United we don’t stand

[Merge]

Yes, extremely odd. Does it necessarily mean anything nefarious? No, I guess it could just be gross incompetence, which incidentally isn’t a good look either, but one has to wonder why did someone choose to put that in the ad? It’s not like they just copied it from the last one. That’s an affirmative act.

Here’s the thing, it’s kind of important to maintain consistency. If this was Donald Trump‘s IRS hiring 89,000 new agents and then running an job listing talking about how at least some of the hirees need to have a willingness to use deadly force, would you feel differently about it? I can tell you I would view it as extraordinarily concerning regardless of the administration. I don’t necessarily need you to tell me one way or the other, but just think about it. It may help to give you some perspective on this.

No it wouldn’t.
Read the link I posted. It explains what their plans are for increasing the size of the IRS.


“The mandatory funds are allocated over a 10-year horizon. They provide enforcement resources, including a significant investment in revitalizing the IRS’s examination of large corporations, partnerships, and global high-wealth and high-income individuals. Mandatory funds are also directed toward other important IRS priorities. For example, nearly $6 billion is dedicated to IT modernization. Modernization funding will allow the IRS to address core technology challenges and transform IRS provision of meaningful taxpayer services and tax enforcement efforts. Tax processing technology today is supported by an inefficient and inflexible batch processing architecture that delays the provision of tax administration data to IRS systems, employees, and taxpayers. Modernized technology will allow the IRS to make data more easily available for service and enforcement purposes and to move toward near real-time tax processing. The existing case management system supported by more than 60 different components could be integrated to provide a more comprehensive view of enforcement case information and taxpayer data and real-time tax processing. The result would be a more interactive tax processing experience that will allow for an improved taxpayer experience and for the IRS to focus resources on redressing noncompliance.
Additional IT tools will help support a staff capable of deploying new analytical techniques; investing in developing machine learning capabilities will enable the IRS to leverage the information it collects to better identify tax returns for compliance review. The proposed IT investment includes $4.5 billion to implement a new information reporting regime. New resources would also support efforts to meet imminent threats to the security of the tax system, like cyberattacks.
Revitalizing the IRS requires more than building up the IRS’s enforcement efforts and technological systems. Revitalization
also demands a renewed commitment to meaningful taxpayer service. The President’s proposal will enable taxpayers to communicate with the IRS securely and efficiently, and the IRS’s new workforce would include additional dedicated customer service representatives ready to assist taxpayers as they navigate newly expanded programs like the Child Tax Credit, the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.”

 

[CL82]

You can believe it or not, you think I care? The fact is it exists but keep playing stupid.

“The tax division” of the IRS? Lol, no it does not.

 

[CL82]

No it wouldn’t.

You should.

 

[anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0]

“The tax division” of the IRS? Lol, no it does not.

You struggle to read apparently. I already said I mis-typed, which you acknowledged. I was referencing their CI division in my initial post and that yes in fact there are people that carrya firearm in the IRS, keep up with that Uconn education.

 

[HallBall02]

I think he is better with watching videos.

 

[CL82]

You struggle to read apparently. I already said I mis-typed, which you acknowledged. I was referencing their CI division in my initial post and that yes in fact there are people that carrya firearm in the IRS, keep up with that Uconn education.

See now that was excellent google work. Because “CI” Sounds just like “tax division.” Really, it’s a mistake anyone could make.

(Pro tip: nobody calls it the “CI division”. It’s CID.)

 

[Merge]

You should.

I should what?
In all seriousness… here’s another link you should read from the national bureau of economic research in 2019.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26475/w26475.pdf

“While it is true that outright elimination of any tax gap is impossible, the magnitude of the gap between what is due and what the IRS collects is a function of the resources at its disposal to detect and punish individuals, firms, estates, and tax avoiders across other filing categories. These resources have decreased over time: The IRS budget has decreased (in real terms) by nearly 15 percent since 2011. Its enforcement budget has dropped by 25 percent during this period. Another way to appreciate the extent to which the IRS today is handicapped relative to longer-term historical norms comes from examining its budget as a share of gross collections. The share of tax revenue that is reinvested in the IRS has decreased steadily over the last twenty- five years, from its peak of 0.6 percent in 1993 to its trough of 0.34 percent today.16 Since 2011, the ratio of its budget to collection activity fell by 34 percent.18 This results in sizeable direct losses to the IRS. But such a lax enforcement regime also has sizable indirect effects, as previously law-abiding filers realize that there are substantial gains—and little cost—to noncompliance.

