Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Howard Fineman calls out Obama on the IRS scandal

Isn't he the former Washington correspondent for Newsweek and doesn't he appear frequently on msnbc?....."it's hard to imagine that the Obama inner circle was oblivious to the issue of what the IRS was doing in Cincinnati"

That's got to hurt.....

[quote]We still don't know the details of how the special scrutiny of conservative groups began in 2010, who approved it, or who first learned about it higher up at the IRS and the Treasury Department. The White House says that it knew nothing about the matter until the counsel received a heads up about the pending IG report.

[quote]And yet tea party and other conservative groups had been complaining about the IRS scrutiny since 2010, and IRS officials had publicly reassured members of Congress that there was nothing unusual or unwarranted going on.

[quote]With two winning presidential campaigns built on successful grassroots fundraising, with a former White House counsel (in 2010-11) who is one of the Democrats' leading experts on campaign law (Bob Bauer), with former top campaign officials having been ensconced as staffers in the White House (David Axelrod, who left for the reelection campaign in early 2011, and Dan Pfeiffer among others), it's hard to imagine that the Obama inner circle was oblivious to the issue of what the IRS was doing in Cincinnati.

by Anonymousreply 7305/25/2013

It's hard to imagine that Fineman has some secret knowledge of what people inside this administration know and don't know.

Honestly, with all of the crap Obama was dealing with domestically (economy, GOP obstruction, getting the Health Care bill passed) and internationally (Afghanistan, Pakistan,China, the Middle East), why would he and his "inner circle" be focusing on what one IRS office in Cincinnati was doing?

Fineman is reaching here to stoke the fires.

by Anonymousreply 105/24/2013

Keep reaching, hoping, praying, R1.

by Anonymousreply 205/24/2013

Keep talking to yourself in your Tea Party bunker, R2.

by Anonymousreply 305/24/2013

He's disliked Obama since 2008.

by Anonymousreply 405/24/2013

Really? Call me crazy but I would think it very unlikely that the "leader of the 'free world'" is up on how the IRS is determining status of applicants. And obviously if this were such a major issue in Washington, the Republicans would have made damn sure the general public were aware of it long before we were.

by Anonymousreply 505/24/2013

Howard Fineman has about as much integrity as the Mormon Church.

by Anonymousreply 605/24/2013

Official liberals LOOOOOVE to appear "objective" by tearing into their own when it's not warranted. A lot like the anti-Obama scum on DL.

by Anonymousreply 705/24/2013

[quote]Official liberals LOOOOOVE to appear "objective" by tearing into their own when it's not warranted. A lot like the anti-Obama scum on DL.

Oh, shut up and eat your Freedom Fries(TM).

by Anonymousreply 805/24/2013

Fineman is a doddering pisher!

by Anonymousreply 905/24/2013

Sorry, R2 was intended to address OP.

by Anonymousreply 1005/24/2013

Totally agree with r5.

And with r7. Ex: Jon Stewart jumped the shark during that March for Sanity or whatever they called it. After generating so much outside media attention/praise, the show now tries to affect some moderate, not-afraid-to-lambast-liberals-too persona that is embarrassingly transparent.

by Anonymousreply 1105/24/2013

The IRS "scandal" is bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 1205/24/2013

Why doesn't he go back to Kentucky and snuggle up to Mitch McConnell?

by Anonymousreply 1305/24/2013

The worst has been Morning Joe. Joe and Mika have spent the past week peeing their panties over the IRS thing. It's abundantly clear now that Joe has only been pretending to somewhat like Obama, mainly because he's on MSNBC. Now that these "scandals" have broken, he's been positively giddy.

by Anonymousreply 1405/24/2013

R14, thankfully, I've gotten up too late to watch most of Morning Joe, so I'm glad I missed it. But he starts in with that holier-than-thou monologue, usually about Obama or democrats generally, and it is really hard to get him to shut up. Maybe that's why MSNBC sent him to Oklahoma at least for a day or so.

by Anonymousreply 1505/24/2013

Most of what ii have read read say that it was the right thing for the IRS info to be kept from Obama and it's NOT implausible that he really didn't know. The Beltway media just likes to push bullshit without delving deeper. They know nothing.

