IRS & Congress ScumBags hold your Liberty in Contempt: Ron Paul Last week, the Justice Department announced it would not charge former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner...

Sicilianthing

Ron Paul
Last week, the Justice Department announced it would not charge former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner with contempt of Congress. Some members of Congress requested that Lerner be charged with contempt after she refused to testify at a congressional hearing investigating her role in denying or delaying the applications for tax-exempt status of Tea Party and pro-limited-government organizations.

Cynics might suggest it is not surprising that a former government official would avoid prosecution for refusing to tell Congress about how federal employees abused their power to help the incumbent administration. These cynics have a point, but the problem goes beyond mere partisanship. Government officials are rarely prosecuted for even the most blatant violations of our liberties. In contrast, federal prosecutors routinely pursue criminal charges against whistleblowers. For example, the only American prosecuted and imprisoned in relation to the governments use of torture was whistleblower John Kiriakou.

While some officials like Lerner who find themselves at the center of a high-profile scandal or partisan dispute can expect harsh treatment from Congress, this is the exception, not the rule. Executive branch officials usually receive deferential treatment from members of Congress. I recall one hearing on government surveillance where a representative actually apologized to a government official because Congress had the gall to ask that official to testify about the governments ongoing surveillance of the American people.

In contrast, private citizens called before Congress are harangued and even bullied. Congress should stop using the hearing process to intimidate private citizens and start using it to intimidate those government officials who are threatening our liberty. For example, Congress should continue to investigate the IRSs ongoing attempts to silence organizations that work to advance free markets and individual liberty.

My Campaign for Liberty organization has had to battle an IRS demand that it hand over personal information regarding some of its top donors. The IRS is either ignoring, or ignorant of, the numerous precedents protecting the right of organizations like the Campaign for Liberty to protect their members privacy from government officials.

The IRS is drafting a new regulation that would empower the agency to revoke an organizations tax-exempt status if that organization sends out a communication to its members or the general public mentioning a candidate for office by name 60 days before an e******n or 30 days before a primary. By preventing groups from telling their members where candidates stand on issues like Audit the Fed and repeal of the Patriot Act, this anti-1st Amendment regulation benefits those politicians who wish to hide their beliefs from the v**ers.

Since the IRSs power stems from the tax system, the only way to protect our liberty from this agency is to eliminate the tax code. Promising to end the IRS is a popular applause line for politicians wishing to appear as champions of liberty. Last week, John Koskinen, the current IRS commissar, responded to these cries to end the IRS by pointing out that shutting down the IRS would deprive Congress of the revenue needed to fund the welfare-warfare state. Koskinen has a point. Congress cannot shut down the IRS until it enacts major reductions in all areas of government spending.

Politicians who v**e for warfare abroad and welfare at home yet claim they want to shut down the IRS should not be taken seriously. Freeing the people from the IRSs tyranny is one of the best reasons to end the welfare-warfare state and return the federal government to its constitutional limitations.

Ron Paul

Foodbandid Loc: My kitchen

Sicilianthing wrote:

Ron Paul
Last week, the Justice Department announced it would not charge former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner with contempt of Congress. Some members of Congress requested that Lerner be charged with contempt after she refused to testify at a congressional hearing investigating her role in denying or delaying the applications for tax-exempt status of Tea Party and pro-limited-government organizations.

Cynics might suggest it is not surprising that a former government official would avoid prosecution for refusing to tell Congress about how federal employees abused their power to help the incumbent administration. These cynics have a point, but the problem goes beyond mere partisanship. Government officials are rarely prosecuted for even the most blatant violations of our liberties. In contrast, federal prosecutors routinely pursue criminal charges against whistleblowers. For example, the only American prosecuted and imprisoned in relation to the governments use of torture was whistleblower John Kiriakou.

While some officials like Lerner who find themselves at the center of a high-profile scandal or partisan dispute can expect harsh treatment from Congress, this is the exception, not the rule. Executive branch officials usually receive deferential treatment from members of Congress. I recall one hearing on government surveillance where a representative actually apologized to a government official because Congress had the gall to ask that official to testify about the governments ongoing surveillance of the American people.

In contrast, private citizens called before Congress are harangued and even bullied. Congress should stop using the hearing process to intimidate private citizens and start using it to intimidate those government officials who are threatening our liberty. For example, Congress should continue to investigate the IRSs ongoing attempts to silence organizations that work to advance free markets and individual liberty.

My Campaign for Liberty organization has had to battle an IRS demand that it hand over personal information regarding some of its top donors. The IRS is either ignoring, or ignorant of, the numerous precedents protecting the right of organizations like the Campaign for Liberty to protect their members privacy from government officials.

The IRS is drafting a new regulation that would empower the agency to revoke an organizations tax-exempt status if that organization sends out a communication to its members or the general public mentioning a candidate for office by name 60 days before an e******n or 30 days before a primary. By preventing groups from telling their members where candidates stand on issues like Audit the Fed and repeal of the Patriot Act, this anti-1st Amendment regulation benefits those politicians who wish to hide their beliefs from the v**ers.

