Exploding IRS scandal.

[brycejones]

Simplified Income Tax Return For Tea Party Members And Other Racist Conservatives

Now you're finally making sense!

 

[Brainonska511]

This article seems rather relevant to the IRS scandal: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/u...s-tested-political-limits.html?pagewanted=all

When CVFC, a conservative veterans’ group in California, applied for tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, its biggest expenditure that year was several thousand dollars in radio ads backing a Republican candidate for Congress.

The Wetumpka Tea Party, from Alabama, sponsored training for a get-out-the-vote initiative dedicated to the “defeat of President Barack Obama” while the I.R.S. was weighing its application.

And the head of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, whose application languished with the I.R.S. for more than two years, sent out e-mails to members about Mitt Romney campaign events and organized members to distribute Mr. Romney’s presidential campaign literature.

Representatives of these organizations have cried foul in recent weeks about their treatment by the I.R.S., saying they were among dozens of conservative groups unfairly targeted by the agency, harassed with inappropriate questionnaires and put off for months or years as the agency delayed decisions on their applications.
...

Some of these groups complaining of targeting seem to have been doing was political in nature, disqualifying them from tax-exempt status anyway.


That doesn't excuse the methods the IRS was using and we should have a non-partisan investigation (read: not a witch hunt) to determine what went wrong, who was responsible, whether there was malicious intent, and how to such targeting in the future.

 

[Incorruptible]

Prove otherwise. Put up, or shut up.

It's the resident jihadist defending the irs. It wasn't just low level workers so you can shut up.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's the resident jihadist defending the irs. It wasn't just low level workers so you can shut up.

It's your assertion to prove, not mine. The burden of proof lies with the accuser, always, and no evidence has been produced showing involvement higher up than the Cincinnati office itself.

I know it's what you want to believe, so you obviously will, being a great adherent to the principles of Truthiness in all its forms.

The whole Teahadist movement is just one giant astroturfed whine-fest, anyway. Which is why the Uber-Right is so twisted over it all in the first place- they desperately want to conceal the sources of their funding, pretend that they're really a grass roots movement. Oh, yeh, and they want a tax break for doing it, too.

What it amounts to is that the poor dears were forced to fill out extra forms & wait for tax exempt status wrt very questionable funding from a deliberately dense & obtuse web of so-called charities whose money likely comes from a handful of Right Wing Billionaires.

Uhhh-Wah! Uhh-waaahhh! UHHH-Waaaaaahhhh!

Hell- the IRS can't even apologize without revealing Teahadists' twisted sense of persecution & desire to tear down the govt of the People as if it weren't democratically elected in the first place.

No, you're not the majority, and you never will be, so get over yourselves.

 

[Bowfinger]

This article seems rather relevant to the IRS scandal: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/u...s-tested-political-limits.html?pagewanted=all


Some of these groups complaining of targeting seem to have been doing was political in nature, disqualifying them from tax-exempt status anyway.


That doesn't excuse the methods the IRS was using and we should have a non-partisan investigation (read: not a witch hunt) to determine what went wrong, who was responsible, whether there was malicious intent, and how to such targeting in the future.

That's one of the interesting comments I've heard about this (and I'm sorry, but I don't remember where I heard this discussion). While the wing-nuts are screaming for a special prosecutor, they need to be careful what they wish for. Whoever it was pointed out that once a special prosecutor is handed the gavel, he has broad discretion in his investigation. He might, for example, choose to examine all these groups to determine if their applications accurately represented their groups' activities. Applicants who provided material misinformation could be charged with fraud. This could blow up in their faces.

I'm perfectly fine with that, of course. I do want a thorough, impartial investigation, and if a special prosecutor is the right way to do that, so be it. If that special prosecutor then takes down some of these corrupt political groups misrepresenting themselves as serving "social welfare" interests, that would just be the icing on the cake. Good riddance.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'd agree except for one thing - the head of the IRS during this period met with White House staff an astounding number of times. Hard to imagine that someone as flip as this son of a bitch, who asserted that the IRS has the right to treat not-for-profit groups completely differently based on political ideology, just coincidentally went to the White House much more often than any of his successors while he was blatantly using his department for political advantage. Other than that, this began right after Obama released his enemies list of big contributors to conservative groups and falsely called them criminals. That should have been enough to inspire the ideologues in the IRS to action without Obama or his staffers needing to do anything illegal.


Dude, we could strap magnets to your ass and have free green energy for the whole country they way you are spinning.

Nobody is stupid enough to believe that the IRS simply coincidentally took action to force conservative groups to a higher standard in raising and spending money without any attempt to do so as a political weapon.


I fear there's a lot of truth in this, and worst of all, unlike the North Korean citizens we're doing it to ourselves. No matter which party is in power, it slips D.C. a little more power knowing that a third of the nation will defend it.

You sound well brainwashed. I'd love to see you cite credible evidence for any of your innuendo. It sounds like the usual fabricated/highly distorted propaganda the nutter bubble cranks out like Orville Redenbacher ships popcorn.

