Tag Archives: IRS

IRS loses big in federal court, admits its wrong-doing and that of the Obama administration

NEXT IN LINE:  Obama’s Deep-State, you-can’t-touch-me shenanigans against the USA and its current president, Donald Trump.

 

We just defeated the IRS in federal court.

It’s an unprecedented victory, one of the biggest we’ve ever obtained.

After a years-long lawsuit against the IRS, the bureaucratic agency has just admitted in federal court to wrongfully targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups for their political beliefs and has issued an apology.

In the proposed Consent Order filed late last night, the IRS not only acknowledges the Obama Administration‘s wrongdoing, it consents to a court order barring it from ever taking such discriminatory action against conservative groups again.

After more than five years aggressively battling the corrupt IRS bureaucracy, we won.  The IRS will never again be allowed to target conservatives for their political beliefs. Period.

It is impossible to overstate the importance of this victory. It sends a powerful message to the deep state bureaucracy. We will defeat the lawlessness.

Now, as we continue to battle the deep state in more than a half a dozen other federal court cases, we urgently need your tax-deductible support.

Chip in $5 to Defeat the Deep State in Court

 

[From a letter to us by Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice]

 

……………………………………………….

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Newest Obamacare failure is a huge one: Penalties of $36,500 per worker

Newest Obamacare failure is a huge one...

Hey, employers, don’t even think about reimbursing your workers’ health-insurance premiums.

Beginning this month, the IRS can levy fines amounting to $100 per worker per day or $36,500 per worker per year, with a maximum of $500,000 per firm.

This Internal Revenue Service penalty is not written into the Obamacare law. The amount is over 12 times the statutory amount in the Affordable Care Act of $3,000 per worker per year. That is what an employer is charged when one of its employees gets subsidized care on one of the health-care exchanges. It’s 18 times the $2,000 penalty for not offering adequate health insurance.

The $100 fine is applicable not only to large firms, but also those with fewer than 50 workers that are exempt from the $2,000 and $3,000 employer penalties. Firms with one worker are exempt. The penalty for S-corporations will take effect on Jan. 1, 2016. The new rule is broad, sweeping and overly punitive.

This new IRS penalty does not assist in the ACA’s stated goal of expanding health insurance in the United States. Rather, it does the opposite. It discourages people from finding and purchasing the insurance that suits them. It also discourages companies from hiring. Consider that 14% of businesses that do not offer group health insurance have some sort of arrangement to reimburse their employees for insurance costs, according to the National Federation of Independent Business.

The administration should be encouraging employers to take on more labor, because many capable people are sitting on the sidelines. On the day after the IRS rule took effect, the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued its Employment Situation Report for June 2015. The report showed that U.S. labor-force participation had declined to a new low, 62.6%, equivalent to levels in October 1977. The drop included prime-age workers, those between 25 and 55, who are normally in the labor market because they generally have finished school and have not yet retired.

Rep. Charles Boustany, a Republican from Louisiana, has introduced the Small Business Healthcare Relief Act of 2015, and Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, has a companion bill in the Senate (S.1697). The bills would allow small businesses to use pre-tax dollars to assist employees purchasing insurance in the individual market.

Why has the IRS taken this extreme view? If the employer reimburses an employee for health-insurance premiums, this arrangement is described as an employer-payment plan. The employer-payment plan is considered by the IRS to be a group health plan that has to meet the conditions of Affordable Care Act insurance, including the prohibition on annual limits for essential health benefits and the requirement to provide certain preventive care without cost sharing.

MarketWatch columnist Bill Bischoff explains the new rule as follows. “Employer-payment arrangements have long been a popular way for small employers to help workers obtain health coverage without the hassle and expense of furnishing a full-fledged company health-insurance plan. Under an employer-payment arrangement, the employer reimburses participating employees for premiums paid for their individual health-insurance policies or pays the premiums directly on behalf of participating employees.”

