ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 15th January 2017, 08:23 PM   #321
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 8,938
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
Actually, Nixon was impeached for attempting to use the IRS as a political weapon. The IRS at time quite correctly refused to audit the people that Nixon wanted audited...
Just to get back to this and clarify, President Richard Nixon did use the IRS to harass or punish people and groups he considered enemies.
Quote:
Nixon appears to have targeted a wider range of "enemy" groups for tax audits, including antiwar groups (and the churches and other nonprofits that sheltered them), civil rights groups, reporters, and prominent Democrats. Moreover, as a result of Watergate investigation (1973-4) and, especially, the disclosure of White House tapes, many of these activities became public. news story link
In 1972 the Commissioner of IRS, Johnnie Mac Walters, was apparently given an "enemies list" of about 200 prominent Democrats by White House counsel John Dean. In an interview in 2013 with USA Today, Walters related:
Quote:
"I said to him, 'John, do you know what you're doing?' " Walters recalled. "He said, 'No, what do you mean?'" ...A couple of days later, he showed the list to Secretary of the Treasury George Shultz, his boss, and said that in his opinion the IRS should do "absolutely nothing" with it. Link
Shultz agreed and the list was set aside. However, this took place in 1972 and there are allegations that Nixon was ordering audits well before that.

The other thing is, Nixon was never impeached. He chose to resign instead. There were three articles of impeachment that passed the House Judiciary Committee, one of which was abuse of power. This was supported in part by the IRS allegations, but only in part as there were other abuses cited as well.

Last edited by newyorkguy; 15th January 2017 at 08:25 PM.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th January 2017, 08:47 PM   #322
cmikes
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Just to get back to this and clarify, President Richard Nixon did use the IRS to harass or punish people and groups he considered enemies.


In 1972 the Commissioner of IRS, Johnnie Mac Walters, was apparently given an "enemies list" of about 200 prominent Democrats by White House counsel John Dean. In an interview in 2013 with USA Today, Walters related:

Shultz agreed and the list was set aside. However, this took place in 1972 and there are allegations that Nixon was ordering audits well before that.

The other thing is, Nixon was never impeached. He chose to resign instead. There were three articles of impeachment that passed the House Judiciary Committee, one of which was abuse of power. This was supported in part by the IRS allegations, but only in part as there were other abuses cited as well.

Bolds added. Yes, there were allegations that Nixon ordered other audits. Of course, there were also allegations that Nixon was sacrificing infants to Satan and drinking the leftover blood. The only case with any evidence that we know about was the Nixon requested the IRS to audit people and the IRS rightly refused to do so.

As far as Nixon being impeached, yes, Nixon, like Clinton was impeached. The impeachment articles were passed by the House, but neither man was convicted by the Senate. Nixon resigned before the vote in the Senate because he had been informed by the GOP leadership that his lying to the American people along with his other actions were unacceptable and that he would certainly be convicted and removed from office by the Senate. Clinton, on the other hand, was informed by the Democratic leadership in the Senate that perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice wasn't important since he was a Democrat and that partisanship would protect him.


ETA: Oops, just checked, and you were right and I was wrong. Nixon resigned before the full House vote but after the Judiciary Committee vote. I withdraw the claim. Shows what I get going by memory instead of checking. Sorry about that.

Last edited by cmikes; 15th January 2017 at 09:35 PM.
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 06:53 AM   #323
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 17,906
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
Bolds added. Yes, there were allegations that Nixon ordered other audits. Of course, there were also allegations that Nixon was sacrificing infants to Satan and drinking the leftover blood. The only case with any evidence that we know about was the Nixon requested the IRS to audit people and the IRS rightly refused to do so.

As far as Nixon being impeached, yes, Nixon, like Clinton was impeached. The impeachment articles were passed by the House, but neither man was convicted by the Senate. Nixon resigned before the vote in the Senate because he had been informed by the GOP leadership that his lying to the American people along with his other actions were unacceptable and that he would certainly be convicted and removed from office by the Senate. Clinton, on the other hand, was informed by the Democratic leadership in the Senate that perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice wasn't important since he was a Democrat and that partisanship would protect him.


ETA: Oops, just checked, and you were right and I was wrong. Nixon resigned before the full House vote but after the Judiciary Committee vote. I withdraw the claim. Shows what I get going by memory instead of checking. Sorry about that.
Bolding mine.

