Posted on 11/28/2013 2:24:18 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Bill Elliot was a cancer patient who lost his insurance due to ObamaCare and couldn’t pay the expensive new premiums. He was talking about paying the ObamaCare fine, going without health insurance and “letting nature take its course.”
He went on FOX News where his story was picked up by C. Steven Tucker, a health insurance broker who helped him keep his insurance.
Now suddenly Bill Elliot is being audited for 2009 with an interview only scheduled in April 2014. Assuming he lives that long. That might be a coincidence, but Tucker is being audited back to 2003.
That’s a rather strange coincidence.
Would the IRS actually go after a cancer patient, who had voted for Obama initially, just for appearing on FOX and now being sharply critical of Obama and suggesting that he resign for his health plan lie?
Under the current insane state of affairs, where the IRS was used to silence the opposition, it’s unfortunately entirely possible. The fact that we are even having this discussion shows how badly Obama has undermined confidence in government institutions and the rule of law.
Americans always hated the IRS, but it’s been a while since they believed that the IRS was targeting them for their political views.
The United States desperately needs to restore the rule of law and confidence in its institutions otherwise we are facing a serious crisis in which Americans begin viewing government agencies as tools of political repression.
Is Lerner still employed?
with ore to come
that should say more
RE: The Republicans need to be perfectly clear that any and all federal officers who have misused their office for improper purposes, be they government service, military or police officers, will be out of a job, and possibly be declared “personna non grata” for future federal employment, as well as lose all benefits accrued, including retirement.
You can write all the laws you want, but here’s the rub — SOMEONE HAS TO EXECUTE/IMPLEMENT the law. If that person tasked with implementing it refuses to do so, and you don’t impeach him, what good is a law like the one you described above?
As a many years manager of a local government agency overseeing laws I had to deal with such situations. In one specific event the feds and state were pushing for enforcement of a new regulation being in question. I told the governing board that I objected to the way the higher agencies wanted me to handle those kind of matters because such would put me in a position of being accuser, enforcer, and judge. I tried to convince the board that the position of being a judge was not to my way of thinking especially since there was an existing procedure approved to go through two levels of ‘judging’. I have believed for a long time that the three functions should be separate and any government official should be subject to challenge and even personal penalties if determined by a court, and not just for serious cases like shootings but in any sociatal egregious conduct affecting anyone else and should particularly be cause for firing from employment.
I thought they could only go back three years on an audit unless they proved fraud somewhere.
The rules and laws don’t apply anymore. The affirmative action President does whatever he wants and no one stops him.
“If that person tasked with implementing it refuses to do so, and you don’t impeach him...”
This is an exceptionally important agenda item for a future conservative congress and POTUS. It involves the re-balancing of not just the federal branches, but the relationship between the federal government, the individual states, and the people.
It begins with significantly reducing the assumed, but unconstitutional, powers of the POTUS. It will take a very strong POTUS to work with congress to do this, to actually *reduce* the power of his office. In order, what must be done:
1) Prohibition of the Presidential Signing Statement, which is by far the most unconstitutional act committed by presidents, by which they have taken both legislative and judicial powers.
2) Prohibition of Czars, strict limits on recess appointments, clear delineation of executive privilege, to strip the POTUS of “proclamation” powers used to seize state lands (along with the return of most taken lands), and a “sunset provision” over all executive orders. In exchange, the president should refrain from the vast majority of ceremonial duties, including two weeks of preparation for the dog and pony show of the State of the Union, which should instead be in writing, and personal conduct of foreign policy, which is a photo-op waste of time.
3) Restoration of the Posse Comitatus Act and a much stricter version of the War Powers Act. Consolidation of the national Intelligence Community (currently 16 major agencies) and Federal Police Agencies (currently 100+); and a prohibition against intelligence gathering and policing by non-intelligence, non-police agencies. (The Department of Education does *not* need its own SWAT team, but it has one.)
4) For its part, the judiciary committees of the senate and house need major restructuring of the judiciary for efficiency, and to both streamline and eliminate activities by federal judges that interfere with states beyond the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment. Especially with the death penalty. The bottleneck of 8000 or so cases appealed to the SCOTUS every year, which can only hear a few dozen cases, must be addressed.
5) Congress must assert its authority over treaties, with clear rules as to what agreements and modifications can be made without senate approval. Congressional subpoenas must be serious, and contempt of congress must be dealt with harshly, with far more serious criminal sanctions. It is up to congress to negate the abuses of the past, such as FDR’s abuse of the Interstate Commerce Clause and LBJ’s abuse of the General Welfare Clause. In doing so, much of the federal government will need to be radically reduced or eliminated. And yes, the audit of the FED.
6) The great purge of federal officers who have betrayed their oaths of office. Likewise, congress should strip all federal employees of union participation.
This is a very good start, but much more would need to be done besides.
Sure, after you've thrown out your records and now don't have a leg to stand on. Then it's your word against the all powerful government. One guess who's going to win that one.
Many people didn't catch on way back when when it first came out that he insisted the IRS oversee obamacare. There's that mmmm, mmmm, mmmm.
My dad lived in Stalin’s USSR and Nazi Germany, and was so scared of the IRS he refused to take deductions he was entitled to...
This is a ping list for cancer survivors and caregivers to share information. If you would like your name added to or removed from this ping list, please tell us in the comments section at this link (click here).
(For the most updated list of names, click on the same link and scroll to the end of the comments.)
Thanks for this reference. I just downloaded it to the Kindle and it looks like an eye-opener.
You’re welcome...I first read the print edition and as I read it I need notes pointing out each area that was similar or the same as our present-day economy in government. I think you may become frustrated reading the Kindle version because you won’t be able to make notes but I’m glad you are reading it.
True that but we don’t have to roll over and hand him him the ky.
Agreed!
I can make notes in the Kindle (using mostly the Windows 8.1 PC version so I have a real keyboard). In fact, I’m going through the book and creating “Sign post” notes when I discover something that will help me measure the decline of our government.
That sounds a lot like what you did. Perhaps we should compare notes after I get through it. :)
True.
Might be the incident they are looking for, with some low-level IRS agent used as the sacrificial lamb. And a good way to conveniently dispatch a rogue (law-abiding) agent who is not of the same beast-IRS mindset.
Seems a bit too similar to the cases where elderly homeowners are harrassed to the breaking point by endless petty ordinances regarding home and property upkeep, or property tax "evasion" or whatnot.
She “resigned”, with full benefits.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
