The IRS doesn't follow its own rules in other ways, as well; (updated)

anyone surprised?
A review of the IRS Office of Appeals, which resolves disputes between the agency and taxpayers, found officials did notalways follow proper procedures when dealing with taxpayers or their legally designated representatives.
...
“Neither we nor the IRS know with any degree of precision how well the IRS is complying with direct contact provisions,” the auditors wrote.
But we're supposed to trust them.  Including with all our medical information.  Right.


Hey, Texas DPS and Austin PD, you do realize you're asking for some serious lawsuits?   Not to mention the costs of the court challenges and all?


Back when the Shepard case was in the news, I made comment somewhere about there being information that didn't fit into the Preferred Narrative; caught hell from various homosexual and correct-thinking people for not just buying into the PN.  Now all this is coming out.  Including something that troubles me greatly, from the linked article:
Not everyone is interested in hearing these alternative theories. When 20/20 engaged Jimenez to work on a segment revisiting the case in 2004, GLAAD bridled at what the organization saw as an attempt to undermine the notion that anti-gay bias was a factor; Moises Kaufman, the director and co-writer of The Laramie Project, denounced it as “terrible journalism,” though the segment went on to win an award from the Writers Guild of America for best news analysis of the year.

There are valuable reasons for telling certain stories in a certain way at pivotal times, but that doesn’t mean we have to hold on to them once they’ve outlived their usefulness.
Bold mine.  I present to you a prime cause of why people don't trust the media, haven't for years: "It's ok to use lies and/or untruths and/or spin the story in false ways if it serves the Cause, but we have to be willing to bring out the whole truth when that need is past."

Yeah, that's doing great things, isn't it?


I cannot imagine what the muzzle blast is like from firing that thing.  Especially with the happy-switch on.

Question: Lots of SWAT teams have gone to something like this instead of a sub-gun.  Wonder if they're liable for hearing loss to people- especially children- when they use one to kill the family pet due to Holy Procedure?
Update:
Sigi says THIS is a real gun.
9" barrel, in .308.
I don't have earplugs and muffs good enough to deal with that.


Dog hit on road.  Fatally injured, but FAR more important than putting it out of pain is "What about my FEELINGS?  What about some child who might see?"
Language warning.  And well-said.


Hey, why would Rangel(Corrupt Dirtbag-NY) care?  He won't pay any real penalty.


"What?  'No boots on the ground promise'?  That was then."