IRS violated privacy laws, claimed privacy rights to block investigation of violation

posted at 10:41 am on June 11, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

US law requires the IRS to keep confidential the material submitted by applicants for tax-exempt status until an adjudication on the application has been finalized.  What happens when they violate this law?  Amazingly, as John Eastman learned when the IRS leaked the information he supplied for the National Organization for Marriage to its most vociferous opponents, the IRS claims that the privacy law forbids anyone to investigate the IRS’ violation of the very same law (via Ace, emphasis his):

In March 2012, the organization, which argues the case for traditional marriage, found out its confidential tax information had been obtained by the Human Rights Campaign, one of its primary opponents in the marriage debate. The HRC put the leaked information on its website—including the names of NOM donors. The NOM not only has the legal right to keep its donors’ names private, it has to, because when contributors’ names have been revealed in the past they have been harassed, boycotted and threatened. This is a free speech right, one the Supreme Court upheld in 1958 after the state of Alabama tried to compel the NAACP to surrender its membership list.

The NOM did a computer forensic investigation and determined that its leaked IRS information had come from within the IRS itself. If it was leaked by a worker or workers within the IRS it would be a federal crime, with penalties including up to five years in prison.

In April 2012, the NOM asked the IRS for an investigation. The inspector general’s office gave them a complaint number. Soon they were in touch. Even though the leaked document bore internal IRS markings, the inspector general decided that maybe the document came from within the NOM. The NOM demonstrated that was not true.

For the next 14 months they heard nothing about an investigation. By August 2012, the NOM was filing Freedom of Information Act requests trying to find out if there was one. The IRS stonewalled. Their “latest nonresponse response,” said Mr. Eastman, claimed that the law prohibiting the disclosure of confidential tax returns also prevents disclosure of information about who disclosed them. Mr. Eastman called this “Orwellian.” He said that what the NOM experienced “suggests that problems at the IRS are potentially far more serious” than the targeting of conservative organizations for scrutiny.

Ace has a hilarious and on-point criticism, casting this interaction in the form of a joke:

NOM: I want to know who broke the law protecting confidentiality of taxpayer information.

IRS: We can’t tell you that.

NOM: Why not?

IRS: The law protecting the confidentiality of taxpayer information protects the confidentiality of those who break the law of protecting the confidentiality of taxpayer information.

That’s the joke version. It also happens to be the actual account of the IRS’ position.

This claim could never have survived in court, but that’s not the point. FOIA requests aren’t answered by someone in a call center; they go to the legal department in an agency with more lawyers than there are players in the NFL at any one time.  This is the official face of the IRS, where laws intended to protect citizens from abuse by the agency get perverted into shields against accountability, while higher-ups exploit their power to intimidate political opponents.

This goes beyond a few “low-level employees.” This speaks to the culture within the IRS, and it’s a culture that is commonly seen when extraordinary power meets a vacuum of accountability. That’s something all Americans should fear — and work to either change or eliminate.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Owellian? That’s good.

oldroy on June 11, 2013 at 10:44 AM

The government is attacking US citizens and then mocking those that are attacked. They are challenging Americans to do something about it.

d1carter on June 11, 2013 at 10:44 AM

This is why I draw the sharp distinction between rights and powers. A government official has no “right to privacy” in the performance of his job. (He does have the same right to privacy as the rest of us as regards his private life; publication of his home address, what bus his daughter rides to school, etc. are off limits.) When he exercises power over us, his every action is subject to the strictest scrutiny, to guard against abuse.

The Monster on June 11, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Does anyone have power over the IRS…other than the thugs at the White House?

d1carter on June 11, 2013 at 10:45 AM

I totally trust these guys to engage in oversight of themselves.

MadisonConservative on June 11, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Relax, Mr. Eastman, the Oversight Committees have your back.

