Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"Worst Washington scandal since Watergate"
26 views
Skip to first unread message
xyzzy
May 17, 2013, 6:52:39 PM5/17/13
to
Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegations-show-flawed-statistical-thinking/?smid=tw-fivethirtyeight&seid=auto
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegations-show-flawed-statistical-thinking/?smid=tw-fivethirtyeight&seid=auto
CheeseHusker dos
May 18, 2013, 12:57:11 AM5/18/13
to
On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
> http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
> Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate - nor do I think the
orders came from on high - however, it would be nice to see someone
other than Nate say this:
"None of this ought to take away from the major part of the I.R.S.
scandal — the targeting of conservative groups that applied for 501(c)
(4) status, which the I.R.S. has admitted to and for which the
statistical evidence is very clear."
This sort of governmental action is not cool. Regardless of political
affiliation.
I look forward to Nate's detailed statistical analysis of groups both
targeted and approved duing the time period in question.
Michael Press
May 18, 2013, 5:18:42 PM5/18/13
to
In article
<424964a6-9e15-46f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
trying to get tax exempt status.
--
Michael Press
<424964a6-9e15-46f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
CheeseHusker dos <jonr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
> >
> > http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
> >
> > http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
trying to get tax exempt status.
--
Michael Press
unklbob
May 18, 2013, 5:34:07 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 5:18 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article
> <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
other reason than to hide money) the same way fake charities sprung up
after Katrina. If you're willing to answer the questions, you can get
the non-profit tax exempt status for your organization if you qualify.
Another sky is falling period for the Obama haters.
> In article
> <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> CheeseHusker dos <jonrus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
> > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
>
> The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> trying to get tax exempt status.
>
> --
> Michael Press
Oh bullshit. Scammers hooked themselve onto the Tea Party ( for no
>
> > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
> > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
>
> The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> trying to get tax exempt status.
>
> --
> Michael Press
other reason than to hide money) the same way fake charities sprung up
after Katrina. If you're willing to answer the questions, you can get
the non-profit tax exempt status for your organization if you qualify.
Another sky is falling period for the Obama haters.
CheeseHusker dos
May 18, 2013, 5:35:13 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 4:18 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article
> <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> In article
> <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> CheeseHusker dos <jonrus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
> > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
>
> The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> trying to get tax exempt status.
Yes - but Watergate was an issue of Presidential coverup. So far,
>
> > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
>
> > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
>
> > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
>
> The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> trying to get tax exempt status.
this hasn't been indicated as such. It's a scandal of gov't abuse -
not White House abuse.
unklbob
May 18, 2013, 5:37:39 PM5/18/13
to
government agency that has seen its budget slashed to the bone?
Michael Press
May 18, 2013, 5:47:35 PM5/18/13
to
In article
<0d78a532-f9a6-4523...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
[...]
Rather than listening, seeing for yourself, and discussing,
you choose shouting down those whom you do not want to hear.
--
Michael Press
<0d78a532-f9a6-4523...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
unklbob <mcgri...@aol.com> wrote:
> On May 18, 5:18 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> > CheeseHusker dos <jonrus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
> >
> > > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
> >
> > > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
> >
> > The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> > Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> > to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> > for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> > asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> > I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> > trying to get tax exempt status.
>
> Oh bullshit.
> On May 18, 5:18 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <424964a6-9e15-46f8-82dc-6f773f0f8...@o2g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> > CheeseHusker dos <jonrus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 17, 5:52 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well except for the innumerate assumptions that went into making that claim.
> >
> > > >http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegat...
> >
> > > I wouldn't call it the worst since Watergate -
> >
> > The IRS releases confidential tax returns. That is a felony.
> > Have you seen the questions the IRS asked of people trying
> > to get tax exempt status for their organizations? They asked
> > for organizations to print out and return all their web pages;
> > asked who their volunteers are; asked who their donors are.
> > I guarantee if you got one of those you would just give up
> > trying to get tax exempt status.
>
[...]
Rather than listening, seeing for yourself, and discussing,
you choose shouting down those whom you do not want to hear.
--
Michael Press
xyzzy
May 18, 2013, 5:50:20 PM5/18/13
to
> <0d78a532-f9a6-4523-8b2b-9462ae6e8...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
Considering the snippage your performed,, in which you removed the
actual substance, you are responsible for the replacement costs of
several irony meters
actual substance, you are responsible for the replacement costs of
several irony meters
CheeseHusker dos
May 18, 2013, 5:50:32 PM5/18/13
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's abuse. Unless they were asking for grease money for speedier
approval or whatever it is that Sibelius is/was doing.
And again - this is not an event singular to this administration -
others prior used the IRS for intimidation purposes and far more
overtly - like Kennedy or Nixon.
Michael Press
May 18, 2013, 7:25:07 PM5/18/13
to
In article
<270b8db8-32d5-4620...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
Cursing is not discourse. I see that you disagree.
--
Michael Press
<270b8db8-32d5-4620...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
--
Michael Press
Eric Ramon
May 18, 2013, 9:23:48 PM5/18/13
to
Michael Press
May 18, 2013, 11:28:49 PM5/18/13
to
In article
<2e51a027-58f2-4ecb...@k8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
> thank you, Peggy
More of the same.
--
Michael Press
<2e51a027-58f2-4ecb...@k8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>,
More of the same.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
May 19, 2013, 1:52:04 PM5/19/13
to
In article
<c4fb2b44-6600-4134...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
I am not arguing that it is the worst since. Logically,
it could be and not be as serious as the Nixon
administration. Most think these three scandals do not
have legs, that they will cancel because of an
embarrassment of riches, and will quickly disappear.
Remember too that behind the AP scandal is the
disclosure by somebody in government of the existence
and identity of a deep cover agent in a hot zone. That
is tantamount to treason. The AP scandal serves, if not
intentionally, as a smokescreen for that disclosure.
We likely will never know if the malefactor is ever identified.
--
Michael Press
<c4fb2b44-6600-4134...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
it could be and not be as serious as the Nixon
administration. Most think these three scandals do not
have legs, that they will cancel because of an
embarrassment of riches, and will quickly disappear.
Remember too that behind the AP scandal is the
disclosure by somebody in government of the existence
and identity of a deep cover agent in a hot zone. That
is tantamount to treason. The AP scandal serves, if not
intentionally, as a smokescreen for that disclosure.
We likely will never know if the malefactor is ever identified.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
May 19, 2013, 1:55:47 PM5/19/13
to
In article
<63978311-8c3f-4c77...@h13g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Disclosing confidential tax returns is a felony.
It was not during the the Kennedy and Nixon administrations.
The Kennedy's were shot down and Nixon driven from office.
Are you saying "boys will be boys?"
--
Michael Press
<63978311-8c3f-4c77...@h13g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
It was not during the the Kennedy and Nixon administrations.
The Kennedy's were shot down and Nixon driven from office.
Are you saying "boys will be boys?"
--
Michael Press
unklbob
May 20, 2013, 8:30:01 AM5/20/13
to
returns using identities they get from rest homes, etc. It's an
epidemic, with people actually holding "clinics" teaching others how
to do it. The IRS has started to come down hard here, because the
pickings are easy. When the Tea Party orgs started springing up like
weeds, a bunch of mob types found it a convenient way to launder money
through tax avoidance. Easy pickings for an agency that has seen its
budget cut by a billion.
0 new messages