Small employers with a workforce of between 50 and 100 employees are required to offer the more expensive “essential health benefits,” including hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental-health and substance-use disorder services, and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

In contrast, large employers, those with more than 100 workers, do not have to meet all the generous standards for health-insurance plans offered on the state exchanges, but can offer lesser health insurance and still avoid penalties. The “minimum essential coverage” that large employers have to offer to comply with the law turns out to be substantially less generous than the “essential health benefits” required for plans sold to individuals and small businesses by insurance companies.

Of course, not all employers will choose low-benefit plans. In order to retain workers, many large employers are likely to offer generous plans, and offset the cost by paying a lower cash wage. Recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that benefits account for 32% of compensation packages, with cash wages responsible for the remainder. However, low-benefit plans are likely to be attractive to employers with low-skill workforces in the restaurant, retail, and leisure and hospitality industries.

Although large employers can legally offer low-benefit plants, small employers are not allowed to do so. This leads to an extraordinary discrepancy in potential tax payments between small and large employers. Hence, they face both higher costs for insurance and higher tax penalties if they fail to offer such insurance.

The Boustany-Grassley bill is focused on small businesses, but it makes sense to allow individuals in large companies to choose less expensive options. Health-insurance premiums are rising substantially. Oregon’s health-insurance commissioner has just approved raises of 25% to 33% for Moda Health Plan and Lifewise, affecting over 220,000 people. Other health-insurance companies nationwide are asking for increases in the same range, and insurance commissioners are deciding whether to approve them.

Even the least expensive plans on the health exchanges, termed bronze plans, feature deductibles that are prohibitive for many. The average deductible on a bronze plan is $5,000 for a single person and $11,000 for a family, according to HealthPocket, a research firm.

Businesses need to take a stand against this new IRS power grab. As Americans search for low-cost ways to stay insured, it makes sense for the government to give employers more options, rather than fewer.

 

[by Diana Furchtgott-Roth, writing for MARKETWATCH]

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  Mr. O strikes again! Isn’t it wonderful, having a guy in the White House who continues to find new and exciting ways to harm his fellow citizens and the US economy?

 

……………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Clinton lies and scandals (continued)…

As promised, “Hillary’s Top Scandals” Part 2

12.  Hillary’s “missing” law firm billing records.  Federal investigators subpoenaed in 1994 Hillary’s billing records from her days as a partner in the Rose Law Firm during the Watergate scandal. Hillary said she didn’t have the 115 pages of billing files the investigators were looking for, claiming among other things that she had only a minor role in the law firm’s activity. The Washington Examiner later reported, however, that “when the records mysteriously turned up in the White House in 1996, they showed that Hillary met repeatedly with key figures in the scandal.”

13.  Pardongate: Hillary’s Senate contributions.  Just before Bill Clinton left the White House in 2001, he granted numerous controversial pardons…including to convicted tax evader Marc Rich, whose wife made significant contributions to to Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign and the Clinton presidential library. Hillary’s brothers, Tony and Hugh Rodham, reportedly received large amounts of money from people who were pardoned by Bill Clinton. Hillary, of course, said she and Bill knew nothing about the scheme.

14.  Hillary’s nearly 10,000% profit in the futures market.  Hillary made massive profits in cattle futures trading when Bill was attorney general of Arkansas. With no experience whatsoever, but with valuable connections at big Arkansas employer Tyson Foods, she made nearly $100,000 from a tiny $1,000 investment. Tyson Foods at the same time just happened to benefit from several state decisions, including favorable environmental rulings, $9 million in state loans, and placement of company executives on important state boards. The huge windfall profit enabled the Clintons to buy a house and investment real estate.

15.  Finding dead people: the “Clinton body count.”  The “Clinton body count” is a collection of names of people associated with Clinton scandals, people who have died mysteriously and often violently. Reporter David Bresnahan broke this story in the summer of 1997. “I started looking into all the various deaths of people who were involved in various Clinton scandals,” Bresnahan said. “I started to investigate the entire picture instead of just one focused event. Nobody out there was putting it all together. If you look at one scandal, you’ll find one dead guy. But when you investigate all the Clinton scandals, you find similarities, you find common tactics and you find dead people. Not only did I find a list of dead people, but I also found there are over 100 people who have refused to testify. There are also 45 people who have gone to jail, some of them White House staff, cabinet members, and people from the Justice Department.” Bresnahan’s research was a source of terror among enemies of the Clintons, but an even greater source of terror for those close to the Clintons, since the closest people appeared to die younger and more inexplicably than the others.