Now please explain the phone call you made to your wife at 0538 on 04/14/09 from the BP gas station in Larchwood, Iowa where you bought exactly $17.08 worth of 91 octane gasoline using a Mastercard ending in 8762 and an expiration date of 06/14.

Bishop on June 11, 2013 at 10:48 AM

And this is why I say that the only way Lois Lerner can assert 5th Amendment rights is to resign from government service and accept a lifetime ban against ever holding any position of power again, down to and including Notary Public or Juror. She has a right to be free from having her own testimony used against her in a criminal proceeding, but she has no right to wield power over others.

The Monster on June 11, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Yes, they totally won’t abuse the power to snoop into every American’s private correspondences.

RiverCocytus on June 11, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Owellian? That’s good.

oldroy on June 11, 2013 at 10:44 AM

That was a typo, and it’s fixed, but … yeah, a useful Freudian slip. ;-)

Ed Morrissey on June 11, 2013 at 10:49 AM

And we’re supposed to believe the NSA is acting within congressional guidelines.

Got it.

BKeyser on June 11, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Oh, how I know this from personal experience.

Bob's Kid on June 11, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Mickey Kaus tells us to Wake Up!

It’s time to wake up! Conservatives–while you are (rightly) excited about NSA snooping and partisan IRS corruption, the Congress is about to change America in a more profound, permanent way right under your noses.

Drained Brain on June 11, 2013 at 10:52 AM

In March 2012, the organization… found out its confidential tax information had been obtained by the Human Rights Campaign, one of its primary opponents in the marriage debate.

Hmmmm……

Human Rights Campaign, or HRC.

Same initials as Hitlery Rodmunch Clinton.

Concidence?

UltimateBob on June 11, 2013 at 10:54 AM

She has a right to be free from having her own testimony used against her in a criminal proceeding, but she has no right to wield power over others.

The Monster on June 11, 2013 at 10:48 AM

True, but she doesn’t have the right to refuse questions of Congress if asked in the capacity as a federal employee. She can plead the Fifth but as a private citizen. Lois Lerner the senior IRS employee should be compelled to answer reasonable questions about her role in targeting certain groups. If it was all done aboveboard then what does Lerner the employee have to fear?

Happy Nomad on June 11, 2013 at 10:54 AM

The government is attacking US citizens and then mocking those that are attacked. They are challenging Americans to do something about it.

d1carter on June 11, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Once again, Obama sets the tone. Witness the appointment of Susan Rice as National Security Adviser…and a dozen other actions of the President in recent weeks. He is communicating loud and clear to his multitudes of acolytes in the bowels of federal agencies across the spectrum.

in_awe on June 11, 2013 at 10:55 AM

This sounds suspiciously like DOJ reasoning….

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 11, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Orwell was an amateur compared to the things these people in Washington can dream up to protect themselves. Next thing they’ll be telling us that they have to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights to protect our American liberty and traditions.

Oh, wait…!

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

Case closed…..nothing to see here it doesn’t go to WH
-cummings

cmsinaz on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

So basically the IRS can break the law and illegally share protected information with outside groups because it’s illegal for them to be investigated? Yeah, that ain’t gonna fly. If the bureaucracy is that corrupt(and that arrogant about it), then a few firings won’t cut it. Shut the whole thing down. Permanently.

Doughboy on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

I totally trust these guys to engage in oversight of themselves.

MadisonConservative on June 11, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Me too!

Not only that, I’m totally excited about having them manage my personal medical records, too!

UltimateBob on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

Has anyone cited the actual statute so we can, you know, read it for ourselves to determine what it does or does not prohibit?

Blake on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

And this is why I say that the only way Lois Lerner can assert 5th Amendment rights is to resign from government service and accept a lifetime ban against ever holding any position of power again, down to and including Notary Public or Juror. She has a right to be free from having her own testimony used against her in a criminal proceeding, but she has no right to wield power over others.