by Anonymousreply 1605/24/2013

It's getting worse and worse. The IRS singled out people that donated to the Romney campaign for Multiple audits by multiple groups. And found nothing. It was intimidation pure and simple.

by Anonymousreply 1705/24/2013

As was stated, R19; keep hoping.

by Anonymousreply 2005/24/2013

R18/R19 is Stephen Baldwin who was just cast as a "Freeper Troll" in [italic]Datalounge: The Movie[/italic].

by Anonymousreply 2105/24/2013

Obama is a Democrat. What is newsworthy about this?

by Anonymousreply 2205/24/2013

Anyone who thinks the President is kept up to date on the routine work of the IRS field office in Cincinnati is smoking something.

It's not hard to see what happened. The IRS workers charged with finding out whether an applicant for tax-free status is a political organization that is not entitled to tax advantages focused on organizations that put the name of a political party in their names.

No one is stupid enough to use "Democratic Party" or "Republican Party" in the names of such an organization, but if they did it, I imagine they would get special scrutiny too.

Sorry Freepers.

by Anonymousreply 2305/24/2013

The IRS thing is like something that has been donein law-enforcement agencies for hundreds of years. You've got limited resources. If you're looking for people committing crimes, you look for people who are inclined to commit crimes. Why waste your time on the little old lady when Joe the Plumber is creeping around the streets looking for someone he can rip off?

by Anonymousreply 2405/24/2013

My "little old lady" mother was audited by the IRS. It turned out she had been overpaying her taxes for years.

She never claimed she was being persecuted when she was audited, even before it went in her favor.

by Anonymousreply 2505/24/2013

Ha Ha R21

The IRS debacle and the targeting of reporters is HUGE.

Holder - GONE Hillary - lied to Congress. Gee what is the penalty for that??

IRS Direcors - Shulman & Miller - Jail Time

Victoria Nuland - Bye Bye Promotion. Will be busted down the ranks to file clerk.

by Anonymousreply 2605/24/2013

Exactly, r24. You start to see patterns in applications and you get suspicious. There are so many scams and schemes out there - you wouldn't believe it.

You start to see a rash of non-profits using the same variation of a name you're going to look at it twice. It has nothing to do with Obama "ordering" anything.

Put it like this, if you saw 10 people walk into a coffee shop wearing the same blue shirt one day you'd wonder WTF was going on, right?

by Anonymousreply 2705/24/2013

If they put "Tea Party" on their application, I sure as hell would look closely at whether they really qualified as a non-political organization.

by Anonymousreply 2805/24/2013

[quote]The National Treasury Employees Union is denying claims that the union’s president was in contact with President Obama shortly before Internal Revenue Service employees began targeting conservative groups.

Do you believe them?

Obama knew this was happening.

by Anonymousreply 2905/24/2013

R26 and his friends got tired of talking to themselves on Free Republic so they decided to invade DL.

by Anonymousreply 3005/24/2013

Of course he did R29. Of course he knew.

I wonder if he actually gave the order...more likely a wink and a nod to Valerie..and she implemented the plan.

by Anonymousreply 3105/24/2013

[quote]Holder - GONE Hillary - lied to Congress. Gee what is the penalty for that??

A second term and a big fancy Liberry.

by Anonymousreply 3205/24/2013

[quote]Holder - GONE Hillary - lied to Congress. Gee what is the penalty for that?? IRS Direcors - Shulman & Miller - Jail Time. Victoria Nuland - Bye Bye Promotion. Will be busted down the ranks to file clerk.

Of course, out here in the real world, Holder's job isn't in jeopardy, Clinton didn't lie to Congress, nobody is going to jail, and Nuland has just been nominated as the next assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs.

by Anonymousreply 3305/24/2013

[quote]Obama knew this was happening.

You're citing the Daily Caller?? ROFLMAO....

by Anonymousreply 3405/24/2013

What r23 said.

by Anonymousreply 3605/24/2013

[quote]You're citing the Daily Caller?? ROFLMAO....