16.  Hillary’s radical pal, Saul Alinsky.  Dick Morris, a former top political adviser to Bill Clinton both as governor of Arkansas and when he was president, has said that “the revelation of how closely linked her efforts were back in the 80s, and have been since, to an Alinsky radical front group is deeply disturbing and expands our understanding of Hillary’s fundamental radicalism and commitment to the new left of Saul Alinsky.”

17.  Hillary laughs about her legal defense of a child rapist.  On the surface, Hillary seemed to maintain propriety when she said she was appointed to act as defense counsel and “I fulfilled that obligation.” However, there are tape recordings in which she boasts of knowing her client’s guilt and is heard laughing about the case. She laughed when she said “I had him take a lie detector test, which he passed, forever destroying my faith in polygraphs.” She also found it humorous when a crime lab accidentally destroyed DNA evidence that tied her client to the crime…especially so because it was Hillary’s defense to attack the 12-year-old rape victim as “emotionally unstable” and “engaging in fantasies.” In 2014 the woman who says she was raped by the defendant said that Hillary “took me through hell” and intentionally lied about her in court documents.

18.  Accepting financial contributions from the Iranian government.  The Clinton foundation has received many thousands of dollars in contributions indirectly from Iran. Hillary’s finance director for her 2008 presidential campaign was Hassan Nemazee, well known for his efforts to normalize US relations with the Iranian regime. In 2010 Nemazee pleaded guilty to running a Ponzi scheme in which he received $292 million in fraudulent loans; he was sentenced to 12 years in prison.  Peter Schweizer, whose current bestseller called “Clinton Cash” is both well researched and well written, has followed the Clinton money trail and revealed the connection between their personal fortune, their “close personal friends,” their foundation, many foreign governments, and some of the highest ranks in our US government. The Clinton conspiracy is now well documented.

19.  The foundation scandals keep on coming.  It appears indisputable that the Clintons have siphoned off tens of millions of dollars per year from their foundation. Both Bill and Hillary are complicit in the “systematic financial fraud which warrants a criminal investigation.” Enriching oneself through a nonprofit organization is expressly forbidden by law, but apparently the Clintons haven’t been told about that restriction. They continue to file false and “materially misleading” tax returns with the IRS and other governmental authorities, to the point that now some in the government are finally calling for the Clinton Foundation to be shut down. At least one of the members of the foundation board of directors has officially been accused of perjury and obstruction of justice.

20.  Four American lives lost in Benghazi.  State Department emails show Hillary knew while the attack on the US Embassy in Benghazi, Libya, was under way that it was being carried out by terrorists. To this day, in fact, the State Department has failed to comply with the requests for more information from the Select Congressional Committee which has the responsibility of getting to the bottom of the Benghazi scandal.

21.  Peter F. Paul: Another Hillary friend goes to prison.  In a campaign donor relationship gone bad, this former Clinton friend has said “Hillary is carrying out her promise to finally destroy my family to punish me for exposing the corruption that elected her to the Senate.”

22.  Watergate: fired for being a liar.  Hillary was fired in 1974 from the staff of the House Judiciary Committee investigating the Watergate scandal; her then supervisor, lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman, has said she is a liar and much worse. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer who conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the Committee, and the rules of confidentiality.”

 

[from an article appearing in the current issue of Whistleblower magazine]

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  Now that you know more of the truth about the “two for the price of one” Clintons, your best course of action, if you still want to vote Democrat in the upcoming election, is to seek out someone who really can put the interests of the country first and foremost. The Clintons have no idea how to do that, and worse, no desire to do that.

 

……………………………………….

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

More outrage from the IRS: It used “hundreds of lawyers” to hide information from Congress…

The IRS continues to amaze with the level of its partisan, outrageous behavior.

