutes and Nugs

Well-Known Member
501c4 groups technically have to be "exclusively" for social welfare. but decades ago, it got changed to "primarily" for social welfare.

so it's a good bet that the tea party just suddenly became interested in social welfare rather than individualist objectives and decided to pitch in a hand.

this makes much sense and explains exactly why darrell issa kept withholding the information that elijah cummings eventually had to reveal.

logic, motherfuckers. this can be the only explanation for why someone would invoke their constitutional rights amidst a modern day mccarthy witch hunt.
rimshot!!!
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
501c4 groups technically have to be "exclusively" for social welfare. but decades ago, it got changed to "primarily" for social welfare.

so it's a good bet that the tea party just suddenly became interested in social welfare rather than individualist objectives and decided to pitch in a hand.

this makes much sense and explains exactly why darrell issa kept withholding the information that elijah cummings eventually had to reveal.

logic, motherfuckers. this can be the only explanation for why someone would invoke their constitutional rights amidst a modern day mccarthy witch hunt.
It seems like many folks are ignoring the mitigating factor where these groups are getting approval withheld pending them actually showing how much they are contributing to social welfare. They need to implement some actual damn guidelines instead of a fuzzy and subjective term like "primarily". If someone got off their ass and did their job (I'm looking at you IRS and/or congress.) by establishing more concrete guidelines, then this whole situation would have been cleared up quickly. Or it, more likely, would have never occurred.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
It seems like many folks are ignoring the mitigating factor where these groups are getting approval withheld pending them actually showing how much they are contributing to social welfare.
how dare you ask them questions about their social welfare objectives before giving them tax exempt status! that is scandalous!

you should know by now that the tea party is all about social welfare. the tea party loves socialism, and welfarism. that's what the tea party is known for, socialism and wlefare. they just love that shit.

who you think you are, bright boy? that one in ten thousand?
 
Top