>

The article claims the HOUSE GOP goal is to “.undermine law enforcement”. Then admits it is about the legislation for 87,000 new IRS agents. These aren’t really police at all.
Defunding the police undermines law enforcement.
Right off the bat, as McCarthy has been told many times, the Democratic measure in question didn’t hire 87,000 IRS agents. It might seem outlandish to think Republicans are attacking a group of officials who do not actually exist.
In reality, the IRS will be bolstered by new employees, but many of them will simply replace retiring workers, and many more will simply work in the building as IT technicians and folks who answer the phone. Repeating the lie about 87,000 new IRS agents doesn’t make it any less wrong.

Republican's 'very first bill' includes lying about what they're trying to repeal.
 
IRS Funding Repeal Could Cost Over $100 Billion, Encourage Tax Cheating >

Why do you think they want to repeal it? Their billionaire backers told them to repeal it so they can continue getting away with cheating on their taxes. >

I think the reason why is that they hate the police. When people say they're Republican, they love what the police do, and hate that the police aren't racist enough for them, and hate them for it. >

They seem to forget that they need more than just the house to get it passed. >

They don't need it to pass. It provides fodder for the base.  They know they cannot pass it but what they do get is this
MAGA - IRS are scum and the GOP fought to defund them. Those pedophiles on the left prevented them from doing that. Now all of their enemies are going to get their doors kicked in by IRS storm troopers.
​
Job done. >

Republicans:  We are the party of law and order.
Also Republicans:  Defund IRS agents who investigate tax fraud. >

Repeat after me: the IRS did NOT hire 87k gun toting agents. The agency doesn't even have 87k employees.
What it did get is funding to hire 87k employees over ten years that will get the agency to baseline 2010 employment levels.
Keep fear mongering! >

And no way that passes the senate >

Anyone want to guess how often magas will have to be told that a bill passing the house is only one part of the process of turning a bill into law? >

They would have to actually care about policy or legislation beyond “owning the libs” to actually notice that it never actually becomes law. I think this performance is enough for a big chunk of magaworld. >

Lol, at republicans making their first act to defund the police. It’s always projection isn’t it. >

The article claims the HOUSE GOP goal is to “.undermine law enforcement”. Then admits it is about the legislation for 87,000 new IRS agents. These aren’t really police at all.
Defunding the police undermines law enforcement. >

IRS agents are responsible for upholding the laws and federal ordinances of the US it's misleading to say Service agents aren't really police at all >

Yes, but the vast majority of the 87,000 to be hired would not be service agents. Most would be IT, support, auditors, etc.
Saying it “undermines law enforcement” is taking false liberty. Especially hypocritical and obnoxious considering the same people making these insinuations are the people who have called for defunding the police. And unequivocally, that does undermine law enforcement when officers are laid off. >

Dude. That's like saying understaffing 911 call centers isn't defunding law enforcement. We should fully fund all public facing government services. I want to call the IRS without hours on the line and days, or weeks, of disconnected calls. Pack the local DMV while they are at it. Are you some sort of masochist? >

I don’t object to adding more IRS agents. But calling it “undermining law enforcement”, and then revealing it is about revealing of new IRS hiring, is a mere smear. >

No, it's a simple objective fact that you can't admit because your ego won't let you.
​
I'd take an IRS agent over a cop any day.  One of them keeps us safe from scum and makes us money and the other cost us money and tends to shoot innocent people a lot more often. >

"Our first bill will be to ensure the American people can no longer be a drag on the American aristocracy." >

"After House Speaker Kevin McCarthy finally won the gavel after midnight early Saturday morning, the California Republican delivered prepared remarks to his colleagues.
“I know the night is late,” he declared from the dais, “but when we come back our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents.” GOP members, convinced that the discredited claim is true, roared in approval." >

GOP in November: "INFLATION! INFLATION!"
GOP in January: "Billionaire tax evasion is cool" >

Moscow Mitch used countless House bills as toilet paper during his reign. McCarthy is going to be humiliated the same way for the next two years. All he will be able to do is have Fox News* scream about it. >

lol good luck getting anything passed in the Senate. >

What difference does it make? It will go nowhere……and somebody should openly say to them to knock off the crap that will go nowhere and legislate for the people of this country. 
They need to be vigorously and endlessly shamed for doing literally nothing. >

Maybe they could defend schools and libraries then we could get along peaceably. >

Defund law enforcement and raise the debt or make the government raise taxes.