… Because of this decrease in enforcement resources, today, the IRS has fewer auditors than it had at any point since World War II…”

 

[SHUSA]

I think he is better with watching videos.

View embedded media

haha yea in office trump got strict on classified documents. then gets in trouble for keeping classified documents. trump in a nutshell.

 

[CL82]

I should what?
In all seriousness… here’s another link you should read from the national bureau of economic research in 2019.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26475/w26475.pdf

“While it is true that outright elimination of any tax gap is impossible, the magnitude of the gap between what is due and what the IRS collects is a function of the resources at its disposal to detect and punish individuals, firms, estates, and tax avoiders across other filing categories. These resources have decreased over time: The IRS budget has decreased (in real terms) by nearly 15 percent since 2011. Its enforcement budget has dropped by 25 percent during this period. Another way to appreciate the extent to which the IRS today is handicapped relative to longer-term historical norms comes from examining its budget as a share of gross collections. The share of tax revenue that is reinvested in the IRS has decreased steadily over the last twenty- five years, from its peak of 0.6 percent in 1993 to its trough of 0.34 percent today.16 Since 2011, the ratio of its budget to collection activity fell by 34 percent.18 This results in sizeable direct losses to the IRS. But such a lax enforcement regime also has sizable indirect effects, as previously law-abiding filers realize that there are substantial gains—and little cost—to noncompliance.

… Because of this decrease in enforcement resources, today, the IRS has fewer auditors than it had at any point since World War II…”

And yet the treasury secretary is asking for the IRS commissioner to come up with an operation plan to spend the $800 billion after the fact. But again, I’m sure you know more than she does. Here is a bag of money, figure out how to spend it is not a particularly sound management strategy.

 

[Merge]

And yet the treasury secretary is asking for the IRS commissioner to come up with an operation plan to spend the $800 billion after the fact. But again, I’m sure you know more than she does. Here is a bag of money, figure out how to spend it is not a particularly sound management strategy.

You keep saying 800 billion. I assumed it was a typo and let it go, but maybe it wasn’t? It’s 80 billion.

you’re acting like this is unusual. It’s not. That’s how the government works.
“Here is what we want you to focus on, here is the money to do it. “

I’m not surprised that is the point you will want to focus on after seeing analysis that shows that there were needs for additional resources at the IRS prior to the pandemic which refutes your prior points.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Media sure. The FBI? Really?

Because we all know that's never happened in the course of American history.

 

[donnie_baseball]

I hope they find something, and he is unable to run for office again. I have Trump fatigue, and the Republican party needs to move on from him, rather than continue to hold him up as their savior. That said, the 4 years under Trump? Much better than the first two under Biden, including the race riots, imo. I don't miss the tweeting and idiocy, however, and would decline to vote for him a third time, if he's somehow on the 2024 ballot.

 

[anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0]

See now that was excellent google work. Because “CI” Sounds just like “tax division.” Really, it’s a mistake anyone could make.

(Pro tip: nobody calls it the “CI division”. It’s CID.)

Its a shame you didnt google the Stockton video before falling for it. 🤡

 

[donnie_baseball]

silly because you have the exact opposite of the left. Defund the police was actually a real idea to get behind at one point. Now we love the law enforcement. Wait what? Both sides play the same game. Comical that you only see it one way.

Zing. And suddenly judges are forthright and above reproach, when just a couple of months ago, we're allowing intimidation outside their houses and slandering them.

 

[Merge]

Because we all know that's never happened in the course of American history.

That the FBI has gone after an ex president because they said mean words about them?

I get having concerns and doubts, but we do also have to consider what the consequences to the bureau would be if they were just going after him because of a vendetta.