The Monster on June 11, 2013 at 10:48 AM

She has a right to not have her own testimony used against her? I don’t think that’s how it works. Her testimony can’t be compelled but if she gives it then it can be used against her.

gwelf on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Yeah, I don’t think for a second this kind of argument will hold up in court. So I’m guessing the real point is to stall, so they don’t have to turn anything over until a court has a chance to rule, possibly pushing it out until after the next election.

If that’s the plan, I don’t think it will work. They’ll probably just outsmart themselves and turn it into an even hotter issue during the 2014 elections.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

If IRS or any other agency can get away with this, all the ‘oversight’ in the world will be pointless.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Does anyone have power over the IRS…other than the thugs at the White House?

d1carter on June 11, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Are you sure they have the power?

Nothing will be done with the IRS, just a few minor policy changes. The IRS is the “enforcer” for congress and the White House.

The power to tax is the power to control…that is why appointment to the Ways and Means cmte. is so prestigious, so sought after.

We could basically dismantle the IRS with a “flat tax” type of proposal, eliminate subsidies, minimize non-profits, and the IRS becomes 10% of the size and influence…but it won’t happen.

Congress will not give up that power…

right2bright on June 11, 2013 at 10:59 AM

If IRS or any other agency can get away with this, all the ‘oversight’ in the world will be pointless.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Exactly…NSA, can’t release information that they are gathering and from whom for national security reasons…/s

right2bright on June 11, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Obama’s “Fundamental Transformation of America” is complete. Total corruption from top to bottom within the federal government.

Dasher on June 11, 2013 at 11:00 AM

As Mark Steyn has pointed out the real problem isn’t who’s in the Whitehouse or running Congress it’s the legislative, regulatory and other powers we’ve invested in the bureaucracies. They are their own principalities with control over our lives and pursuits and livelihoods that are almost totally unaccountable to the democratic process. Obama will be gone at the end of this term but the bureaucracy lives on forever.

gwelf on June 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM

a friend of mine got a letter that their filing was overdue, which was incorrect because they had filed on time.
.
Upon contacting the IRS they learned another application using his information was already received (for a refund obviously) and blocked the processing of their joint return and consequently his spouse had no processed filing and was now overdue.
.
So they asked , well, show me that first filing, since clearly it is send with my name on it. That however did the IRS not want to do due to privacy concerns –privacy of the criminal. But the criminal who violated the identity of good citizens, we don’t care if that is trashed.
.
And yes, it took the IRS over 9 months to look into the matter all the while they were harassed by other letters from the automated IRS system threatening about the not yet processed return (except the cheque they had send in on time, that money was taken immediately)

huntingmoose on June 11, 2013 at 11:02 AM

She has a right to not have her own testimony used against her?
gwelf on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Then Miranda needs to be changed if we’re going to go that route. A defense attorney can get his client’s confession excluded, but going this new and improved way means a confession is basically inadmissible evidence, like evidence seized during an illegal search.

Orwell had nothing on these people.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 11:02 AM

I totally trust these guys to engage in oversight of themselves.

MadisonConservative on June 11, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Like these guys:

“Employees at the U.S. Department of the Interior routinely violate federal policy by approving their own travel and charging thousands of dollars in unsupported costs to the government, according to auditors.

I feel better already.

Bishop on June 11, 2013 at 11:03 AM

If IRS or any other agency can get away with this, all the ‘oversight’ in the world will be pointless.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

It sounds like those evil South African dudes in Legal Wreckin 2 who go around dealing drugs and killing cops and then claim diplomatic immunity to protect themselves from prosecution.

Doughboy on June 11, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Hitler would have been proud. And Hugo, and Mao and Stalin and Atilla the Hun.

redguy on June 11, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Summary executions for all guilty parties.

BuckeyeSam on June 11, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Isn’t this the group that can’t keep receipts of their conventions, and don’t know how to audit the vendors to obtain those receipts…and isn’t this the organization, where one of their executives stated “I am not very good at math”…

Why is anything surprising? Nor is it surprising that congress, both sides, are not in any hurry to control them.

right2bright on June 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM

huntingmoose on June 11, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Wow, that is shocking.