The Senate has demanded from Obama that he make available for questioning everyone who knew about IRS targeting of conservative groups, and demanded his cooperation.

 

It’s been a very bad week for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) – which translates into a very bad week for the American people.

First, it was revealed the IRS failed to implement critical upgrades to its computer systems which made it much easier for Russian hackers to steal information from more than 100,000 taxpayers. Then, if Russian hackers weren’t enough, an IRS employee in Missouri pleaded guilty to stealing more than $325,000 by filing fraudulent tax returns – stealing the identities of American taxpayers.

Now, we learn that as Congress began its investigation into the unlawful scheme targeting conservative and Tea Party groups the IRS used “hundreds of attorneys” to hide critical information from Congress.

According to new bombshell testimony, the IRS set up a previously unknown “special project team” comprised of “hundreds of attorneys,” including the IRS Chief Counsel (one of only two politically appointed positions at the IRS).

The “special project” this team was given?  Concealing information from Congress. (Emphasis by NORM ‘n’ AL.)

The IRS’s director of privacy, governmental liaison, and disclosure division, Mary Howard, testified that soon after the IRS targeting scandal was revealed, the IRS “amassed hundreds of attorneys to go through the documents [requested by Congress] and redact them.” She told Congress that once the “special project team” was created and operational, she never saw requests for information.

Members of Congress have long complained that many of the documents produced by the IRS have been “redacted to the point of absurdity.”  Now we know why.

Her testimony is clear: As soon as the IRS targeting scandal broke, the IRS set up a special team of hundreds of attorneys, including President Obama’s political head of the Chief Counsel’s office, to keep requests for publicly available information away from the person who would normally review those documents and turn them over to Congress and the public.  That “special” team then overly redacted, delayed, and determined which documents it wanted Congress to see.

After setting up a special “group” to target and delay applications by Tea Party groups for tax-exempt status, the IRS set up a new “special project team” to delay and redact information from Congress about that targeting.  Talk about a cover-up.

When asked about these revelations and the ongoing investigation by Congress into the IRS and former top IRS official Lois Lerner’s involvement, Howard testified, “I think that Lois Lerner was the tip of the iceberg.”

This is what we at the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) have been arguing all along.  The targeting of conservative groups, the delays, the unconstitutionally abusive questions go far beyond Lerner. We expect to learn more about Lerner’s role and the disappearance and later recovery of many of her emails later this month as the Inspector General for Tax Administration is due to issue its report.

Congress’s investigation is far from over.  At the ACLJ, our ongoing lawsuit on behalf of dozens of conservative and pro-life groups targeted by the IRS is far from over.  Our appeal is pending before a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C.

Unfortunately, the targeting is far from over as well, as the application of one of our clients has been pending for well over five years.

We will not give up.  The more we learn the worse it gets.  The IRS has become a bureaucratic behemoth that – as I describe in my new book “Undemocratic” – is institutionally incapable of self-correction.

We will continue fighting to expose IRS corruption and pursue justice for the American people.

[by Jay Sekulow, writing for FOX NEWS]

Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law. He is a New York Times bestselling author.  Jay’s latest book is “UNDEMOCRATIC: How Unelected, Unaccountable Bureaucrats Are Stealing Your Liberty and Freedom” (Howard Books May 19, 2015). He hosts “Jay Sekulow Live”— a daily radio show which is broadcast on more than 850 stations nationwide as well as Sirius/XM satellite radio. Follow him on Twitter @JaySekulow.

 

……………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Judge’s new ruling shows EPA lied, deliberately delayed information requests from targeted organizations, and discriminated against conservative groups

Ruling seen as a rebuke of Obama, who took office vowing to run the “most transparent administration in history,” but who has totally failed to live up to that goal. Judge says “public trust has been diminished.”

A federal judge warned the Environmental Protection Agency today not to discriminate against conservative groups in how it responds to open-records requests, issuing a legal spanking to the agency concluding that while it can’t prove officials intentionally destroyed documents, they lied to the court and showed “apathy and carelessness” in carrying out the law.