Free Republic is suspicious as well. SO THERE. CONFIRMATION

by Anonymousreply 3705/24/2013

Thank you R4. Fineman has never been an Obama fan. He also contradicts himself often and prides himself in being a political insider with great sources. I love to watch him twist himself into a pretzel talking about Congress and the Administration, as he "reads the tea leaves." I finally gave up on him when he was so completely off base during the 2012 election. He as laughably out of touch.

by Anonymousreply 3805/24/2013

R39 doesn't know how Trolldar works.

by Anonymousreply 4005/24/2013

Howard has gotten worse since he became a big shot for Arianna Huffington and her AOL.com news site.

by Anonymousreply 4205/24/2013

[quote]Howard has gotten worse since he became a big shot for Arianna Huffington and her AOL.com news site.

That's like being a supervisor at the local J C Penney.

by Anonymousreply 4305/25/2013

Perhaps someone at the IRS did this on purpose to embarrass the president.

Perhaps this is a manufactured ploy from the right.

by Anonymousreply 4405/25/2013

R44 must be joking-

Have you ever met a government employee who was a Republican (outside the military)?

by Anonymousreply 4505/25/2013

r45 must be joking.

by Anonymousreply 4605/25/2013

R45, you need to realize that there are a lot of government employees salted away in the bureaucracy from previous administrations.

When a Senator or a Congressman wants to create some mischief, there are plenty of "sources" with incomplete, inaccurate information that can easily be twisted to even greater heights of distortion and put out in the universe.

Journalists who cultivate Congressional staffers and even members of Congress for information think they are getting some scoop and it's usually 3/4 bullshit.

As for Howard Fineman, he relies heavily on his own invention. He thinks he's a very savvy political strategist, and will always say what he thinks they're up to, or what they ought to be doing as if he knows something.

by Anonymousreply 4705/25/2013

Yet the crimes of the Bushes---all of them---are ignored.

by Anonymousreply 4805/25/2013

Sorry OP. We just ain't buying what you freepers are selling...

Why Republican Attacks in Obama Scandals Aren’t Sticking

Karl Rove has predicted Benghazi will be “corrosive” to President Barack Obama. Fox News political maven Roger Ailes in an email to Fox News employees compares the Obama administration’s actions against his company to McCarthyism and predicts they will fail. Is Barack Obama on the political ropes going down for the count — to become yet one more unpopular second term President?

Nope says The National Journal’s Charlie Cook who unlike Rove (whose track record, predictions and election-night performance on Fox suggested he was perhaps separated from birth from Dick Morris…the worst pundit since the snake told Adam a bit of the apple wouldn’t hurt) and Ailes (the quintessential partisan and major power figure in the GOP) has a better record in stand-back-and-analyze punditry. And Cook says the Republican charges aren’t stick on Obama for a key reason:

The Republicans and Republican Party are greatly disliked, not trusted and lack credibility with a big chunk of the American voting public. I’d call that chunk in particular “the middle.”

by Anonymousreply 4905/25/2013

Meh. The talking heads on tv will blather on about these meaningless non-scandals until something shiny and new comes along, distracting their attention.

Fineman's not an idiot but he's a well-compensated prisoner of the Huffpo headline machine. DC gossip is fun but has very little bearing on reality.

The President's speech on National Security is the most interesting thing that's happened in our politics for quite a while. Naturally, most people are more interested in these inane, sub-adult, faked up scandals.

by Anonymousreply 5005/25/2013

[quote]No, but I do. I've watched one troll defend the gov from murder and spying and obstruction of justice...

No, actually you haven't but it's hilarious that you think you have. Alas, you are wholly incapable of actually reading what people write and you instead simply make shit up, just as you do with everything else you post here.

by Anonymousreply 5105/25/2013

Interesting that these arguments around Fineman and others are based on whether someone "likes" or "doesn't like" Obama.

What happened to whether it is around whether it is an issue or not an issue? Is it impossible in your little minds that someone you "like" as a politician could do something wrong, or even illegal?

I thought this tweet from Ali Shapiro of NPR a couple of days ago was interesting

[quote]Spotted: @joshtpm @CapehartJ @ezraklein & other lefty columnists headed into the West Wing as a group. POTUS coffee? Carney meeting? Anyone?

So Obama invites his "friends" in the press for a private briefing - just like he did for Benghazi a week or two ago.