This of course is just my opinion, but given the context of how divided the country is now and how public trust in the justice system has eroded, I would be shocked if this does not end up being crystal clear that we were left with no choice but to get a warrant to get these records back. If that is not the case, it would be devastating for the FBI and our country.

I doubt the judge will allow the release of the affidavit at this point, but I hope he at least provides some kind of timeframe or something.

 

[donnie_baseball]

If you retain sensitive documents, get a subpoena to return them, do not return them and your house gets raided? Yes I am ok with that.

Agree, regardless of what information it is. The "nuclear secrets" story seems a bit unfounded at the moment.

 

[donnie_baseball]

That the FBI has gone after an ex president because they said mean words about them?

Noooo, but they certainly has been a history of questionable and probably illegal activity, aimed at political enemies.

 

[Merge]

Agree, regardless of what information it is. The "nuclear secrets" story seems a bit unfounded at the moment.

Agreed to this point, though "top secret" isn't exactly ok here. There is just no legitimate legal reason for him to keep top secret documents there. Plenty of illegal reasons why he could want to though.

Gets worse when they weren't returned with the original batch in February and further worse when they weren't returned in June after a subpoena. Why did he still have them? That is a problem.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Still nothing intelligent to say. So sad.

He used to contribute something once in awhile. Now making shusa look like a nobel laureate with his loose application of the "stockholm syndrome" label.

 

[donnie_baseball]

the matter is strange because trump is a looney egomaniac that is a disgrace to the country. water is about an inch deep here and theres plenty of morons trying to dive in.

This is like reading a point-counterpoint between Colin Powell and Paul Reubens.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Agreed to this point, though "top secret" isn't exactly ok here. There is just no legitimate legal reason for him to keep top secret documents there. Plenty of illegal reasons why he could want to though.

Gets worse when they weren't returned with the original batch in February and further worse when they weren't returned in June after a subpoena. Why did he still have them? That is a problem.

I am in your camp 100% on this one. Nuclear or not, it's not OK. I recall, when Trump was elected, all the CNN talking heads fretting about him having the "football" or the "button," so to me, it seems like more scare tactics.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Oh my goodness, I failed to think of what Alan Dershowitz thinks 🤣

I’m happy that this Fox News guy that represented Harvey Epstein, Jeff Epstein and OJ Simpson has an opportunity to sell more books, esp the one about how Trump should not have been impeached in 2020, to you dummies.

🤨

Did you mean Juan Epstein?

 

[HallBall02]

What is going on inside your brains to think Trump is innocent/framed and the FBI is corrupt.

He has a history of lies, employees being jailed and arrested, toeing the line of breaking the rules for his self enrichment.

At very worst you should be non committal on what you think he did or did not happen, but you crazies are actually saying the FBI and DOJ are definitely corrupt and Trump is innocent. What?

 

[donnie_baseball]

Here’s the thing, it’s kind of important to maintain consistency. If this was Donald Trump‘s IRS hiring 89,000 new agents and then running an job listing talking about how at least some of the hirees need to have a willingness to use deadly force, would you feel differently about it? I can tell you I would view it as extraordinarily concerning regardless of the administration. I don’t necessarily need you to tell me one way or the other, but just think about it. It may help to give you some perspective on this.

At the very least, Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo would have been crying about it on a daily basis.

 

[cernjSHU]

The strange thing is that even though Trump had documents that were top secret, this still does not mean that this will result in a criminal prosecution. Why? The Feds executed a search warrant to get back documents that should not have been in the possession of Trump. That was the last resort from asking nicely to return the documents and to a subpoena.

The Feds had no choice to execute a warrant that they had PC to believe that Trump had top secret Documents in violation of the law. Had they not done that, the DOJ and the FBI were not doing their jobs.

Now, this does not mean that this will result in a criminal prosecution. Nor does this mean that Trump was not guilty of having top secret docs in contravention of the law. IT just means that the DOJ decided not to pursue an indictment due to many reasons. It is in their discretion.

