• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Already 17 Times More Coverage on Christie Scandal Than obama"s IRS scandal

You know what the media is also ignoring these days?

Watergate. What's with that? A president commits a crime and is forced to resign, and the media just ignores it?
 
eohrnberger said:
Only the first 2 days, and yet it's already a 17:1 ratio of time covering one and not the other.

You point out the first 2 months of the IRS scandal are not included. Fine.
I'll still wager that the time comparison stated still holds up, because I don't ever recall the IRS scandal getting much or as intense coverage as this scandal is getting, even in the first 2 months after it broke, especially in the Biased Lame Stream Media.
Click to expand...
There was no IRS scandal, all groups were targeted.
 
pbrauer said:
There was no IRS scandal, all groups were targeted.
Click to expand...

Whether all groups were targeted or not is still an open question from the last that I heard.
n 2013, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) revealed that it had targeted political groups applying for tax-exempt status for closer scrutiny based on their names or political themes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating the IRS's actions as part of a criminal probe ordered by United States Attorney General Eric Holder.[1] This led to both political and public condemnation of the agency and triggered further investigations.[2] Initial reports had described the targeting as nearly exclusively on conservative groups with terms such as "Tea Party" in their names. 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.[3][4][5][6][7] The use of target lists continued through May 2013.[8]
Click to expand...
2013 IRS scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In total, 30 percent of the organizations we identified with the words 'progress' or 'progressive' in their names were processed as potential political cases," George wrote to Rep. Sandy Levin, D-Mich., the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. "In comparison, our audit found that 100 percent of the tax-exempt applications with Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names were processed as potential political cases during the timeframe of our audit."
Click to expand...
IRS: Progressive groups flagged, but tea party bigger target - CBS News

30% vs. 100% doesn't sounds too even handed to me.
 
bubbabgone said:
Pete Pete Pete ... you're a real trip ... what am I gonna do with you.
Click to expand...
eohrnberger said:
Whether all groups were targeted or not is still an open question from the last that I heard.
2013 IRS scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


IRS: Progressive groups flagged, but tea party bigger target - CBS News

30% vs. 100% doesn't sounds too even handed to me.
Click to expand...
All of those political organizations could have gotten tax exempt status using IRS code 527.

Tax Information for Political Organizations
 
Kobie said:
The article you linked is dishonest as all hell.

The article says there is more coverage of the Christie scandal than there has been of the IRS scandal for the last six months. Which may very well be true. However, the IRS scandal broke eight months ago (in May), not six. It's ignoring the two months when the "scandal" was front and center. It's simply not a valid comparison.
Click to expand...

You would have a point if not for the fact that since the IRS scandal first broke new info on it has been coming out that the media has ignored.
This for instance.

"October, newly obtained e-mails showed that the scandal-plagued Lois Lerner, the woman at the center of the controversy, illegally gave Tea Party tax info to the FEC. Lerner retired from the IRS In September, but the networks skipped that."
 
mak2 said:
Why arent you guys repeating the same thing about Christie over and over? Oh yea, double standard.
Click to expand...

Not at all. Christi is a fraud too.

No one in this part of the country would vote for that obese, loudmouth punk.
 
Perotista said:
When it comes to the R and D partisans, double standards are the norms. Regardless of what my guys does, real or perceived or not, you defend him and regardless of what the other guy does, real or perceived you crucify him. Let's face it, to a partisan of either party, what my guy does is always right, pure at heart and what the other guy does is always wrong and evil.

That is politics in today's America. Did Obama know about the IRS, I don't know. Did Christie know about the bridge closing, I don't know. But I will admit that. There is only one way to find out the truth, appoint an independent council or investigator with the power to dig even if it becomes political embarrassing. Is there a there, there in either of these cases, I don't know. But I probably will never know about the IRS, Christie's bridge, there is a better chance there of the truth coming out. But it won't be easy to get at.

Let's face it, democrats don't want to find out the truth one way or the other with the IRS and republicans don't want to find out the truth one way or the other with Christie's bridge. But each side wants as much dirt and scandal on the other side as possible. Truth be damned.
Click to expand...

The "best" thing about the IRS "scandal" is the complete ignorance of non-profit rules and procedures.
 
eohrnberger said:
Please elaborate as to why that is important.

It doesn't change the level of, nor the targets of, the IRS targeting, nor the fact that it appears the IRS was using for this targeting.
Click to expand...
It refutes the claim that Obama was trying to inflict economic damage on the Republicans. Both sides sought 501(c)(4) for one reason... they were able to keep their donors anonymous. They can't do that with IRS Code 527, so they went for 501(c)(4).
 
pbrauer said:
It refutes the claim that Obama was trying to inflict economic damage on the Republicans. Both sides sought 501(c)(4) for one reason... they were able to keep their donors anonymous. They can't do that with IRS Code 527, so they went for 501(c)(4).
Click to expand...