Presumably now they will write something that will rally those who believe that those columnists are impartial (ha).

What happened to an open and transparent administration?

by Anonymousreply 5205/25/2013

[quote]Is it impossible in your little minds that someone you "like" as a politician could do something wrong, or even illegal?

No. Is it impossible in your little mind that someone you "dislike" as a politician could do something right, or even legal?

Anyone who takes these non-scandalous fake scandals seriously is a fool and a puppet of the right wing.

by Anonymousreply 5305/25/2013

I also don't think that we have the complete picture in any of these scandals.

The first rule of politics is to get all of the information out and quickly if you have a good (or mediocre) position/story in these types of situations. Better to get it over and out of the news quickly plus having things dribble out creates an appearance of having something to hide.

The dribbling and backtracking here has been incredible.

The fact hat this was known last year and denied in testimony in Congress is problematic, especially when there were a lot of accusations that this was happening.

The fact that Obama's campaign aggressively pursued this strategy (aggressively pushing the Justice Department and the IRS to go after opposing groups) against Clinton in the primary and against Romney is problematic - clearly, this is something that they had as a strategy.

The fact that none of these audits have come back it any issues identified and that all of these groups that were targeted by the IRS have been approved (for those where the IRS has completed the audit) is problematic. If this was a real tax issue, one would have assumed that a good fraction of the groups were, in fact, not eligible for the tax-free status.

The fact that they claim that the work was all done in Cincinnati when a lot was done and led out of Washington is problematic.

The fact that the White House Counsel told the White House Chief of Staff about the investigation and yet the White House claims that the President didn't know is problematic because it is so far fetched (as the link from the Washington Post discusses).

There is a lot more to be learned here and that is the problem for the White House.

by Anonymousreply 5405/25/2013

Given that the Koch brothers have secretly funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into Tea Party organixations, I'm nit surprised at all that the IRS was tasked with investigatings this. You can't have a completely corrupt Republican hierarchy without some checks and balances.

And yes, I call them completely corrupt because they are. They actively plotted to prevent people of color from voting in multiple states. That's who the Republicans are at the top. Vile, disgusting and absolutely corrupt.

by Anonymousreply 5505/25/2013

R53, would you list a few things that Obama has done with which you disagree and/or mistakes that he has made....besides "trying too hard to win over Republicans" (rolling my eyes as I type that).

It will give us some insight into your level of ideological rigidity and also your willingness (or lack thereof) to be critical of a Democratic leader.

Thanks

by Anonymousreply 5605/25/2013

[quote]Given that the Koch brothers have secretly funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into Tea Party organixations, I'm nit surprised at all that the IRS was tasked with investigatings this. You can't have a completely corrupt Republican hierarchy without some checks and balances

Then why were none of these groups denied their tax-free status?

Serious question that deserves a serious answer.

On a less serious note, "organixations" and "tasked with investigatings"?

Hitting the pills a little early today?

by Anonymousreply 5705/25/2013

Oh go fuck yourself, R56, you pompous, manipulative, pus-oozing cyst on Dick Cheney's flabby ass.

by Anonymousreply 5805/25/2013

[quote]The fact that Obama's campaign aggressively pursued this strategy (aggressively pushing the Justice Department and the IRS to go after opposing groups) against Clinton in the primary and against Romney is problematic - clearly, this is something that they had as a strategy.

Not only is that not a "fact," it's not true.

by Anonymousreply 5905/25/2013

R53/R58. Thanks! You couldn't have answered my question more clearly even if you actually answered what I asked.

Your knowledge seems to be limited to what you can cut and paste off of msnbc.

Your depth of knowledge is immeasurably shallow.

Your ability to think critically around issues is nonexistent.

You believe that your personal attacks make you look smart but, in fact, they make you look insubstantial.

Facts and you never seem to travel in the same circles.

it is all unfortunate.

by Anonymousreply 6005/25/2013

Here's the fact that is driving r60 crazy. President Barack Obama is the President. He's not perfect. His administration hasn't been perfect. The majority of the country knows they are far, far, far better off with Obama and his team than with the Republicans.