The irony of all this is that Trump and Republicans will look at that saying see this was a witch hunt because if there was something there it would be an indictment.

That above stance MAY result in that the DOJ indicts Trump over something that they may have not ordinarily pursued criminally.

 

[CL82]

You keep saying 800 billion. I assumed it was a typo and let it go, but maybe it wasn’t? It’s 80 billion.

you’re acting like this is unusual. It’s not. That’s how the government works.
“Here is what we want you to focus on, here is the money to do it. “

I’m not surprised that is the point you will want to focus on after seeing analysis that shows that there were needs for additional resources at the IRS prior to the pandemic which refutes your prior points.

Yup absolutely on the 80 billion. Thanks for pointing that out, I don’t know why I was locked into adding another zero.

Respectfully those articles didn’t point out a specific need what they did point out was the differential spread between revenue received and funds expended on collection. That isn’t a hard ratio. Otherwise, definitionally every time you go into an inflationary economy or a growth cycle more money would be spent on IRS enforcement. But there would be no corresponding decrease in a recessionary economy. That’s a classic example of an ever expanding federal government.

fully agree that there are plenty of times that the government just hand people a bag of cash, I’ll be at with a whole Lotta zeros, and says figure it out. Respectfully, you and I disagree that doubling the amount of IRS agents is a good thing. I’ll also disagree that handing the IRS 80 billion in cash and telling them yeah you figure out what to do is a bad idea. If there is a need state it with specific figures. Coming up with the operational plan after the fact is looking for ways to spend the allotted money as opposed to finding the money necessary for specific needs.

 

[CL82]

Its a shame you didnt google the Stockton video before falling for it. 🤡

Lol, go back and read my comment, I laughed at the kids with the plastic guns. It was a hysterically awkward.

In any event far more of what CID (you know them as the IRS’s imaginary “tax division“) does is forensic accounting. It was never intended to be a paramilitary enforcement arm and, as noted previously, usually the FBI accompanies them if they believe that there’s likely to be violence. That’s why the notion of adding a “willingness to use deadly force“ job requirement is so odd and out of place. Of course the other reason is you don’t see that language even in other law-enforcement positions, who might be more reasonably expected to be in a use of deadly force situation.

Anytime a government is soliciting people to use deadly force against their citizens it should be subject to incredible scrutiny. Using deadly force in tax matters should almost never happen absent some other overriding criminal activity for which other law enforcement should be present.

 

[CL82]

At the very least, Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo would have been crying about it on a daily basis.

Lol, are you kidding me? The word of the day in the far left media would be “brownshirts” and you’d hear used in every single broadcast.

 

[anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0]

Lol, go back and read my comment, I laughed at the kids with the plastic guns. It was a hysterically awkward.

In any event far more of what CID (you know them as the IRS’s imaginary “tax division“) does is forensic accounting. It was never intended to be a paramilitary enforcement arm and, as noted previously, usually the FBI accompanies them if they believe that there’s likely to be violence. That’s why the notion of adding a “willingness to use deadly force“ job requirement is so odd and out of place. Of course the other reason is you don’t see that language even in other law-enforcement positions, who might be more reasonably expected to be in a use of deadly force situation.

Anytime a government is soliciting people to use deadly force against their citizens it should be subject to incredible scrutiny. Using deadly force in tax matters should almost never happen absent some other overriding criminal activity for which other law enforcement should be present.

I'll take "Believes Twitter Videos Without Context for $1,000 Alex"

 

[Merge]

Respectfully those articles didn’t point out a specific need what they did point out was the differential spread between revenue received and funds expended on collection. That isn’t a hard ratio. Otherwise, definitionally every time you go into an inflationary economy or a growth cycle more money would be spent on IRS enforcement. But there would be no corresponding decrease in a recessionary economy. That’s a classic example of an ever expanding federal government.

Agree, it isn't a hard ratio but I think these lookbacks on analyzing these tax gaps showing that there was a significant gap in collections and what should have been collected and that the number of audits have been declining kind of proves the point that there is a need for additional enforcement activity.

fully agree that there are plenty of times that the government just hand people a bag of cash, I’ll be at with a whole Lotta zeros, and says figure it out. Respectfully, you and I disagree that doubling the amount of IRS agents is a good thing.