Well, not really Republicans, as I don't think these groups are really Republican groups. Conservative groups, I think is a more accurate label, but that's just a minor nit.

So if I understand this correctly, it's your assertion that these groups should have filed as 527's and not 501(c)(4)s, and there would have been no greater scrutiny? So it's the groups fault for filing paperwork with the wrong choice of category? Yes?
 
What if...? said:
The "best" thing about the IRS "scandal" is the complete ignorance of non-profit rules and procedures.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about the general public, you are exactly correct. They know nothing about non-profit rules and regulations. This is probably why with the general public at large the scandal didn't catch on. There was an upturn in the Republicans favor when it broke, but not over the rules or anything like that. The cause for the upturn was everyone's hatred of the IRS and if they are targeting conservatives, then they must be alright. But what gain the Republicans had received over the IRS scandal, they promptly lost it and more when they shut down the government.

The IRS scandal is still with us, but outside of the very partisan, no one is paying it any attention anymore.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
The bias in our media is reaching the point of absurdity and the network news has become a complete farce.


In less than 24 hours, the big three networks have devoted 17 times more coverage to a traffic scandal involving Chris Christie than they've allowed in the last six months to Barack Obama's Internal Revenue Service controversy. Since the story broke on Wednesday that aides to the New Jersey governor punished a local mayor's lack of endorsement with a massive traffic jam, ABC, CBS and NBC have responded with 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage. Since July 1, these same networks managed a scant two minutes and eight seconds for the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups.

Read more: There's Already 17 Times More Coverage on Christie Scandal Than in Last Six Months of IRS | NewsBusters
Click to expand...

NBC, CBS, and ABC all have local news that covers the tristate area of PA, NJ, DEL
 
eohrnberger said:
Well, not really Republicans, as I don't think these groups are really Republican groups. Conservative groups, I think is a more accurate label, but that's just a minor nit.

So if I understand this correctly, it's your assertion that these groups should have filed as 527's and not 501(c)(4)s, and there would have been no greater scrutiny? So it's the groups fault for filing paperwork with the wrong choice of category? Yes?
Click to expand...
No, not exactly. The utmost priority to the groups was to keep their donors identity a secret, it wasn't to get tax exempt status. This allowed corporations to contribute to defeat or support candidates without the fear of retribution from the public.
 
pbrauer said:
No, not exactly. The utmost priority to the groups was to keep their donors identity a secret, it wasn't to get tax exempt status. This allowed corporations to contribute to defeat or support candidates without the fear of retribution from the public.
Click to expand...

So then the IRS scandal is to force conservative groups to reveal their donors while allowing liberal groups to keep their donors identify a secret, as you say to avoid retribution from the public, at a 30% to 100% ratio.

Still seems a disproportionate ratio to me.
 
eohrnberger said:
So then the IRS scandal is to force conservative groups to reveal their donors while allowing liberal groups to keep their donors identify a secret, as you say to avoid retribution from the public, at a 30% to 100% ratio.

Still seems a disproportionate ratio to me.
Click to expand...
The difference in the numbers is because many Tea Party were being formed at the time. Also, the 501(c)(4) code was mean for groups whose mission was primarily social welfare.
 
pbrauer said:
The difference in the numbers is because many Tea Party were being formed at the time. Also, the 501(c)(4) code was mean for groups whose mission was primarily social welfare.
Click to expand...

As to the numbers, yeah, I can see that.

However, if 'social welfare' is the criterion, seems to me that neither of the groups really qualifies by this measure. Would really be a shame if it turns out that liberal groups would be considered as qualifying and conservative groups not, when neither really should.
 
eohrnberger said:
As to the numbers, yeah, I can see that.

However, if 'social welfare' is the criterion, seems to me that neither of the groups really qualifies by this measure. Would really be a shame if it turns out that liberal groups would be considered as qualifying and conservative groups not, when neither really should.
Click to expand...
How in the hell would you know unless you looked at each individual case involved. But you are correct the law must be administered fairly.
 
pbrauer said:
How in the hell would you know unless you looked at each individual case involved. But you are correct the law must be administered fairly.
Click to expand...

Err. Yeah, that's fair. But still hard to imagine that a politically motivated group would somehow qualify as a 'social welfare' group, regardless from which end of the political spectrum the fall.
 
Liberals don't cover things up. There is no bias in the media. The other networks are far more "fair and balanced" than "faux news." Oh. And Michael Moore doesn't blatantly mislead people in his movies.

It is sad the lengths the left will go to try and convince themselves that their party isn't guilty of being dirty and corrupt just like every other political party on the globe.
 
The media refuses to cover the Teapot Dome Scandal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom