White House, IRS exchanged confidential taxpayer info


Obama also contracts with Halliburton. Sometimes you have to use the people who know what they’re doing, whether you like them or not.

The Iraqi WMDs are gone, though, probably. The Brits destroyed the last (known) of them last summer at the request of the Iraqi government. Whether any are buried out in the desert still is not known. Same with executed Iranians, because Saddam used to kill the people who carried out his orders. (“Dead men tell no tales.”) But they do discover a mass grave now and then, even so.

Nobody actually believes Bush misrepresented intelligence, particularly since U.S. intelligence was confirmed by Russian and Israeli intel as well.

And do you really think Cheney intentionally shot his friend?


He might not have owned a single share in Halliburton. Whatever he had was in a blind trust. If you have proof the trustee held onto it and that Cheney knew it, that would be a really major news item. So share it with us and with the news outlets. :slight_smile:


Ah, yes, Halliburton. We all know how expert they are…at raping the taxpayers.




Cheney was not a shareholder in Haliburton at the time of the Iraq War. Further you need to be aware that there are only a couple of contracting companies that could provide the services that Haliburton or Bechtel or maybe one other company could provide. So the choice of Haliburton may have more to do with its ability to provide the needed services rather than to line Cheney’s pocket (hard to do since he didn’t own any at the time).

As to your strawman, no one has said that Bush or even Reagan were “paragons of virtue” so why don’'t we discuss the actual points at issue rather than tossing out the Scarecrow and setting him ablaze? Bush certainly had his faults and I was disappointed in a number of his actions but I think he was a man with personal integrity and did what he thought was truly the best course for the American people. Sometimes he was right, sometimes wrong but it’s hardly the same as the Green Energy, NSA,IRS, Benghazi,Fast & Furious…the list goes on.


And if someone said the same thing about you, would there be any sounder basis for the assertion than you have given for saying this about Halliburton?


The proof against Halliburton is indisputable.



I love the continued tilting at windmills, the refighting of the Iraq War, the mired in the past with mud to your ankles approach to deflecting the bead drawn on your guy. That old “Squirrel! Squirrel!” approach is quite old and tired.

Now what about the actual issue here? It’s clearly a pattern of corrupt if not illegal activity in the quest for political power. At some point the rest of the country realizes our Emperor has no clothes. The rest of the world already has done so.



Thanks for bringing this back to the topic at hand.


I think they did let out a slight whimper when it was found out that some of their own phones were being tapped,. :rolleyes:


Maybe I have been watching too much about Star Wars but there is something about Obama that reminds me of Palpatine and how he became Emperor.


Well, being the Star Wars fan (excluding episode 3) that I am…I see it very much so.


Actually I was just talking about Halliburton. You’ll have to find someone else to complain to.

I don’t think thats true. Besides, Obama doesn’t need more political power; he’s the President of the United States. The reason for the use of this code is still unclear. In reading the e-mails, it appears to me that all of this was simply a response to a series of questions regarding what kind of institutions are exempt from filing. :shrug:


More Obama illegal activity with the IRS:

Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years.

According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status** within a month of filing**, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.

Read more: dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/#ixzz2hHjzVflB


Your timing is off. These incidents occurred during his first term at a time when his approval was slipping and there was clear risk of losing in his bid for re-election.

As to the reference to the Code, the inserts referenced a particular section that provides for punishment for disclosing personal information. You don’t have a clue as to the procedures regarding filing for exempt status do you? It has been demonstrated clearly the Administration wished to delay or prevent certain organizations from receiving exempt status and it used all manner of tactics from delays, from onerous data requests, to threats to “deals” offered for not continuing to pursue exempt status.

Your boy has no clothes Emperor :D. He couldn’t win the election through merit or by his less than stellar performance as CoC so he resorted to what he knew best, Chicago style thuggery. It’s truly unfortunate that the American people were so easily duped by this incompetent and corrupt pol



You don’t apparently. Law allows disclosure if certain criteria are met. Have a read.

Conspiracy theory.


Again do you know anything about this? Apparently you didn’t read the disclosure regulations, none of which referred to White House operatives. Such information can be disclosed to state agencies, to parties at interest and to those designated by the taxpayer. I suspect that the references to personal information disclosed to Obama adminsitration officials had nothing to do with legal disclosure.

In addition, not only do I know about applying for exempt status, I’ve done so successfully for several organizations for which I’d volunteered my services as a CPA:D


I agree that Obama is the worst of the lot! What I was trying to point out was in response to the “Bush scandals :confused:” comment in post #10. In my opinion, Bush was a poor president. Why does the Cheney shooting incident matter? Because it involved the VP showing irresponsible behavior, the president is supposed to be accountable for what happens on his watch, and the press made a considerable amount of hay over the incident. Halliburton? The company which the VP led until his election is handed multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts. That should raise red flags in any context. The Iraqi WMDs? The CIA had passed on several warnings regarding the lack of reliability of the reports, and then - following the invasion - Bush joked about not finding the things which were were told was the whole reason for invading. Nice to know my little brother - who was deployed to Kuwait by Sept. 20, 2001, well before any “reports” of Iraqi WMDs - was put on the front lines because of a known falsehood. and then the Commander in Chief who put him there uses the needless death of 100,000 people to try his hand at stand-up comedy.

I’m sorry if my criticism of Bush offends some people here, but I am not a fan of him, and never will be. I truly believe that we should have not have invaded Iraq, and doing so has done damage to our image in the Middle East that will take decades to heal. That doesn’t make me a fan of Obama. If I had my choice for president, it would have been Ron Paul.

And now, back to our normally scheduled IRS/White House shenanigans.


Could you enlighten us as to what criteria are relevant in this case? The President can request information, but only by name and address of the taxpayer concerned, must be personally signed by the President, and has to include the specific reason for the request. I - and others, I’m sure - would like to know what “specific reason” was named.


Executive privilege.

You can’t expect him to say it’s to harrass taxpayers with audits and fines do you?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.