I'm not even saying it's a good thing. I just don't think it's necessarily a bad thing.
Maybe the IRS needs 30,000 employees to be effective and efficient or maybe it should be closer to 150,000. I have no idea and I think the knee jerk reactions are just based on political bias.

I’ll also disagree that handing the IRS 80 billion in cash and telling them yeah you figure out what to do is a bad idea. If there is a need state it with specific figures. Coming up with the operational plan after the fact is looking for ways to spend the allotted money as opposed to finding the money necessary for specific needs.

The IRS did produce a budgetary request for 2023 which does cover some of these increases. Not sure how efficient it would be for the IRS to create 10 year plans for money that may not be allocated. I don't disagree that is how it should work in a perfect world, but that isn't how things work in government.

 

[CL82]

I'll take "Believes Twitter Videos Without Context for $1,000 Alex"

“Kniespolice the question was which IRS agent division is empowered to carry guns? Let’s see your final Jeopardy answer…. Oh I’m sorry “the tax division“ is not correct.”

😂

 

[Merge]

Anytime a government is soliciting people to use deadly force against their citizens it should be subject to incredible scrutiny.

They aren't soliciting to use deadly force. They alerted people it may be a part of the job.

They would be trained on when and when not to use deadly force just like every other job where you carry a gun.

 

[CL82]

They aren't soliciting to use deadly force. They alerted people it may be a part of the job.

They would be trained on when and when not to use deadly force just like every other job where you carry a gun.

And yet every other job where you carry a gun doesn’t include that language in the job listing. And yet someone made the decision to do it here. At best it’s very very questionable judgment. At best.

But I think our discussion has gotten circular. Overall it was an interesting conversation, particularly the last few posts. I’m out, but feel free to get the last word in.

 

[Merge]

And yet every other job where you carry a gun doesn’t include that language in the job listing.

I'd argue it is implied when you're applying to be a cop or an FBI agent.
It's not really implied when you're applying to be an IRS agent.

It alerts people that this is a job which carries additional risk beyond a normal IRS agent.

 

[HallBall02]

The FBI has to be setting up Trump right?🤣

 

[Proud NJ Sports Fan]

The FBI has to be setting up Trump right?🤣

View embedded media

TDS

 

[HallBall02]

TDS

Not just Trumpism, I dont like any autocrats, not a fan of criminals, and I do like free and fair elections, so….

Your fear is education, informed public, free and fair elections, peaceful transfer of power, diversity, legal immigration, and law & order. What’s the acronym for that one?

 

[Merge]

When this comes out. It will be very black and white. There will be no grey in an action like this.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf

Grey fading away other than what was in the documents and why Trump was keeping them.
It is clear why the DOJ was forced to get a warrant.

After the subpoena, Trump's team signed off that they returned everything. DOJ had evidence that was a lie and had no choice but to get the documents back and even found some in his desk.

 

[cernjSHU]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf

Grey fading away other than what was in the documents and why Trump was keeping them.
It is clear why the DOJ was forced to get a warrant.

After the subpoena, Trump's team signed off that they returned everything. DOJ had evidence that was a lie and had no choice but to get the documents back and even found some in his desk.

How anyone can dispute the validity of the search warrant by the Justice Department is beyond me. It is clear that they had to go in with a search warrant. The photos of all those Top Secret documents without any notation that it was declassified has moved me more towards that Trump needs to be indicted for this.

 

[Merge]

How anyone can dispute the validity of the search warrant by the Justice Department is beyond me. It is clear that they had to go in with a search warrant. The photos of all those Top Secret documents without any notation that it was declassified has moved me more towards that Trump needs to be indicated for this.

DOJ seems to be saying that Trump did not claim the documents were declassified at any point in the process either. Seems like that claim is just Trump trying to cover his ass.

The FBI had to get additional clearance to review some of the files, so clearly they believe the documents were still classified.

Not sure how he doesn't get charged with obstruction at minimum based on his actions.