Judge Royce C. Lamberth described the “absurdity” of the way the EPA handled a Freedom of Information Act request from the Landmark Legal Foundation and then the court case stemming from it — including late last week admitting it lied to the court about how it went about searching for documents.

In a scorching 25-page opinion, the judge accused the agency of “insulting” him by first claiming it had done a full search for records, then years later retracting that claim without any explanation.

“The recurrent instances of disregard that EPA employees display for FOIA obligations should not be tolerated by the agency,” the judge said in a 25-page ruling. “This court would implore the executive branch to take greater responsibility in ensuring that all EPA FOIA requests — regardless of the political affiliation of the requester — are treated with equal respect and conscientiousness.”

The ruling could be seen as a rebuke to President Obama, who took office vowing to run the most transparent administration in history, but who has faced increasing challenges over how he’s failed to live up to that claim. The EPA in particular has been in a years-long battle with conservative groups who argue the agency has ignored them while playing favorites with liberal groups.

Eric W. Wachter, a key EPA official identified as overseeing the open-records search, didn’t respond to a request for comment but an agency spokeswoman said they were happy the judge didn’t sanction them, as Landmark had sought.

“EPA is focused on creating more efficient work processes to ensure FOIAs responses are done more effectively and at a lower cost,” the spokeswoman said. “That includes adopting industry concept and best practices into the delivery of information technology services in areas such as cloud computing, mobile technology and workplace standards.

Judge Lamberth said Mr. Wachter provided false information to the court, then the EPA tried to withdraw it on Friday, though never explained how it got things wrong in the first place nor why it waited years to admit it had lied to the court.

Landmark, a conservative public interest legal group, filed a request in 2012 trying to see what outside groups EPA officials had been speaking with as they wrote new rules and regulations.

EPA slow-walked that request, Landmark sued, and the matter has been in front of the courts ever since.

Just Lamberth said at several turns, the EPA was either lying or terribly incompetent in how it handled the situation, both in terms of the search it performed and how it responded to the court case.

“Either EPA intentionally sought to evade Landmark’s lawful FOIA request so the agency could destroy responsive documents, or EPA demonstrated apathy and carelessness toward Landmark’s request,” Judge Lamberth said. “Either scenario reflects poorly upon EPA and surely serves to diminish the public’s trust in the agency.”

The judge said since Landmark couldn’t prove it was intentional bad faith, the group wasn’t entitled to “spoliation sanctions.” Neither could he find a reason to impose criminal sanctions against the agency.

Judge Lamberth also refused to appoint an independent monitor to oversee the EPA’s open-records requests, saying that was an “extreme and legally uncertain” alternative. But his frustration with the situation showed through repeatedly.

“The court is left wondering whether EPA has learned from its mistakes, or if it will merely continue to address FOIA requests in the clumsy manner that has seemingly become its custom,” the judge wrote. “Given the offensively unapologetic nature of EPA’s recent withdrawal notice … the court is not optimistic that the agency has learned anything.”

 

In other news, the IRS says  illegal immigrants can claim up to three years’ refunds on income even if they never paid income taxes.

[NORM ‘n’ AL Note: Read it again, folks. That’s what it says: Illegal immigrants are permitted to get tax refunds on taxes they never paid. Think that might work for us regular legal Americans? The guy in the White House is not only a liar, he’s a lunatic. Great job, Mr. O…just bring ’em in and show ’em the loopholes!]

 

The IRS is defending its decision to let illegal immigrants claim up to three years’ refunds on income even if they never paid income taxes, telling Congress in a new letter last week that agency lawyers have concluded getting a Social Security number triggers the ability to go back and ask for previous refunds.

Obama’s deportation amnesty could grant Social Security numbers to as many as 4 million illegal immigrants, making many of them eligible for tax refunds under the Earned Income Tax Credit even for years when they cheated on their taxes, worked off the books and refused to file tax returns.

“Section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code requires an SSN on the return, but a taxpayer claiming the EITC is not required to have an SSN before the close of the year for which the EITC is claimed,” IRS Commissioner John Koskinen wrote in his letter to Sen. Charles E. Grassley on Wednesday.