 

[Incorruptible]

It's your assertion to prove, not mine. The burden of proof lies with the accuser, always, and no evidence has been produced showing involvement higher up than the Cincinnati office itself.

I know it's what you want to believe, so you obviously will, being a great adherent to the principles of Truthiness in all its forms.

The whole Teahadist movement is just one giant astroturfed whine-fest, anyway. Which is why the Uber-Right is so twisted over it all in the first place- they desperately want to conceal the sources of their funding, pretend that they're really a grass roots movement. Oh, yeh, and they want a tax break for doing it, too.

What it amounts to is that the poor dears were forced to fill out extra forms & wait for tax exempt status wrt very questionable funding from a deliberately dense & obtuse web of so-called charities whose money likely comes from a handful of Right Wing Billionaires.

Uhhh-Wah! Uhh-waaahhh! UHHH-Waaaaaahhhh!

Hell- the IRS can't even apologize without revealing Teahadists' twisted sense of persecution & desire to tear down the govt of the People as if it weren't democratically elected in the first place.

No, you're not the majority, and you never will be, so get over yourselves.

Keep spouting your anti-American BS.

 

[Jhhnn]

You sound well brainwashed. I'd love to see you cite credible evidence for any of your innuendo. It sounds like the usual fabricated/highly distorted propaganda the nutter bubble cranks out like Orville Redenbacher ships popcorn.

I do like the term "nutter bubble".

The whole thing will go down in the myths & legends of the fringe whacks, with multiple authors gulling the rubes into buying their books on the subject, published by Regnery, of course. It's big business, providing the perps with very nice livings indeed.

They know that whatever it is, it doesn't need to be true to be believed, and to sell like hot cakes at a 4th of July breakfast social.

 

[Jhhnn]

Keep spouting your anti-American BS.

I'm not anti-merricuhn, at all. I'm just anti- brainwashed idiot, particularly self righteous idiot. If you weren't one, you'd see that there is a difference.

 

[shadow9d9]

Keep spouting your anti-American BS.

You just admitted that you can't back up your claims. You are better off running away than admitting that you have nothing...

 

[Incorruptible]

I'm not anti-merricuhn, at all. I'm just anti- brainwashed idiot, particularly self righteous idiot. If you weren't one, you'd see that there is a difference.

You've done an excellent job of exposing yourself as an idiot. These groups support the Constitution and you're against them so yes you are anti-American.

 

[shadow9d9]

You've done an excellent job of exposing yourself as an idiot. These groups support the Constitution and you're against them so yes you are anti-American.

He asked you to support your claims and you couldn't. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[monovillage]

You just admitted that you can't back up your claims. You are better off running away than admitting that you have nothing...

As a matter of fact Jhhnn asked "put up or shut up" and Fern put up the facts and bitch slapped Jhnnn over them in the IG's report.

Try reading the thread next time.

 

[ivwshane]

I'd agree except for one thing - the head of the IRS during this period met with White House staff an astounding number of times. Hard to imagine that someone as flip as this son of a bitch, who asserted that the IRS has the right to treat not-for-profit groups completely differently based on political ideology, just coincidentally went to the White House much more often than any of his successors while he was blatantly using his department for political advantage. Other than that, this began right after Obama released his enemies list of big contributors to conservative groups and falsely called them criminals. That should have been enough to inspire the ideologues in the IRS to action without Obama or his staffers needing to do anything illegal.


Dude, we could strap magnets to your ass and have free green energy for the whole country they way you are spinning.

Nobody is stupid enough to believe that the IRS simply coincidentally took action to force conservative groups to a higher standard in raising and spending money without any attempt to do so as a political weapon.


I fear there's a lot of truth in this, and worst of all, unlike the North Korean citizens we're doing it to ourselves. No matter which party is in power, it slips D.C. a little more power knowing that a third of the nation will defend it.

Oops you better get some new sources, it turns out he was invited 157 times to meetings regarding the ACA, of which he only attended 11 times in two years!

 

[Jhhnn]

As a matter of fact Jhhnn asked "put up or shut up" and Fern put up the facts and bitch slapped Jhnnn over them in the IG's report.

Try reading the thread next time.

Hardly. Fern merely asserted falsehood, that the Teahadist groups were prevented from operating. They weren't. They just couldn't operate as tax exempt.

Which has nothing to do with your claim that it's all the Ebil Obama's doing.

Not that you're remotely capable of catching a glimmer of any of that.

 

[PokerGuy]

Whoever it was pointed out that once a special prosecutor is handed the gavel, he has broad discretion in his investigation. He might, for example, choose to examine all these groups to determine if their applications accurately represented their groups' activities.

Whether or not their applications were accurate or not is immaterial to the issue at hand: the groups were subjected to scrutiny and abuse based on their name and political affiliation, not the supposed accuracy of the application. Even if the application was later proven to be completely bogus, it doesn't change the fact that those applications should not have been subject to any more scrutiny than any other applications based on political affiliation.

Your argument sounds a whole lot like "stop complaining about the abuse serfs, or we could make the abuse a whole lot worse!".