By the way, r60, no pills here. Just a few typos on a mini-iPad.

by Anonymousreply 6105/25/2013

[quote]Not only is that not a "fact," it's not true.

Hmmm - read below

[quote]in the spring of 2008, Mr. Bauer (General Counsel for the Obama campaign) filed a complaint with the FEC against the American Leadership Project, a group backing Hillary Clinton in the primary. "There's going to be a reckoning here," he had warned publicly. "It's going to be rough—it's going to be rough on the officers, it's going to be rough on the employees, it's going to be rough on the donors. . . Whether it's at the FEC or in a broader criminal inquiry, those donors will be asked questions." The campaign similarly attacked a group supporting John Edwards.

[quote]American Leadership head (and Democrat) Jason Kinney would rail that Mr. Bauer had gone from "credible legal authority" to "political hatchet man"—but the damage was done. As Politico reported in August 2008, Mr. Bauer's words had "the effect of scaring [Clinton and Edwards] donors and consultants," even if they hadn't yet "result[ed] in any prosecution."

[quote]Bob Bauer, general counsel for the campaign (and later general counsel for the White House), wrote to the criminal division of the Justice Department, demanding an investigation into AIP (a group opposing Obama in the 2008 General Election), "its officers and directors," and its "anonymous donors." Mr. Bauer claimed that the nonprofit, as a 501(c)(4), was committing a "knowing and willful violation" of election law, and wanted "action to enforce against criminal violations."

Yet, none of these groups were ever found in violation of either tax law or Federal Election law.

by Anonymousreply 6205/25/2013

[quote]Your knowledge seems to be limited to what you can cut and paste off of msnbc. Your depth of knowledge is immeasurably shallow. Your ability to think critically around issues is nonexistent. You believe that your personal attacks make you look smart but, in fact, they make you look insubstantial. Facts and you never seem to travel in the same circles.

ROFL... Oh, the irony... Talk about projection!

by Anonymousreply 6305/25/2013

And yet your link does nothing to support your assertion, R62. I repeat, "Not only is that not a 'fact,' it's not true."

by Anonymousreply 6405/25/2013

You're right R64, filing a claim with the Justice Department asking for criminal investigation into an opposing group on a campaign financing matter is nothing like "aggressively pushing the Justice Department and the IRS to go after opposing groups"

In actions against the Clinton campaign, having your general counsel say, in reference to an opposing group, "It's going to be rough—it's going to be rough on the officers, it's going to be rough on the employees, it's going to be rough on the donors. . . Whether it's at the FEC or in a broader criminal inquiry, those donors will be asked questions." is nothing like "aggressively pushing the Justice Department and the IRS to go after opposing groups"

And, of course, none of this is similar to a government agency targeting groups for extended tax audits that result in no determinations of wrongdoing.

And, of course, none of the other issues raised in my first post are issues at all. The administration, the Treasury Department and the senior IRS officials have all been clear, transparent and honest from the beginning.

The fact that senior members (General Counsel and Chief of Staff) were aware of this issue earlier than the White House had previously said is not an issue at all.

Parsing words will make this all go away!

by Anonymousreply 6505/25/2013

ROFL @R65. Wow.... you really don't have a connection to reality, do you? Sucks to be you.

by Anonymousreply 6605/25/2013

Yeah, I guess will see where this goes. Since about 3/4 of the people feel like this should be investigated further, I'm sure we'll have plenty of time to figure out the real impact on the administration.

I just hope for your sake that the administration has been fully transparent on their knowledge and role (if any) on this topic.

Everyone from Richard Nixon to Martha Stewart learned that the crime wasn't the issue; it was the cover-up that did them in

by Anonymousreply 6705/25/2013

I'm glad at least two other people on this board think this shit stinks to high heaven, and that Obama is lying about not knowing.

Compared to McCain, I supported (mildly) Obama since I thought he would be better on civil liberties and wars. How wrong I was.

He's a piece of shit lying political hack from Chicago and I'd love to see him brought to the Hague and tried for war crimes (along with both Bushes, both Clintons and their staff) for what they've done.

by Anonymousreply 6805/25/2013

[quote]Everyone from Richard Nixon to Martha Stewart learned that the crime wasn't the issue; it was the cover-up that did them in

Obama should just "pull a Reagan" as we say in D.C. .....