The IRS’s chief lawyer had reached that conclusion in 2000, and the agency has newly confirmed it, Mr. Koskinen said.

Mr. Grassley said that made a mockery of the law, and said he’ll try to write a bill specifically prohibiting it.

“The tax code shouldn’t reward those who broke our immigration laws,” the Iowa Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said in a statement.

The IRS ruling creates an odd circumstance where illegal immigrants who cheated by not paying taxes before can see if they would benefit from refunds. If they do benefit, they could file, but if they don’t benefit they could continue to avoid taxes for those years.

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  An “odd circumstance”? It’s not odd, it’s OUTRAGEOUS!  Dumbest thing we’ve ever heard! Let’s just change the name of the IRS to Irrational Revenue Service, and quit kidding ourselves that this agency is really doing something beneficial.

 

[by Stephen Dinan, writing for The Washington Times]
……………………………………
As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Friday Free-for-All…

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has a lengthy record of abusing power.

The IRS’s abuse of power is not restricted to targeting tea party groups but it also includes seizing assets of small business owners under the suspicion of engaging in money laundering.

IRS intimidation...Under federal civil asset forfeiture laws the IRS can seize bank accounts of individuals that make a series of deposits or withdrawals of cash under $10,000. Cash transactions under $10,000 are suspicious because they fall under the federal reporting requirement and it’s illegal to avoid the reporting threshold by “structuring” a number of smaller transactions to avoid federal detection.

Most concerning is that civil asset forfeiture allows the IRS to take the money first with the burden falling on the individual to prove their innocence. The guilty first, innocent second twisting of justice puts the IRS in a powerful position.

Since the IRS uses a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel, it has seized the bank accounts of many innocent small businesses that frequently make small cash deposits in its zeal to enforce the “structuring” law.

According to The Institute for Justice, the IRS seized just over $240 million in over 2,500 cases that were considered structured transactions between 2005 and 2012. The Institute for Justice recently released a report, Seize First, Question Later: The IRS and Civil Forfeiture, that analyzes recent cases of civil asset forfeiture.

A recent House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight hearing focused on the abuse of power surrounding the IRS’s civil asset forfeiture laws.

During the hearing, Jeffrey Hirsch, an owner of a convenience store distributor company in Long Island, New York, told the committee how the IRS seized without prior notice almost half a million dollars from his company’s bank account because the IRS felt it was making structured cash deposits.

The IRS held his money for more than two-and-a-half years without making a formal charge before giving all the money back. The actions by the IRS almost drove the company into bankruptcy.

In his testimony, IRS Commissioner John Koskien told the committee that structuring bank transactions is illegal regardless of the source of the funds but he said the IRS will try to zero in on cases where the structured deposits and withdrawals are from illegal activity.

[by Tom Borelli]

 

Is Obama Readying USA For Islamic Takeover?

Tragically and with full malice aforethought, the beauty, simplicity and essential to thought subject of Logic is no longer taught in the US Public school system. As a note, little else that matters is now taught either. It was taught when I attended school.
For the purposes of this column, I will deal with two forms of logic, as defined by the current 0n-line Merriam-Webster Dictionary: “a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty” and “interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable.” I hope that these will assist those people who still cannot—according to their own words seem to fathom why Barack Hussein Obama does what he does and says what he says.

Note: Too many of these (many high profile) and, ostensibly, Conservative individuals seem to be extremely well-educated but–due to their statements of incredulity over Obama’s actions or lack thereof–are quite apparently lacking the power of even the most basic practice of logical reasoning. That leaves us with Occam’s Razor or “the solution amongst competing hypotheses with the fewest assumptions [the one that possesses the most facts] should be selected.”

Obama's Muslims...Obama is destroying the USA and replacing its legal citizens with Muslims and other illegals, in order to create a new country of his making.  Logic requires rational reasoned thought…not emotion and false premises. Thus…I shall attempt to explain it to them for yet one more time. The rest of you—conservatives specifically–understand perfectly well what’s going on: Christians are responsible for Islamic Violence and their own deaths!