Since the IRSs power stems from the tax system, the only way to protect our liberty from this agency is to eliminate the tax code. Promising to end the IRS is a popular applause line for politicians wishing to appear as champions of liberty. Last week, John Koskinen, the current IRS commissar, responded to these cries to end the IRS by pointing out that shutting down the IRS would deprive Congress of the revenue needed to fund the welfare-warfare state. Koskinen has a point. Congress cannot shut down the IRS until it enacts major reductions in all areas of government spending.

Politicians who v**e for warfare abroad and welfare at home yet claim they want to shut down the IRS should not be taken seriously. Freeing the people from the IRSs tyranny is one of the best reasons to end the welfare-warfare state and return the federal government to its constitutional limitations.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul br Last week, the Justice Department anno... (show quote)

Sadly they all speak with forked tongue..Every last one of them.. Who to trust besides the Lord?

Loki Loc: Georgia

Sicilianthing wrote:

Ron Paul
Last week, the Justice Department announced it would not charge former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner with contempt of Congress. Some members of Congress requested that Lerner be charged with contempt after she refused to testify at a congressional hearing investigating her role in denying or delaying the applications for tax-exempt status of Tea Party and pro-limited-government organizations.

Cynics might suggest it is not surprising that a former government official would avoid prosecution for refusing to tell Congress about how federal employees abused their power to help the incumbent administration. These cynics have a point, but the problem goes beyond mere partisanship. Government officials are rarely prosecuted for even the most blatant violations of our liberties. In contrast, federal prosecutors routinely pursue criminal charges against whistleblowers. For example, the only American prosecuted and imprisoned in relation to the governments use of torture was whistleblower John Kiriakou.

While some officials like Lerner who find themselves at the center of a high-profile scandal or partisan dispute can expect harsh treatment from Congress, this is the exception, not the rule. Executive branch officials usually receive deferential treatment from members of Congress. I recall one hearing on government surveillance where a representative actually apologized to a government official because Congress had the gall to ask that official to testify about the governments ongoing surveillance of the American people.

In contrast, private citizens called before Congress are harangued and even bullied. Congress should stop using the hearing process to intimidate private citizens and start using it to intimidate those government officials who are threatening our liberty. For example, Congress should continue to investigate the IRSs ongoing attempts to silence organizations that work to advance free markets and individual liberty.

My Campaign for Liberty organization has had to battle an IRS demand that it hand over personal information regarding some of its top donors. The IRS is either ignoring, or ignorant of, the numerous precedents protecting the right of organizations like the Campaign for Liberty to protect their members privacy from government officials.

The IRS is drafting a new regulation that would empower the agency to revoke an organizations tax-exempt status if that organization sends out a communication to its members or the general public mentioning a candidate for office by name 60 days before an e******n or 30 days before a primary. By preventing groups from telling their members where candidates stand on issues like Audit the Fed and repeal of the Patriot Act, this anti-1st Amendment regulation benefits those politicians who wish to hide their beliefs from the v**ers.

Since the IRSs power stems from the tax system, the only way to protect our liberty from this agency is to eliminate the tax code. Promising to end the IRS is a popular applause line for politicians wishing to appear as champions of liberty. Last week, John Koskinen, the current IRS commissar, responded to these cries to end the IRS by pointing out that shutting down the IRS would deprive Congress of the revenue needed to fund the welfare-warfare state. Koskinen has a point. Congress cannot shut down the IRS until it enacts major reductions in all areas of government spending.

Politicians who v**e for warfare abroad and welfare at home yet claim they want to shut down the IRS should not be taken seriously. Freeing the people from the IRSs tyranny is one of the best reasons to end the welfare-warfare state and return the federal government to its constitutional limitations.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul br Last week, the Justice Department anno... (show quote)

Lois Lerner is a criminal, but, unfortunately, the Constitution she betrays protects her from self incrimination. If her testimony tends to incriminate her, she doesn't have to testify. I suppose this is a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Constitutional safeguards against a police state usually work as intended. Sometimes they don't. It looks like safeguarding the rights of many people, in this case, allowed a large hairball to get coughed up and out.

Sicilianthing

Foodbandid wrote:

Sadly they all speak with forked tongue..Every last one of them.. Who to trust besides the Lord?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I feel bad to say this, I hold my Faith before anything... but I think God is going to sit this one out and Watch Free Will take it's course... just like it says in the writings...

It's time to get up off our ass and take action... using free will which he won't interefere with (if you believe) and

March on Washington and Clear them out.

V****g will Not Change Anything until you deal with the Bankster families.

GAME OVER !

Sicilianthing

Loki wrote:

Lois Lerner is a criminal, but, unfortunately, the Constitution she betrays protects her from self incrimination. If her testimony tends to incriminate her, she doesn't have to testify. I suppose this is a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Constitutional safeguards against a police state usually work as intended. Sometimes they don't. It looks like safeguarding the rights of many people, in this case, allowed a large hairball to get coughed up and out.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ok so now what ?

