WTAF?

quote:

An online job posting for special agents within the law enforcement branch of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is causing a stir on social media, as Congress prepares to pass a spending bill that would greatly expand the federal agency. A link to a job posting for "Criminal Investigation Special Agents" appeared to have been briefly deleted on Wednesday, following online criticism of the posting's language, though it reappeared back online after a FOX Business inquiry to the agency.

A "key requirement" for applicants is that they have to be "legally allowed to carry a firearm," and "major duties" include "Carry a firearm and be willing to use deadly force, if necessary" and "Be willing and able to participate in arrests, execution of search warrants, and other dangerous assignments," according to the job posting. The requirement that agents be willing to use "deadly force, if necessary" drew heated criticism online, although the same language appears in job postings for other law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI.

"The IRS Criminal Investigation special agent job announcement continues to be open on USAJobs and has not/was not taken down. USAJobs is where these positions are posted and where applicants are referred to in order to apply," an IRS spokesperson told FOX Business. "The announcement has been opened since February 2022 and continues through Dec. 31, 2022." The uproar over the post coincided with criticism of the proposed expansion of the IRS under the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes an $80 billion boost to the IRS over a 10-year period, with more than half intended to help the agency crack down on tax evasion.

Link

It’s an army bro… Larger than the IDF

To quote someone else here the only thing they should be armed with is a pencil. With an eraser.

I've just scanned this thread, apologies if this was mentioned earlier.

We've heard of efforts to create a national firearm data base as well as proposals for really onerous, prohibitive taxes on guns and ammos. Armed and dangerous IRS agents knocking on your door would be unsurprising.

Is this why they emptied out Rikers island? Make room for 100 million Americans that are going to complain?

Democrats play Manchin for fool on permitting reform

https://www.washingtonexaminer...on-permitting-reform

It supposedly sealed the deal for Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-WV) essential vote for the Inflation Reduction Act: He was allegedly promised passage of separate legislation that would make it easier for energy projects to get through the federal government’s stringent permitting process.

Now, as many predicted, that deal appears dead.

“Why should Democrats deliver the Republican agenda on these issues when they’re unified in voting against everything?” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) told Rachel Frazin.

Grijalva further indicated he would do everything in his power to keep the permitting reform out of any larger legislation to fund the government at the end of the year.

The United States currently has some of the highest construction costs for infrastructure projects in the entire world. A big reason why is the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act, which empowers environmental activists to go to federal court to stop any infrastructure project that receives a single dime of federal money. These lawsuits can take years, causing unnecessary delays and driving up the cost of infrastructure projects.

Manchin’s permitting reform legislation would greenlight some specific projects and also set a time limit for all NEPA challenges in federal court. This would make the construction of all energy projects, both renewable and fossil fuel projects, easier and less expensive.

Environmentalists hate that.

"There is simply no excuse for Democrats who care about the climate to support a toxic giveaway that amounts to little more than a fossil fuel wish list," Evergreen Action Executive Director Jamal Raad said in a statement about Manchin’s permitting bill.

Manchin’s approval rating in West Virginia has fallen 30 points since he sold out his state by voting for the Inflation Reduction Act. As it becomes apparent just how badly Manchin got played in this deal, that number could fall further.

https://www.eenews.net/article...r-permitting-reform/

https://www.wvnews.com/news/wv...8d-6f67ba5dc5c3.html

saw a talking head the other day with a GREAT question: "What's the IRS going to do with 87,000 new agents while the Border Patrol is 19,000"?

Those new hires agreed to be armed and willing to use deadly force.

Send ‘em to the border and here I thought the IRS was a bunch of debit and credit people. They did get Credit for Big Al.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
Those new hires agreed to be armed and willing to use deadly force.

Send ‘em to the border and here I thought the IRS was a bunch of debit and credit people. They did get Credit for Big Al.