That’s one more reason that I underpay my taxes every year…. there’s no refund due to me that can be stolen!

F__k the IRS.

UltimateBob on June 11, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Bishop on June 11, 2013 at 11:03 AM

Y DO U WANT TERRRRRRISTS 2 KILL PPL????!!!

MadisonConservative on June 11, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Summary executions for all guilty parties.

BuckeyeSam on June 11, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Or another convention to re-organize…Food, drinks, travel, on the house.

right2bright on June 11, 2013 at 11:08 AM

This is about the NSA Stasi scandal but it perfectly sums up the arrogance of Congress.

“There are certain things that are appropriate for me to know that is not appropriate for the bad guys to know,”
- Al Franken

Not clear who the bastard really is referring to as bad guys. Terrorists or ordinary citizens.

Happy Nomad on June 11, 2013 at 11:09 AM

Kafka says: LOLWUT?

Jeff Weimer on June 11, 2013 at 11:10 AM

The protection given to Federal employees gives rise to these types of ridiculous action.
Take away the protection and watch accountability improve.

Jabberwock on June 11, 2013 at 11:11 AM

“God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. … What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”
– TJ

Shy Guy on June 11, 2013 at 11:11 AM

If IRS or any other agency can get away with this, all the ‘oversight’ in the world will be pointless.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

This is what enrages me when I see establishment politicians backing the NSA snooping by saying that there’s “oversight” and that things are “illegal.” First, there is no vigilant oversight. Second, when there is oversight, nothing can be done to bring people to justice.

Whoever leaked the NOM donors should have been identified by now, prosecuted, and sentenced. This is a national disgrace. And at this point, I wouldn’t mind at all seeing a large number of corrupt bureaucrats hanging by piano wires. They are un-American, and they’re undermining this great country.

BuckeyeSam on June 11, 2013 at 11:12 AM

Obama’s “Fundamental Transformation of America” is complete. Total corruption from top to bottom within the federal government.

Dasher on June 11, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Bingo. Pretty much what I’ve concluded.

But let’s spend the next week on ONE individual who exposed
the NSA!

ToddPA on June 11, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Not only that, I’m totally excited about having them manage my personal medical records, too!

UltimateBob on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

That is super convenient. And when you think about it, the people managing your medical history and your money and keeping track of your correspondence are also the people who decide if you can have a gun — which is, freaky lucky.

We’re as safe and snuggled in as bugs in rugs.

Axe on June 11, 2013 at 11:13 AM

This is about the NSA Stasi scandal but it perfectly sums up the arrogance of Congress.

“There are certain things that are appropriate for me to know that is not appropriate for the bad guys to know,”
- Al Franken

Not clear who the bastard really is referring to as bad guys. Terrorists or ordinary citizens.

Happy Nomad on June 11, 2013 at 11:09 AM

He’s a liberal Dem. Same thing, in his eyes and in those of his colleagues which include RINOs.

Liam on June 11, 2013 at 11:14 AM

BTW: Hot Air should play Cavuto’s interview with the CEO (or founder) of Home Depot from yesterday afternoon. That guy is unbelievably awesome.

BuckeyeSam on June 11, 2013 at 11:14 AM

and Atilla the Hun.

redguy on June 11, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Don’t lump Attila or Genghis Khan in with the rest. They were actually good at cutting down on social spending, if you know what I mean. Fewer mouths to feed meant less spending.

oldroy on June 11, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Of course the IRS makes this legal pretzel claim.

Every agency in the executive is making the same sorts of legal pretzel arguments…and they are brazen about it because the Executive has neutered the Congress.

workingclass artist on June 11, 2013 at 11:15 AM

That Franken would be privy to any information beyond the location of the senate dining room scares me more than anything else.