Head cocked earnestly to one side, eyebrows knit, mouth pursed, former President Reagan spent eight hours of testimony claiming to know less about his administration's Iran-contra scandal than do millions of average citizens.

Billed as the key witness in the Iran-contra trial of his former national security adviser, retired Rear Adm. John Poindexter, Reagan said he did not authorize Poindexter to mislead Congress, contradicting Poindexter's argument that Reagan knew of and authorized his activities.

But aside from that recollection, the former president professed an ignorance of the events and personalities in the affair.

The words ``I don't remember' or their equivalents occurred at least 124 times in his eight hours of testimony. The lapses in memory ranged from the identity of Rep. Lee Hamilton, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee during several of the key years of Reagan's presidency, to the central conclusions of the Tower Commission, which Reagan appointed to investigate the Iran-contra affair.

Reagan, now 79, also didn't remember that Robert McFarlane, who served as his national security adviser, had pleaded guilty to a charge of withholding information from Congress.

Reagan's memory lapses, however, never occurred on answers that bolstered his longstanding position that he, himself, had done nothing wrong. Repeatedly, he emphasized that while he might not be able to recall the names of the subordinates he gave instructions to - even at Cabinet rank - he recalled clearly the content of the instructions: ``Stay within the law.'

If the former president often could not remember key events, he came well-armed with statistics to explain why things were hard to remember. He had accumulated some 50 million papers, he said several times, and he had met with 400 foreign leaders while in office.

Though he admitted a total blank on some events, Reagan revealed a vivid memory for other incidents, such as a telephone call to the president of Honduras about helping the contras.

by Anonymousreply 6905/25/2013

Oh please, r68. Name two examples of how Obama is more hawkish than McCain? Your bullshit exaggerations give you away.

by Anonymousreply 7005/25/2013

R70-

I didn't say MORE hawkish- McCain would've started WW3 in his first term (unlike Obama, who is courting it during his second vis a vis antagonizing Russia, China and the Mideast) but Obama has been almost as bad.

I'm talking about the domestic and foreign drone issues, the attacks on Yemen and Syria and Egypt (don't for a second believe that the US isn't supplying arms and intelligence to our "allies" in those countries) and myriad other issues that a supposedly anti-war, pro-civil liberty executive should NOT be doing. I won't even mention his continued bailouts of the big banks, favors to big pharma/insurance via the ACA, and his refusal to cut the welfare payments to the military contractors and other big corps.

He's just another crony, no better or worse than Bush or Clinton or Reagan.

by Anonymousreply 7105/25/2013

Look, this is the kind of government we have. This is the system under which we are governed. Every single politician who runs for President, including Bill Clinton the Rock Star, and all the rest who get elected, are limited in what they can do by the system they are sworn to uphold.

The Republicans have achieved revolution in a way, from the time Reagan got elected, and they moved this country to the Right. They will block anyone and any effort to dilute the corporate police state that they have put into place.

They use lies, distortions, divide and conquer tactics, and foment confusion all the time. They control most state governments, legislatures Secretaries of State, Attorney Generals, State court systems, school boards, and even town councils and mayors.

They control the U.S. Supreme Court, The House of Representatives, which has the "power of the purse", and can filibuster and clog up the U.S. Senate with their 60 votes rule. Obama has demonstrated time and again, that on hard core issues of finance and industry, he is willing to capitulate and cave in to all their pressure before they even ask him to.

If you want to change the system, you'll need to change it from the grassroots thru and thru, and not just think you can elect someone President and they can wave a magic wand and make everything different.

You want to take this country back, start doing it state by state. Republicans control the state government apparatus when it counts. After the census when legislative redistricting happens. They gerrymander people into office with a guarantee they will get re-elected at least for the next ten years.

by Anonymousreply 7205/25/2013

R66 - tl;dr. You have got to lighten up (or at least shorten) these constant rants of yours.

In other news, the thing about American political scandal mongering is that you can only fool people with your vagina cape twirling for a while. Eventually you've got to put a big dick on the table or shut the fuck up.

As usual, the Republicans have tinymeat.

by Anonymousreply 7305/25/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.