The governing party concluded that the government could collect more revenue without raising taxes by simply enforcing the laws already on the books. >

Let the pointless cluster fuck commence >

Question from a foreigner: since any stupid bill the House passes won't get through the Senate or face a Biden veto, what is their real power?  Is the debt ceiling and threat to shut down the government their only real power or are they dangerous in other ways?  I know there will be many sham investigations and at least one sham impeachment.  What other types of damage do they have the power to do? >

I agree with the message of this article, but I think the author applies the term "law enforcement" too broadly. 
IRS "agents" generally are not necessarily "law enforcement" - only those individuals who are IRS "Special Agents" in the criminal investigations department are in fact law enforcement. Those "agents" that conduct IRS audits are not actually law enforcement. I know the author just wanted to write about the GOP targeting "law enforcement" but the author should try to be more accurate. >

It’s the Maddow blog. What do you expect? >

fair point! >

Absolutely.
It's pure clickbait, but the actual topic itself is worrisome. >

The article claims the HOUSE GOP goal is to “.undermine law enforcement”. Then admits it is about the legislation for 87,000 new IRS agents. I would say it is partisan, considering all the calls to “defund the police” that resulted in actual reductions in police officers and annual double-digit percentage surges in crime, violence, homicides in those cities. >

How many police precincts were actually defunded? It’s all public funding, so it should be really easy to look up. You can also post your sources for the crime rates in those cities, since you know how much they increased. >


Right off the bat, as McCarthy has been told many times, the Democratic measure in question didn’t hire 87,000 IRS agents. It might seem outlandish to think Republicans are attacking a group of officials who do not actually exist.
In reality, the IRS will be bolstered by new employees, but many of them will simply replace retiring workers, and many more will simply work in the building as IT technicians and folks who answer the phone. Repeating the lie about 87,000 new IRS agents doesn’t make it any less wrong.

Republican's 'very first bill' includes lying about what they're trying to repeal.
 
IRS Funding Repeal Could Cost Over $100 Billion, Encourage Tax Cheating >

Why do you think they want to repeal it? Their billionaire backers told them to repeal it so they can continue getting away with cheating on their taxes. >

I think the reason why is that they hate the police. When people say they're Republican, they love what the police do, and hate that the police aren't racist enough for them, and hate them for it. >

They seem to forget that they need more than just the house to get it passed. >

They don't need it to pass. It provides fodder for the base.  They know they cannot pass it but what they do get is this
MAGA - IRS are scum and the GOP fought to defund them. Those pedophiles on the left prevented them from doing that. Now all of their enemies are going to get their doors kicked in by IRS storm troopers.
​
Job done. >

Republicans:  We are the party of law and order.
Also Republicans:  Defund IRS agents who investigate tax fraud. >

Repeat after me: the IRS did NOT hire 87k gun toting agents. The agency doesn't even have 87k employees.
What it did get is funding to hire 87k employees over ten years that will get the agency to baseline 2010 employment levels.
Keep fear mongering! >

And no way that passes the senate >

Anyone want to guess how often magas will have to be told that a bill passing the house is only one part of the process of turning a bill into law? >

They would have to actually care about policy or legislation beyond “owning the libs” to actually notice that it never actually becomes law. I think this performance is enough for a big chunk of magaworld. >

Lol, at republicans making their first act to defund the police. It’s always projection isn’t it. >

The article claims the HOUSE GOP goal is to “.undermine law enforcement”. Then admits it is about the legislation for 87,000 new IRS agents. These aren’t really police at all.
Defunding the police undermines law enforcement. >

IRS agents are responsible for upholding the laws and federal ordinances of the US it's misleading to say Service agents aren't really police at all >

Yes, but the vast majority of the 87,000 to be hired would not be service agents. Most would be IT, support, auditors, etc.
Saying it “undermines law enforcement” is taking false liberty. Especially hypocritical and obnoxious considering the same people making these insinuations are the people who have called for defunding the police. And unequivocally, that does undermine law enforcement when officers are laid off. >

Dude. That's like saying understaffing 911 call centers isn't defunding law enforcement. We should fully fund all public facing government services. I want to call the IRS without hours on the line and days, or weeks, of disconnected calls. Pack the local DMV while they are at it. Are you some sort of masochist? >

I don’t object to adding more IRS agents. But calling it “undermining law enforcement”, and then revealing it is about revealing of new IRS hiring, is a mere smear. >

No, it's a simple objective fact that you can't admit because your ego won't let you.
​
I'd take an IRS agent over a cop any day.  One of them keeps us safe from scum and makes us money and the other cost us money and tends to shoot innocent people a lot more often. >