Bishop on June 11, 2013 at 11:17 AM

As I said somewhere else on this earlier today, I wonder if the recipients of illegally received confidential information don’t have liability here. They each knowingly received confidential information (the private real property of the filing organization) and then used it in pursuit of their commercial activities, with intent to attract increased or continuing funding thereby. Like a fence selling stolen goods.

I think a class action against these so-called “non-profits” might be instructive and potentially even teach us a lot. In any event we could turn the left’s usual tool against them. That would be fun.

MTF on June 11, 2013 at 11:19 AM

But – ED – remember YOU Said, and I want to Quote You EXACTLY on THIS:

….mmmBut mmmBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH-BOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH

…..as I recall you saying WORD FOR WORD!!

williamg on June 11, 2013 at 11:20 AM

That’s something all Americans should fear — and work to either change or eliminate.

I’ll go with ‘eliminate’.

trigon on June 11, 2013 at 11:21 AM

How do we get personal contact info, addresses, etc on these IRS folks (like the specific agent from the earlier IRS thread telling some group to ‘keep it to themselves’ or some such)?

I think these people need to be hounded personally at work, at home, on their commute, etc. Lives need to be made a living hell. Messages must be sent, lessons must be learned.

Midas on June 11, 2013 at 11:21 AM

By the way, I think the same principle could be used in even a relativel benign situation, like the Austan Goolsbee/Koch tax info case.

If Koch could find a way file against Goolsbee in his individual capacity, which is tough obviously, then he might well assert in defense of his statements that he learned the tax information from the Florida interview but he would only do so after a discovery phase and under oath.

It would be interesting to see if his defense “evolved” at all in an action like this one.

MTF on June 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM

As the “Church Lady” would say:
“Isn’t that conveeeenient!”
http://tinyurl.com/n2x9wn7

I don’t know what it will take for Americans to wake up.
I am not optimistic – been around too much.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWHOIowtzXA

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on June 11, 2013 at 11:26 AM

FOIA requests aren’t answered by someone in a call center; they go to the legal department in an agency with more lawyers than there are players in the NFL at any one time.

Wrong. They go to a central FOIA office in the agency, separate from all other offices/divisions and staffed by non-lawyers with the equivalent of call-center education. Depending on the complexity of the requests, the worker bees may farm them out from there to the appropriate legal divisions in the agency for a response. Or at least that’s how it was when I worked FOIA at a federal agency.

mrsknightley on June 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Normally my first reaction to something like this would be “unbelievable”.

But it only takes a fraction of a second to remember the administration we’re currently under and the state they’ve got us in.

At that point it all just becomes par for the course.

Oxymoron on June 11, 2013 at 11:30 AM

“There are certain things that are appropriate for me to know that is not appropriate for the bad guys to know,”
– Al Franken

Not clear who the bastard really is referring to as bad guys. Terrorists or ordinary citizens.

Happy Nomad on June 11, 2013 at 11:09 AM

That would be those individuals in the state of Minnesota
who are “outdoorsmen”…you know, they like to Fish, Hunt, and
pursue activities such as that…..(not anybody on this
website)
..don’t let any Flat Earther Dolt from the heartland tell you
any different, they’re the REAL terrorists!

And Al needs to know about these things….you see, he’s got
a Sh*tload of car trunks he needs to have “serviced”

ToddPA on June 11, 2013 at 11:31 AM

She has a right to not have her own testimony used against her? I don’t think that’s how it works. Her testimony can’t be compelled but if she gives it then it can be used against her.

gwelf on June 11, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Yes. If the Fifth Amendment doesn’t protect her against being compelled to testify before Congress, it must protect that coerced testimony from being used against her in a criminal proceeding.

But if she does assert that right to protect herself against criminal penalties, then she should also be excluded from ever exercising power over anyone else.