I think that's more faulty memory.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 07:01 AM   #324
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 8,938
Thanks but I checked sources too. This was over forty years ago!

I understand this is off-topic but there was a major difference between what happened to Bill Clinton and the Nixon episode. Impeachment charges were brought against Clinton because he had lied under oath about having an extra-marital affair. Nixon was accused of using the power of his office to abuse the democratic process.

At any rate, to bring this back on-topic, I do not expect the IRS to investigate President Donald Trump unless ordered to do so by Congress, the FBI or the DofJ. I don't expect either of those three groups to consider something like that because of Trump's past conduct. If in the coming months there are serious accusations that Trump is receiving payoffs or is involved in other illegal activities as president, then I could see an investigation.

Last edited by newyorkguy; 16th January 2017 at 07:05 AM.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 11:25 AM   #325
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Lol
The agony of defeat!
Yeah, it's been a bitch watching you all sell yourselves down the river.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 06:11 PM   #326
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,184
I know I'm going back to an earlier portion of this thread, but I was reminded of it again today. It was the smackdown that Trump laid on the CNN reporter during the press conference. When I first heard that, there was a little voice in my saying it was dangerous to have a president who only takes questions from friendly journalists.

However, there was a great big voice in my head saying, "THAT WAS FRIGGIN' AWESOME!!!!"

These guys in the press take themselves way too seriously, and they are just entertainers, anyway. Press conferences become a way of seeing who can score points by asking the best question. I was glad to see one them put into his place.

Partly, I liked it because I blame CNN for Trump in the first place. He didn't deserve coverage, but he got tons more of it than anyone else, because he was the most entertaining. He kept the ratings high.
__________________
Leftists are scum. Right wingers are scum. There - now if you don't have anything else to say, could you just please go away.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 07:11 PM   #327
cmikes
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Thanks but I checked sources too. This was over forty years ago!

I used to know this stuff, I swear. But you're right, I should have checked sources before I replied instead of after.


Quote:
I understand this is off-topic but there was a major difference between what happened to Bill Clinton and the Nixon episode. Impeachment charges were brought against Clinton because he had lied under oath about having an extra-marital affair. Nixon was accused of using the power of his office to abuse the democratic process.

Off topic, so I'll just note that the laws against perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice don't have an * beside them saying "unless you're a Democratic president being sued in Civil court."


Quote:
At any rate, to bring this back on-topic, I do not expect the IRS to investigate President Donald Trump unless ordered to do so by Congress, the FBI or the DofJ. I don't expect either of those three groups to consider something like that because of Trump's past conduct. If in the coming months there are serious accusations that Trump is receiving payoffs or is involved in other illegal activities as president, then I could see an investigation.

I agree with this, except to say that I'm sure that, like most prominent Republicans, Trump will end up on the IRS's "random" audit list every year.
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 07:17 PM   #328
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Yeah, it's been a bitch watching you all sell yourselves down the river.
I didn't sell anything, just voted.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 07:25 PM   #329
Hercules56
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,546
Originally Posted by logger View Post
I didn't sell anything, just voted.
Which means you will own everything he does.

War with China. War with Iran. War with North Korea.

30 million people without health insurance.

That will all be yours.
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 09:44 PM   #330
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Which means you will own everything he does.
Ok
Quote:
War with China. War with Iran. War with North Korea.
Thanks Obama?
Quote:
30 million people without health insurance.
Now they will be able to afford it.
Quote:
That will all be yours.
Amusing, thanks!
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th January 2017, 04:34 AM   #331
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 8,938
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
...Off topic, so I'll just note that the laws against perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice don't have an * beside them saying "unless you're a Democratic president being sued in Civil court." ...
This is the big divide right here. There is a major difference between a president lying under oath about an extra martial affair and a president trying to subvert the democratic process for political and ideological reasons. Pretending not to see it doesn't make it the same.

Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
I agree with this, except to say that I'm sure that, like most prominent Republicans, Trump will end up on the IRS's "random" audit list every year.
It is very hard for me to believe this happens, I never saw this comment before. Can you back it up with a reference? I hope you're not referring to the practice a few years ago when the IRS was found to have improperly audited conservative groups applying for tax exempt status based on having the words 'tea party' in their organization names. When that came to light the practice was stopped and that was not auditing most prominent Republicans.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.