JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS CLINTON IRS ATTEMPTED AUDIT

Judicial Watch ^ | April 18, 2002

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I don't know anything about gay porn.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I don't want this subject discussed here. This is a Judicial Watch thread.

[Registered]

I'll take that as you are going to continue to lie about it Amelia. I stated in the forum that I posted sarcasm. You understand English. I am not going to accept your lies. I have told South the same but she continues also. If you can't muster an apology fine, but I consider both you and South spreading lies a personal attack.

[Registered]

BTW......abuse is often the last refuge of one who is frustrated.

As I said to Amelia, I am not going to accept your LIES any longer concerning the images. You want this to escalate? It's your choice.

[Amelia]

That's good. I wouldn't expect you to know anything about gay porn. I teach science, BTW.

[Iwo Jima]

FWIW, my money's on Iwo.

Keep your money, Honey. I have nothing to say to Registered. I think that this thread has been distracted for far too long from its central subject and am trying to get it back on track to the IRS audit of JW.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

What lies ? Is the post cited in #1578 yours or not? There is no indication of sarcasm in that post. Was it edited?

[Registered]

I will not allow this lie of yours to continue. Apologize.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Please put this ridiculous discussion somewhere else; confine it to private Freep mail if need be. This has nothing to do with Judicial Watch, so please stop bringing up this subject. No one else cares about your personal spat with Registered.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

I didn't lie.

[Amelia]

I think if Judicial Watch has nothing to hide, it should submit to the audit. The numbers do look very odd.

I think the information about the Perot connection is quite intriguing. Did you mention that Newsmax is suggesting a McCain-Hillary Clinton ticket for the Democrats in 2004?

[Registered]

Fine. Goodbye.

[deport]

Can't you stick to the debate at hand?

Jesus Christ, Just what is the debate at hand? Seems this thread was a PR by the 'ethical Washington Watchdog' regarding a pending IRS of Judicial Watch. Now it has been run around the track a few times discussing all sorts of things from Ron Brown, China Gate, Filegate, gates and more gates, Cruises, Form 990, college education, pornography..... etc. etc. If you are the thread mommy you may want to get it back to the article.......... After all the sooner the audit can be completed and 'eww' can be shown to be clean as he proclims the quicker he can get back to his assigned task of fighting gov't corruption, education and legal filings.

GO AUDIT GO.... _{bigger fish to fry}

[Amelia]

bigger fish to fry

Those fish are beginning to smell a little...er....FISHY, aren't they?

[Iwo Jima]

I have never subscribed to the "if you have nothing to hide" theory. I think that we have natural and constitutional rights to be left alone by our government whether we have have anything to "hide" or not. For example, if the police asked me if they could search my vehicle, I would decline, unless I knew that they had a very good reason for asking (e.g., mass murderer reported seen in the vicinty).

I definitely oppose the efforts of the IRS to gain the names of all contributors. I don't know what legitimate purpose could be served by requesting such information. They will definitely find my name on that list, as I have given thousands of dollars to JW in past years (although nothing in the last few years). I would not want the government to know what organizations I had contributed to (NRA, etc.).

Having said that, I am convinced that JW's financial affairs are rotten to the core and that it will not withstand scrutiny by the proper authorities for the proper purposes. Judicial Watch is Larry Klayman's private piggy bank, and that is just an undeniable fact.

My opinion of the IRS is so low that I find any position which I take supportive of it to be disconcerting, to put it mildly. But in this instance I think that the questions being asked are proper and will lead to the exposure of JW as an organization engaged in a host of improper activites and NOTHING like what it has repressented itself to be to the public, its contributors, or Freepers.

[deport]

FISHY, aren't they?

What, you mean there's possibly more to this story than what the 'ethical Washington Watchdog's' PR said. Who'd a thunk it. Heck I figured an audit of the books wouldn't take long as I'm sure he has all the documentation of income/outgo along with all required paperwork on the donors, etc. Just think a quickie audit and he's home free and could issue press releases for a month about how he defeated and prevailed in the audit over the IRS. His ratings would soar so high that we may have contrail sightings again and his name would become a household word for defeating the IRS. How can he not go on with this audit and get back to the missions he so desperately needs to be working on?

GO AUDIT GO.... _{bigger fish to fry}

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I am out for now.

[BeAChooser]

Those fish are beginning to smell a little...er....FISHY, aren't they?

This "scandal" doesn't smell anywhere near as "fishy" as the Ron Brown scandal. Curious how selective your smell is.

[Amelia]

I think that we have natural and constitutional rights to be left alone by our government whether we have have anything to "hide" or not.

I would agree. The right to privacy.

I definitely oppose the efforts of the IRS to gain the names of all contributors. I don't know what legitimate purpose could be served by requesting such information.

I tend to think that line is a "scare tactic" JW is using to get contributors to send more money so that JW can "protect" the privacy of the contributors.

I also can't see that the names of the contributors would be relevant, unless the IRS had reason to believe that JW was receiving contributions from certain foreign sources, corporate entities such as the RNC, or something of that nature. I can't see how the names of private citizen contributors would be necessary or relevant.

I think grants over a certain amount and/or from foundations, corporations, or government entities must be reported in any case?

[Amelia]

How can he not go on with this audit and get back to the missions he so desperately needs to be working on?

Good question.