The Monster on June 11, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Oh yes, the right rear tire is a bit low.

mike3121 on June 11, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Relax, Mr. Eastman, the Oversight Committees have your back.

Now please explain the phone call you made to your wife at 0538 on 04/14/09 from the BP gas station in Larchwood, Iowa where you bought exactly $17.08 worth of 91 octane gasoline using a Mastercard ending in 8762 and an expiration date of 06/14.

Bishop on June 11, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Oh yes, the right rear tire is a bit low.

Note: I tried the quote and it didn’t work. I used a control V instead.

mike3121 on June 11, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Let’s face it, the election is over so the stonewalling will end soon. You will notice, however, that while they’re stonewalling, nothing is being done about these applications. I’m not sure if they can carry this out until 2014, but with Pravda and Izvestia on the job, they just might be able to get away with it.

bflat879 on June 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Someone needs to go to jail Ben

neyney on June 11, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Not Orwell, more like Joseph Heller:

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane, he had to fly them. If he flew them, he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to, he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

“That’s some catch, that Catch-22,” he observed.

“It’s the best there is,” Doc Daneeka agreed.

PackerBronco on June 11, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Orwellian?
More like, montypythonian.

Dexter_Alarius on June 11, 2013 at 12:08 PM

It sounds like those evil South African dudes in Legal Wreckin 2 who go around dealing drugs and killing cops and then claim diplomatic immunity to protect themselves from prosecution.

Doughboy on June 11, 2013 at 11:05 AM

And, I loved Murtaugh’s response when confronted with that defense:
“It’s been revoked.” BLAM! BLAM!

GWB on June 11, 2013 at 12:25 PM

All FOIA responses should be over an individual’s signature, and that individual should not have any immunity from damages for the release of personal, protected information.
Either that, or repeal the statutes against dueling.

Another Drew on June 11, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Now I know this is what we are paying our public servants for. One giant massive CYA mobilization of the government.

jake49 on June 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Well, I for one am glad that there is such strong oversight in place to curb the (potential) excesses of the IRS.

Especially considering that they are the ones tasked with keeping track of all of the medical information about every American.

Without such strong oversight, it’s entirely conceivable that some unscrupulous person to use – or mis-use – that information for who knows what nefarious purpose.

//bluegill//

Solaratov on June 11, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Nobody has said that the testimony as the remake of the classic “who’s on first”.

teejk on June 11, 2013 at 1:46 PM

Time to raise the stakes?

If releasing the info is a felony, anyone knowingly trying to cover it up or interfere with the investigation also becomes subject to felony charges.

taznar on June 11, 2013 at 1:48 PM

Once upon a time it was reeealllly dangerous for a “revenuer” (sounds like manuer) to go poking around in people’s business.
How long ’til that’s the case again with these kinds of actions?

questionmark on June 11, 2013 at 1:58 PM

manure–I knew it didn’t look right.

questionmark on June 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Eliminate.

Unless of course this post is being reviewed by the government for subversive content in which case I think they are doing an excellent job.

talkingpoints on June 11, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Shut the whole thing down. Permanently.

Doughboy on June 11, 2013 at 10:56 AM

No, blow it up. Completely.

They already call us terrorists, as they terrorize us. That’s exactly what the Israelis have to contend with. So let’s do what the Israelis would do and fight back, literally.

ardenenoch on June 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Don’t worry everyone, the data collected by the NSA would never be used to target US citizens for political purposes and is great for stopping terrorism. You are afraid of terrorists! You should be very afraid of the terrorists. Our government can be trusted completely.

-Blue Gill and company

Pattosensei on June 11, 2013 at 3:32 PM

I don’t know about you, but I was think about forming my own 501(c)4 but after hearing horror stories about Tea Parties trying to get their 501(c) 4-s, I decided to hold off.

That said … how about a settlement of Tea Party v IRS modeled on the Pigford settlement

J_Crater on June 11, 2013 at 5:53 PM