If that special prosecutor then takes down some of these corrupt political groups misrepresenting themselves as serving "social welfare" interests, that would just be the icing on the cake. Good riddance.

There is no exact definition of "social welfare", so there is no possible way a special prosecutor or anyone else could go after any such groups unless they actually lied about facts on their application. Well, not legally anyway, but I'm sure our resident authoritarian democrats would be fine with sicking a bunch of government agencies after them to harass them for their crime of having conservative thoughts.

 

[PokerGuy]

Hardly. Fern merely asserted falsehood, that the Teahadist groups were prevented from operating. They weren't. They just couldn't operate as tax exempt.

I'm sure you have no problem then with making certain groups of voters travel 500 miles to a voting location if they want to vote. Hey, by your logic, they are not being prevented from voting, they just have to go to a different location

Without the ability to raise funds these groups effectively can't operate, that was the whole point of subjecting them to abuse and scrutiny and delaying their applications, to shut down opposing political speech.

 

[brycejones]

Keep spouting your anti-American BS.

Reality check, not liking the tea party is not equal to being anti-american.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm sure you have no problem then with making certain groups of voters travel 500 miles to a voting location if they want to vote. Hey, by your logic, they are not being prevented from voting, they just have to go to a different location

Without the ability to raise funds these groups effectively can't operate, that was the whole point of subjecting them to abuse and scrutiny and delaying their applications, to shut down opposing political speech.

I'm sure you need to duh-vert into scurrilous non sequiter accusations when confronted with the truth, because you just did.

Literally thousands of political groups operate w/o tax exempt status in this country. They obviously raise money to do so. Are Teahadists so poorly adept at messaging that they can't? Or are they so utterly dependent on big money anonymity that they can't function w/o the hidden funding from a few wing nut billionaires that only tax exempt status will allow?

 

[Bowfinger]

Whether or not their applications were accurate or not is immaterial to the issue at hand: the groups were subjected to scrutiny and abuse based on their name and political affiliation, not the supposed accuracy of the application. Even if the application was later proven to be completely bogus, it doesn't change the fact that those applications should not have been subject to any more scrutiny than any other applications based on political affiliation.

Your argument sounds a whole lot like "stop complaining about the abuse serfs, or we could make the abuse a whole lot worse!".


There is no exact definition of "social welfare", so there is no possible way a special prosecutor or anyone else could go after any such groups unless they actually lied about facts on their application. Well, not legally anyway, but I'm sure our resident authoritarian democrats would be fine with sicking a bunch of government agencies after them to harass them for their crime of having conservative thoughts.

You're missing my point. A special prosecutor is a powerful weapon, with broad discretion to branch out into such side issues, regardless of the initial focus of the investigation. Two wrongs don't make a right. It is quite possible the SP might pursue both the issue of partisan delays and the issue of fraudulent applications.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'm sure you have no problem then with making certain groups of voters travel 500 miles to a voting location if they want to vote. Hey, by your logic, they are not being prevented from voting, they just have to go to a different location

Without the ability to raise funds these groups effectively can't operate, that was the whole point of subjecting them to abuse and scrutiny and delaying their applications, to shut down opposing political speech.

As mentioned, the problem with that story is that many (most? all?) of these groups were already operating. "Donations" to such 50a(c)(4) groups are not tax deductible anyway, so delays would seem to have limited impact. Also as mentioned, 501(c)(4) groups aren't even required to apply to the IRS. It is optional, though it's not clear to me the exact implications of applying vs. not bothering to apply. To be clear, that still does NOT make it right if such groups' applications were delayed for partisan reasons, but it seems like the impact was actually rather limited.

 

[Incorruptible]

Reality check, not liking the tea party is not equal to being anti-american.

The Tea Party supports the Constitution and people who oppose them are anti-Constitution.

 

[Bowfinger]

The Tea Party supports the Constitution and people who oppose them are anti-Constitution.

Shut up, twit for brains. The ACLU also supports the Constitution. Do you support the ACLU? If not, by your simple-minded, black and white "logic" (lulz!), you are anti-Constitution.

Oh wait, we already know you think the Constitution only applies to white male Christians. It is why you are so Inconsequential.

 

[Incorruptible]

Shut up, twit for brains. The ACLU also supports the Constitution. Do you support the ACLU? If not, by your simple-minded, black and white "logic" (lulz!), you are anti-Constitution.

Oh wait, we already know you think the Constitution only applies to white male Christians. It is why you are so Inconsequential.

Shut up, twit for brains. I never said that I oppose the ACLU. Do you support the Tea Party?

 

[Paratus]

I'm sure you have no problem then with making certain groups of voters travel 500 miles to a voting location if they want to vote. Hey, by your logic, they are not being prevented from voting, they just have to go to a different location

Without the ability to raise funds these groups effectively can't operate, that was the whole point of subjecting them to abuse and scrutiny and delaying their applications, to shut down opposing political speech.

So you're saying without tax exempt status these groups can not collect donations?

Hmmm.