Although they haven’t said it outright–yet– the Obama syndicate members seem poised to soon say that Christians are actually responsible for their own beheadings and burning of the adults and children..many of them infants. Obama recently said that Christians have done horrible things, too. But—and it’s a big one—he had to go back to the over-a-thousand-years-ago Crusades to make his case.

The Crusades were in effect because barbaric and enslaving Islam had taken over Spain and other regions in Europe. In a nutshell, Islam hordes conquered and took Christendom lands, enslaved the people and stole their Holy sites. The Christians fought Islam to get them back. Christianity won. In Obama’s book “Audacity of Hope.” he (or possibly Bill Ayers) writes “…I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” NORM ‘n’ AL Note: Americans already knew that, didn’t we? But now we know Mr. O actually said he would not stand with his country. How did we ever elect this guy?

 

Due to its atrocities against humanity, the political winds of the world currently seem to be against Islam…yet, Obama seems bent upon backing them all of the way.  In fact, recently, Obama held two “private” meetings with Muslim Brotherhood members. Please remember that the Brotherhood is the parent of most of the terrorist groups currently on our planet. A handful–hundreds of examples are available–of indicators that Obama stands with and actually fully supports “radical” Islam are as follows:

1. Obama still refuses to use the word Islam when speaking about Islamic terrorists
2. Obama has had “secret” meetings (only recently disclosed) at the White House with the Muslim Brotherhood members in the last month
3. Obama is working with radical Islamic ICNA in its just concluded 3-day “summit” on terrorism
4. The Center for Immigration Studies advised that Obama imported 300,000 Muslims into the USA in 2013 and at least 70,000 Muslims in 2014
5. In 2015, Obama ordered the US State Department to overload the immigration system in order to bring thousands of jihadis into the USA as well as tens of thousands more Muslims. One way or the other, Obama is determined to turn what was once the USA into an Islamic country
6. Every time ISIS or another Islamic terrorist group commits another beheading, live human burning, disembowelment of organs for sale (this is one of the new practices), Obama makes excuses for them. At a press conference 19 February 2015, Obama said that the terrorists “may have legitimate grievances.” WHAT?

 

Everything Obama and the Islamo-Nazi new world order is now doing is designed to implement the “Final Solution” for the USA…that of the North American Caliphate which Obama plans to head. President Ronald Reagan’s “America a shining city upon a hill whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere” will be destroyed and extinguished at last. As it is, the flicker of my home country is very dim now, indeed.

 

As I’ve written before, my ancestral family members built the United States of America from the ground up and I have been witnessing its dismantling. Although I view Barack Hussein Obama as a loathsome creature, even more offensive are those who refused to lift a hand to stop him and those who affected the pretense of being of, for and by the people but, who willingly betrayed their fellow humans for the promise of power in this planned New Dark World and a few pieces of silver. And, to them, I say whether you choose to believe it or not truth is truth and our Creator God is watching. Even so, Lord, come soon…

 

[by Sher Zieve, writing for BARBWIRE]

 

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.  (Genesis 6:5-6)

 

The wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.” (Daniel 12: 10)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Five Obama tax proposals that make absolutely no sense to anybody else…

 ObamaObama’s fiscal 2016 budget would raise government revenues as a share of gross domestic product steadily over the next decade, and make the tax code far more complex.

By now, everyone has heard of the increase in capital-gains tax rates (yielding $208 billion over 10 years), the 19% tax rate on foreign earnings ($206 billion), and limits on individual itemized deductions together with a 30% tax rate for millionaires ($638 billion).

But what about the tax changes that almost everyone has overlooked? Here are five little-discussed new tax proposals.

1. Forget deductions for charitable contributions linked to college sports ticket purchases. Few provisions will cause more of an uproar than this: a contribution to the alma mater is not counted as a charitable contribution if it entitles donors to buy advance tickets for sporting events. It will not even sit well with the president’s liberal ivory tower supporters. Today, if donations entitle alumni to advance ticket purchases, they can deduct 80% of the donation. Come Jan. 1, 2016, none of the contribution would be deductible. This goes to the heart of alumni contributions to Ole Miss and the Crimson Tide.