"Our first bill will be to ensure the American people can no longer be a drag on the American aristocracy." >

GOP in November: "INFLATION! INFLATION!"
GOP in January: "Billionaire tax evasion is cool" >

"After House Speaker Kevin McCarthy finally won the gavel after midnight early Saturday morning, the California Republican delivered prepared remarks to his colleagues.
“I know the night is late,” he declared from the dais, “but when we come back our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents.” GOP members, convinced that the discredited claim is true, roared in approval." >

Moscow Mitch used countless House bills as toilet paper during his reign. McCarthy is going to be humiliated the same way for the next two years. All he will be able to do is have Fox News* scream about it. >

lol good luck getting anything passed in the Senate. >

What difference does it make? It will go nowhere……and somebody should openly say to them to knock off the crap that will go nowhere and legislate for the people of this country. 
They need to be vigorously and endlessly shamed for doing literally nothing. >

Maybe they could defend schools and libraries then we could get along peaceably. >

Defund law enforcement and raise the debt or make the government raise taxes.

The governing party concluded that the government could collect more revenue without raising taxes by simply enforcing the laws already on the books. >

Let the pointless cluster fuck commence >

Question from a foreigner: since any stupid bill the House passes won't get through the Senate or face a Biden veto, what is their real power?  Is the debt ceiling and threat to shut down the government their only real power or are they dangerous in other ways?  I know there will be many sham investigations and at least one sham impeachment.  What other types of damage do they have the power to do? >

I agree with the message of this article, but I think the author applies the term "law enforcement" too broadly. 
IRS "agents" generally are not necessarily "law enforcement" - only those individuals who are IRS "Special Agents" in the criminal investigations department are in fact law enforcement. Those "agents" that conduct IRS audits are not actually law enforcement. I know the author just wanted to write about the GOP targeting "law enforcement" but the author should try to be more accurate. >

It’s the Maddow blog. What do you expect? >

fair point! >

Absolutely.
It's pure clickbait, but the actual topic itself is worrisome. >

The article claims the HOUSE GOP goal is to “.undermine law enforcement”. Then admits it is about the legislation for 87,000 new IRS agents. I would say it is partisan, considering all the calls to “defund the police” that resulted in actual reductions in police officers and annual double-digit percentage surges in crime, violence, homicides in those cities. >

How many police precincts were actually defunded? It’s all public funding, so it should be really easy to look up. You can also post your sources for the crime rates in those cities, since you know how much they increased. >

Isn't anything going forward that isn't bipartisan a nothing-burger?  Isn't this like when they passed laws to repeal ACA like 100 times. >

If you are going to propose a dead bill, why not something a little less transparent? >


Right off the bat, as McCarthy has been told many times, the Democratic measure in question didn’t hire 87,000 IRS agents. It might seem outlandish to think Republicans are attacking a group of officials who do not actually exist.
In reality, the IRS will be bolstered by new employees, but many of them will simply replace retiring workers, and many more will simply work in the building as IT technicians and folks who answer the phone. Repeating the lie about 87,000 new IRS agents doesn’t make it any less wrong.

Republican's 'very first bill' includes lying about what they're trying to repeal.
 
IRS Funding Repeal Could Cost Over $100 Billion, Encourage Tax Cheating >

Why do you think they want to repeal it? Their billionaire backers told them to repeal it so they can continue getting away with cheating on their taxes. >

I think the reason why is that they hate the police. When people say they're Republican, they love what the police do, and hate that the police aren't racist enough for them, and hate them for it. >

They seem to forget that they need more than just the house to get it passed. >

They don't need it to pass. It provides fodder for the base.  They know they cannot pass it but what they do get is this
MAGA - IRS are scum and the GOP fought to defund them. Those pedophiles on the left prevented them from doing that. Now all of their enemies are going to get their doors kicked in by IRS storm troopers.
​
Job done. >

Republicans:  We are the party of law and order.
Also Republicans:  Defund IRS agents who investigate tax fraud. >

Repeat after me: the IRS did NOT hire 87k gun toting agents. The agency doesn't even have 87k employees.
What it did get is funding to hire 87k employees over ten years that will get the agency to baseline 2010 employment levels.
Keep fear mongering! >

And no way that passes the senate >

Anyone want to guess how often magas will have to be told that a bill passing the house is only one part of the process of turning a bill into law? >

They would have to actually care about policy or legislation beyond “owning the libs” to actually notice that it never actually becomes law. I think this performance is enough for a big chunk of magaworld. >

Lol, at republicans making their first act to defund the police. It’s always projection isn’t it.