Kevyn

Sicilianthing wrote:

Ron Paul
Last week, the Justice Department announced it would not charge former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner with contempt of Congress. Some members of Congress requested that Lerner be charged with contempt after she refused to testify at a congressional hearing investigating her role in denying or delaying the applications for tax-exempt status of Tea Party and pro-limited-government organizations.

Cynics might suggest it is not surprising that a former government official would avoid prosecution for refusing to tell Congress about how federal employees abused their power to help the incumbent administration. These cynics have a point, but the problem goes beyond mere partisanship. Government officials are rarely prosecuted for even the most blatant violations of our liberties. In contrast, federal prosecutors routinely pursue criminal charges against whistleblowers. For example, the only American prosecuted and imprisoned in relation to the governments use of torture was whistleblower John Kiriakou.

While some officials like Lerner who find themselves at the center of a high-profile scandal or partisan dispute can expect harsh treatment from Congress, this is the exception, not the rule. Executive branch officials usually receive deferential treatment from members of Congress. I recall one hearing on government surveillance where a representative actually apologized to a government official because Congress had the gall to ask that official to testify about the governments ongoing surveillance of the American people.

In contrast, private citizens called before Congress are harangued and even bullied. Congress should stop using the hearing process to intimidate private citizens and start using it to intimidate those government officials who are threatening our liberty. For example, Congress should continue to investigate the IRSs ongoing attempts to silence organizations that work to advance free markets and individual liberty.

My Campaign for Liberty organization has had to battle an IRS demand that it hand over personal information regarding some of its top donors. The IRS is either ignoring, or ignorant of, the numerous precedents protecting the right of organizations like the Campaign for Liberty to protect their members privacy from government officials.

The IRS is drafting a new regulation that would empower the agency to revoke an organizations tax-exempt status if that organization sends out a communication to its members or the general public mentioning a candidate for office by name 60 days before an e******n or 30 days before a primary. By preventing groups from telling their members where candidates stand on issues like Audit the Fed and repeal of the Patriot Act, this anti-1st Amendment regulation benefits those politicians who wish to hide their beliefs from the v**ers.

Since the IRSs power stems from the tax system, the only way to protect our liberty from this agency is to eliminate the tax code. Promising to end the IRS is a popular applause line for politicians wishing to appear as champions of liberty. Last week, John Koskinen, the current IRS commissar, responded to these cries to end the IRS by pointing out that shutting down the IRS would deprive Congress of the revenue needed to fund the welfare-warfare state. Koskinen has a point. Congress cannot shut down the IRS until it enacts major reductions in all areas of government spending.

Politicians who v**e for warfare abroad and welfare at home yet claim they want to shut down the IRS should not be taken seriously. Freeing the people from the IRSs tyranny is one of the best reasons to end the welfare-warfare state and return the federal government to its constitutional limitations.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul br Last week, the Justice Department anno... (show quote)

Paul's organization is laundering dirty political money and trying to protect those who are buying politicians. This is the worst kind of behavior when it comes to hiding the sinister secret doners who are rigging our e******ns. We are entitled to a secret b****t but none of us is guaranteed anonymity with our freedom of speech.

Sicilianthing

Kevyn wrote:

Paul's organization is laundering dirty political money and trying to protect those who are buying politicians. This is the worst kind of behavior when it comes to hiding the sinister secret doners who are rigging our e******ns. We are entitled to a secret b****t but none of us is guaranteed anonymity with our freedom of speech.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Electronic V****G needs to END

PERIOD...

Game OVER !

Loki Loc: Georgia

Sicilianthing wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Electronic V****G needs to END

PERIOD...

Game OVER !

Now THAT I can agree with.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Sicilianthing wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Electronic V****G needs to END

PERIOD...

Game OVER !

Now THAT I can agree with.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Kevyn wrote:

Paul's organization is laundering dirty political money and trying to protect those who are buying politicians. This is the worst kind of behavior when it comes to hiding the sinister secret doners who are rigging our e******ns. We are entitled to a secret b****t but none of us is guaranteed anonymity with our freedom of speech.

Paul's organization are neophytes compared to the people behind Obama, and McConnell, and Reid, and Schumer, and Pelosi, and Boehner.

Foodbandid Loc: My kitchen

Loki wrote:

Lois Lerner is a criminal, but, unfortunately, the Constitution she betrays protects her from self incrimination. If her testimony tends to incriminate her, she doesn't have to testify. I suppose this is a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Constitutional safeguards against a police state usually work as intended. Sometimes they don't. It looks like safeguarding the rights of many people, in this case, allowed a large hairball to get coughed up and out.

You mean "safeguarding the rights of government workers", and NOT "We the People". God forbid we have representatives that stand up for Americans.. If America would just spy on other countries like they spy on each other..

Sicilianthing

Loki wrote:

Paul's organization are neophytes compared to the people behind Obama, and McConnell, and Reid, and Schumer, and Pelosi, and Boehner.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

and the list goes on and on and on and on and on .....

All these Clowns will be on the run when the Bell rings !