The White House estimates that this change would bring in $2.5 billion over 10 years. But colleges and universities will not give in so easily. It is far more likely that universities will move to an informal donation system, one that is not traceable by the Internal Revenue Service.

2. Stop saving, stupid. Many say that Social Security is going broke, people are living longer, and that we are not saving enough for retirement. But Obama thinks Americans are saving too much. His budget wants to limit retirement savings to an amount sufficient to generate an annuity of $210,000 beginning at age 62. No matter that this is hard to estimate, even for actuaries. Too bad for you if you live in New York City or San Francisco, where $210,000 might not be enough to pay the rent, go out to dinner and make occasional trips to see the grandchildren. This provision would generate $26 billion over 10 years.

3. Force independent contractors to become employees. Many workers prefer to operate as independent contractors. It suits them because they can work for a variety of employers and get higher cash wages, skipping the benefits. But unions, a key part of the administration’s base, want to count independent contractors as employees whenever possible, so they can be forced to participate in elections for union representation. An independent contractor is not a potential member of the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers or the Service Employees International Union.

So the president proposes to raise $10 billion over the next decade by allowing the Internal Revenue Service to reclassify independent contractors as employees. The budget states: “New enforcement activity would focus mainly on obtaining the proper worker classification prospectively, since in many cases the proper classification of workers may not be clear.” Quite. It is too much, naturally, to expect the administration to allow workers to decide by themselves whether they want to be independent contractors or employees.

 4. Return of a repealed Obamacare provision. In a blast from the past, businesses that purchase more than $600 worth of goods or services from a contractor would have to get that contractor’s Taxpayer Identification Number and check that TIN with the Internal Revenue Service. If the IRS does not certify the TIN as valid, the business is required to withhold a portion of the payments, either 15%, 25%, 30% or 35%, and presumably send the amount to the IRS. The provision is supposed to raise $831 million over 10 years.This is similar to an Affordable Care Act provision, repealed by Congress in 2011, that would have required businesses to send a Form 1099 to any supplier from which they purchased $600 or more in goods and services. It was deemed overly complex and impractical. A taxi company would have to keep track of all gas purchased from different gas stations, for instance, and people might be purchasing from the same supplier operating under different names and unintentionally violating the law.

The same difficulties would apply to the new proposal. It takes real audacity for the president to propose a tax that was signed into law and repealed a little over a year later. (NORM ‘n’ AL Note: Our emphasis. And the word  we’re thinking of is not “audacity.”)

5. Expand electric-car tax credits to more worthy vehicles. President Obama wanted a million electric cars by 2015, but, according to the Electric Drive Transportation Association, there were only 174,000 battery-powered and hybrid plug-in vehicles on the nation’s roads in 2013.

The administration now wants to replace the electric-vehicle credit with credits worth $3.3 billion over 10 years for “advanced technology vehicles.” Passenger vehicles, which would get $2.9 billion of the credits, qualify if they “operate primarily on an alternative to petroleum” and “there are few vehicles in operation in the United States using the same technology as such vehicle.” This raises the possibility of credits for natural-gas vehicles, the closest substitute for the gasoline-powered engine. People could get tax credits of $10,000 per vehicle ($7,500 if the car costs more than $45,000.)

The problem is that the $3.3 billion could be better spent. Awarding tax credits for particular technologies puts the government in the dangerous role of picking winners and losers. Natural gas is inexpensive and plentiful, and these cars would likely be chosen by consumers without the credit. They are popular in many parts of the world. Natural gas is already used to power fleets of buses and trucks, which can be charged overnight. These funds are a waste of taxpayer dollars because the technology will likely be adopted anyway. And if it isn’t, it probably isn’t worth the investment.

With a Republican Congress that was elected on a platform of lowering taxes, none of these proposed tax changes are likely to become law.

[by Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former chief economist at the US Dept. of Labor, writing for MARKETWATCH]
…………………………………………

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized