Image 01 Image 03

Elizabeth Warren Promises IRS Will Have “Super Duper Enforcement” Powers If She Wins

Elizabeth Warren Promises IRS Will Have “Super Duper Enforcement” Powers If She Wins

I have no words

Okay, I’m not sure what Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is thinking here.  How is it a good idea to imbue the already far too powerful and almost universally distrusted IRS with “super duper enforcement” powers to ensure her wealth tax is implemented?

Further, “super duper,” really?  She’s interviewing to be President of the United States of America, not president of the fifth grade.

The Daily Caller reports:

Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren promised “super duper enforcement” to ensure the implementation of her proposed wealth tax.

Warren made the comments during a New Hampshire Public Radio event hosted by Laura Knoy along with NHPR’s political reporter Casey McDermott.

. . . . Warren, in a move reminiscent of former President Obama’s “you didn’t build that” remarks, made the case for her wealth tax in part by claiming that wealth gained in America was wealth that was necessarily built with the help of others.

“I guarantee, if you built that fortune here in America, you built it at least in part using workers all of us helped pay to educate,” she said. “You built it at least in part, getting your goods to market, on roads and bridges all of us helped pay to build. You built it at least in part protected by police, firefighters — all of us helped pay the salaries.”

So apparently her logic goes like this: Since “you didn’t build that,” nothing you have or earn is actually yours. It all belongs to the collective, to the state.  Indeed, according to communist ideology, people—the workers, i.e. “labor”—also belong to the state; this is why they believe in, as a Denver Councilwoman put it, “community ownership of land, labor, resources, and distribution of those resources.”  You and all your stuff are belong to us.

Upon establishing that nothing you have is actually yours but instead belongs to the collective, to be administered by the state, the next logical step is to have a means of enforcement that is, in Warren’s world, “super duper enforcement.”

The Daily Caller continues:

Warren addressed concerns with failing wealth taxes in some European nations, explaining that because the threshold was so high — focusing only on individuals with amassed wealth over $50 million — enforcement would necessarily be less complicated and more effective.

Touting “super duper enforcement,” Warren then outlined a plan that included partnering with foreign governments to track those who would be subject to the wealth tax whose money was being held in other countries.

You can watch the full interview here.

Does she imagine this “super duper enforcement” shtick is somehow endearing or cute?  Is she, from her elitist perch, attempting to reassure we uneducated rubes in deplorableland that it’s okay because Mommy is in charge and she has “super duper” powers?  It’s all very confusing and just plain strange.

Twitter went wild with this bizarre statement.

The whole thing is so absurd that it reminded a lot of people of the comedy classic Animal House.

Ridicule is perhaps the best response to the ridiculous.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I do believe the old bag is trying to lose.

    Tom Servo in reply to Whitewall. | November 2, 2019 at 8:02 pm

    Lizzy Warren never read her bible.

    I was instantly reminded of the story in 1st Kings, after the death of Solomon. The new King’s advisers came to him and said (paraphrased) “if you are kinder to these people than your father, they will serve you forever!” But Rehoboam instead said “My father laid on you a heavy yoke; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.'”

    (1 Kings 12:11)

    surprise, surprise, his kingdom fell apart immediately.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Whitewall. | November 2, 2019 at 8:08 pm

    Maybe not. Her wanting to increase IRS powers is to appeal to those craving confiscatory taxes to teach the filthy rotten capitalist pigs a lesson.

    In short, she is playing to the envious.

      You have a point. Those who don’t pay any Federal Income Tax probably do not have the same visceral reaction to that headline which those of us who do pay said taxes would.

      What they don’t understand is if any of her bright ideas were put in play, they would very quickly learn to hate and fear the Infernal Revenue Service too.

      The left always creates envy of what others have to go with their heaping the idea of your dissatisfaction of life.
      Class warfare, racial warfare, gender warfare, sexuality warfare. To sell their ideas they split people into groups, then push hate, which is their standard bearer, so a number of enemies of that group (mostly false, but hey power is more important than semantics) and the members of that splinter group have to join the politician who is “fighting” those hated enemies, even though they include other members of the “big tent” of leftists.
      Hate and envy are their tools in trade.
      It pushed the Bolsheviks forward. It pushed Castro into a lifelong power. It pushed the Nazis into power. It works for the left because if anyone really sat down to think of their ideas, they would see its based on greed of those who have less, it is based on creating equal outcomes which never happens in reality, it is based on destruction of a group of people because they are convenient and smaller in size.
      She is a good one to head a party of hatred and envy, she lied all her life to gain that which she didn’t earn, no wonder she is a leftist, it’s the usual guilt associated with undeserved wealth based on lies and deceptions.

      Exactly! That’s been the Democrats playbook for years and Warren is just taking it to the next level before Pelosi wing of the Dems are ready for it. Thing is that the first person to do that is the one who gets the most benefit from it.

    Finrod in reply to Whitewall. | November 2, 2019 at 8:19 pm

    The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

    Free State Paul in reply to Whitewall. | November 2, 2019 at 9:05 pm

    She’s displaying the same lack of political instincts she showed when she doubled down on the American Indian ancestry issue. I work with a lot of college professors outside of academe. A lot of them have this problem. They are not used to being wrong. So when they make a mistake, they try to justify it rather than backtrack and move on. She’s dug herself into a big hole with how to pay for Medicare for All. But she refuses to stop digging.

      They are not used to being caught.

      FIFY, they are always wrong.

        Free State Paul in reply to Barry. | November 2, 2019 at 11:10 pm

        No, PhD professors are almost always right— within the confines of the classroom while lecturing on the subject of their degree. They’re used to being questioned by ignorant students, who just don’t get it.

        Too many, however, come to believe that they are ALWAYS right about EVERY subject even when outside the classroom. Put a PhD on the Board of a professional society, for example, and many will suddenly assume they know more about finance or marketing or databases than the hired staff who, after all, don’t have PhDs. So, after suggesting something dumb, they double down on proving YOU are the dummy, not them.

    OweCmon in reply to Whitewall. | November 3, 2019 at 6:48 am

    Right. How else does her neverending, off-the-rails ‘Pandering’ make any sense? She’s another loose cannon, shooting her mouth off in all directions. If she isn’t trying to lose the nomination, I believe her ability for truthful introspection is missing… along with common sense, love for country, respect for the American people, reverence for the Constitution, etc., etc,……

If I were a memer – I’d take the Superman logo and put a couple vertical green lines through it.

She’d probably bring Lois Lerner out of retirement to head up the new Thought Crimes Division at the IRS.

… liawatha speak with fork in tongue!

Under previous administrations, the IRS has already purchased thousands of firearms and millions of rounds of ammunition. They already employ local SWAT teams to steamroll their targets. What more power can they handle?

Christopher B | November 2, 2019 at 6:35 pm

hey, at least she didn’t say it would be yuuuuge beautiful enforcement.

Too many survived the IRS attack on the Tea Party and, as a result, they have morphed into ‘The Deplorables’. Warren promises not to make that mistake again.

Connivin Caniff | November 2, 2019 at 6:42 pm

When she jerks around those spastic long arms of hers, high in the air, she reminds me of an inflatable tube man in front of a used-car dealership. What an idiot.

It’s all very logical. “Super duper enforcement” is just a cute (and, she must think, palatable) way of singing the virtues of the police state. And, since you can’t—even in theory—have socialism communism without draconian enforcement of the edicts of the central committee, she’s being very logical and consistent.

The only problem I see looming over her horizon is that Big Sister is Watching You doesn’t have same ring as the classic version with Big Brother doing the watching. But I’m sure she’ll come up with some cute way to reword it.

She seems to ignore that the”wealthy” have been paying far more in taxes than most people. So, if taxes went to pay for those roads, and schools and everything else, hasn’t the wealthy already paid for their fair share?

Also – why don’t the Ds pay their share of taxes? How many congress critters are behind in taxes (Rangel, AOC, others?)

    Connivin Caniff in reply to Liz. | November 2, 2019 at 6:58 pm

    The wealthy have always paid their fair share if they are D’Rats. As to the rest or us, never.

“So apparently her logic goes like this: Since ‘you didn’t build that,’ nothing you have or earn is actually yours. It all belongs to the collective, to the state.”

She’s simply echoing the totalitarianism of Benito (as a proxy of every lefty including Ds), “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”

Of course. In the dictatorship of the proletariat (run by the ruling class) there must be an all powerful big brother to enforce conformance.

Lia-A-Watha wants to “supersize” the federal government by having bureaucrats do the work insurance company employees are currently doing and significantly increase the size of the IRS.

    CaptScientist in reply to bw222. | November 4, 2019 at 8:10 am

    I thought “obamacare” had already supersized the size of the IRS, didn’t little o hire on about 15,000 new revenuers?

I do not doubt for a fraction of a second that she played fast and loose with the tax code in accumulating her $12,000,000.And now like all good liberals, she wants to ensure she continues to get rich by using the IRS as her private hit squad.

Hideous and hateful old woman absolutely HATES Americans. This woman is as wicked as they come, even Hillary wouldn’t have anything to do with her. OTOH, Pelosi probably adores her.

This has nothing to do with revenue. The Animal Farm had the nine dogs. East Germany had the Stasi. Warren would have the IRS.

Remember that Soros says she is the most “qualified” of the candidates to be POTUS. Soros would call the shots and Warren would be Face of the tyranny. Middle of the night raids have been tested recently in Wisconsin against Walker and again by Mueller.

Loris Lerner would look like a friend compared to Warren. Warren would make Woodrow Wilson’s roundup of critics look like play. Sociopaths know to crush their enemies. Oberlin anyone?

smalltownoklahoman | November 2, 2019 at 8:34 pm

Nuts! Especially if she thinks further empowering one of the most hated government agencies is going to endear her to we the people!

She will win. There are diverse special and peculiar interests in our society… in our world, that favor progressive redistributive change schemes. The only chance is to restore market function to mitigate progressive prices and undermine their appeals to empathy and deferment to social justice.

    When you say she will win, do you mean the primary or the presidency? Just curious.

    I do agree that we may be too far gone at this point. Even people who identify as on the right/conservative love them some socialism, including expanding it. Sigh.

Always with those puny old woman fists.

Like the old hag Clinton, she’ll never ever be president.

I’m at a loss for words–that she is a Harvard professor of law and speaks like a Valley Girl is just astonishing

Given that the IRS is Americans’ least favorite government agency. Whenever you sic the IRS on fellow Americans, at some point it’s going to get back to you.

shes trying to use terms millenials understand…

she may be nominated and, given the usual demo/leftist election fraud/shenanigans, she might even win

but methinks she will never serve

Every one of the idiots in that audience thinks this ‘Super-Duper-Enforcement’ is only going to be attacking *other* people.

They have no idea that they are the target.

I am not a lawyer. Here is the text of the 16th amendment, which gave the FedGov the power to tax.:

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Sixteenth Amendment in the National Archives. The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states on the basis of population.

Please notice it says Income Tax.

Warren needs to pass a constitutional amendment to tax wealth.


BiteYourTongue | November 4, 2019 at 8:22 am

Super Duper, translation: She’s going to corrupt the IRS like Obama or she’s going to provide arms to the IRS.

Like Obozo did when he targeted opposition groups? When Lerner lied and was in contempt but permitted to walk away?

Wake up America:

The democrats are demonstrating in the “Impeachment Hearings” what they plan to do when and if they take over the country.

First they will abolish the Bill of Rights.
That allows them to confiscate any and all weapons, guns, knives, pressure cookers, etc. They will determine what someone can say.

They will conduct hearings or prosecutions in secret. They will not allow the accused to hear all accusations or charges against him. He could be found guilty even though no law was broken. He will not be allowed to confront his accuser.