To be absolutely clear, I am 100% totally and completely opposed to hiring 87,000 new IRS employees. It is wrong. It will be counterproductive. It's going to hit the middle class and even some low income people such as waitresses and others with cash income. However, it's always best to be accurate. The huge majority of the 87,000 new hires will be Revenue Agents (RAs). They conduct tax audits. A few will be Revenue Officers (ROs) and will perform collections actions such as garnishing bank accounts and wages. RAs and ROs do NOT carry guns. Only Special Agents of the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) carry firearms. The cost to the government (read - tax payers) is a lot higher for CID agents than it is for RAs and ROs. The training is far more expensive and lengthy. If they are interested is collecting money ASAP, they are not going to waste time training CID agents. NO reader of my post should interpret it as an endorsement of this insane idea. I oppose the hiring of these 87,000 people completely. But almost all of these 87,000 new hires will NOT be armed. Just because you saw a talking head on TV (even a conservative one) say there will be 87,000 armed IRS agents hired doesn't mean it's true. Even the conservative talking heads are sometimes wrong. The Liberal talking heads are wrong, however, whenever you see their mouths move.

The fangs of a rattlesnake are only a small portion of the whole organism.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...00-irs-agents-video/

House Republicans Vote Unanimously to Repeal Funding For Army of 87,000 IRS Agents

By Cristina Laila
Published January 9, 2023 at 9:17pm


The House of Representatives on Monday evening voted 221-210 to repeal funding for 87,000 IRS agents.

The so-called ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ gave $79.6 billion to the IRS over the next 10 years.

The Wall Street Journal said the new army of IRS agents will target the middle and upper-middle class.

According to new analysis, the IRS audits the poor at 5 times the rate of everyone else.

The IRS also has a history of targeting conservative groups.

The House approved its first bill on Monday night rescinding funding for the 87,000 IRS agents.

“Promises made,” Speaker McCarthy said as he dropped the gavel.

“House Republicans just voted unanimously to repeal the Democrats’ army of 87,000 IRS agents” Kevin McCarthy said Monday night.

Does that vote actually take the money away or is it a symbolic vote?

But that would still have to go through the senate and be repealed there too right?

Sure. And then the President has to sign it. But they have to start somewhere.

The House spends the money...or not.

A good place to begin deliberations as to the benefit of canceling 87,000 unnecessary jobs would be the cost to the taxpayer. Taxpayers who the agents would be turned against for no other reason than fleecing them. IRS agents make approximately $116,104 a year. Multiply that by 87,000 and you get over 10 billion dollars. Now add in benefits, health insurance, raises, training, incidentals, etc. and the figure can only go up.

That’s the angle the republicans need to take with the public. These people want to steal more money from you, and charge you money we don’t have to do it.

quote:

A good place to begin deliberations as to the benefit of canceling 87,000 unnecessary jobs would be the cost to the taxpayer. Taxpayers who the agents would be turned against for no other reason than fleecing them. IRS agents make approximately $116,104 a year...

And most of the people they are taking it from make less than that.
Long term, that doesn't work for anyone.

I recognize it is entirely symbolic, but I do appreciate the gesture.

If nothing else it gets the Democrats voting on the record to keep the IRS and I imagine there are a lot of democrat constituents who also aren’t real happy with the current system. Maybe it will cause a few to start rethinking the consequences of their votes.

As a bit of a pessimist I will also note that time they “waste” doing this is time NOT spent creating more government, taxes, regulations, etc.

Sometimes, it is important to do the “right” thing even if you know it will make no difference, change nothing, and bring ridicule.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
House Republicans Vote Unanimously to Repeal Funding For Army of 87,000 IRS Agents

Now, they need to learn a trick or two from the enemy, and stick this in a 'must pass' bill.

Otherwise, to quote the Bard, it is 'full of sound and fury, etc.'

What if there were an 'Omnibus Bill' it could be attached to that needed to pass in order to fund the .gov and avoid a shutdown? Oh, never mind...