For you folks who support profiling, the IRS was right to scrutinize Tea Party!

Rose Captain said:
He's a troll.
Click to expand...

He's worse than a troll. Paulie is a psychopath.

PostmodernProphet said:
really?.....who did the IRS target in 2000-2008?......1992-2000?.....
Click to expand...

We've posted several other times on this forum about the IRS during the Bush administration directly targeting applicants for political reasons, including a church in California.

And the NAACP. This was a renewal of their status.

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/1/irs_investigating_naacp_for_criticizing_bush

The Internal Revenue Service is investigating the non-profit status of the NAACP after its chairman, Julian Bond, criticized the Bush administration in a speech at its annual convention in July. We speak with NAACP Director Hilary Shelton about the investigation as well as the intimidation and suppression of voters around the country. [includes rush transcript]
Three members of Congress are calling on the Internal Revenue Service to drop an investigation into the non-profit status of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The IRS audit comes after its chairman, Julian Bond, criticized the Bush administration in a speech at its annual convention in July.

At the time, President Bush turned down an invitation from the NAACP–the country’s oldest and largest civil rights organization–to speak at the convention. In his speech, Chairman Bond criticized Bush’s civil rights record, the Iraq war, the high black unemployment rate and the decline of educational opportunities for blacks.

The letter addressed to the IRS Commissioner by three House Democrats: Charles Rangel of New York, Pete Stark of California and John Conyers of Michigan says: "it is obvious that the timing of this IRS examination is nothing more than an effort to intimidate the members of the NAACP."
Click to expand...

Bfgrn said:
Hello? Hey PEA brain, if these teabaggers were applying for tax exempt status, HOW are they allowed to 'fund' candidates?
Click to expand...


A bigger question is how in the hell are they a tax free charitable organization?
 
007 said:
The purpose of the tax exempt status is to raise funds for donation to campaigns or to provide media access via purchased airtime to counter liberal lies and attack ads.

This action prevented them from raising monies to be used legally to inform the voters.
That is the purpose of political fundraising, not for profit groups.
Are you really that stupid?
The IRS actions were designed to cut off funding to opposition candidates.
The release of names, addresses, children's names etc was incitement to violence against ordinary American families who have the temerity to defy the liberal bosses.
Click to expand...

Here is a response from your typical totalitarian liberal. Please don't read it, it will destroy your dogma.


Why Should Any of These Groups Have Tax-Exempt Status?

Jared Bernstein
Fmr. Obama administration economist
 
Howey said:
He's worse than a troll. Paulie is a psychopath.



We've posted several other times on this forum about the IRS during the Bush administration directly targeting applicants for political reasons, including a church in California.

And the NAACP. This was a renewal of their status.

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/1/irs_investigating_naacp_for_criticizing_bush

The Internal Revenue Service is investigating the non-profit status of the NAACP after its chairman, Julian Bond, criticized the Bush administration in a speech at its annual convention in July. We speak with NAACP Director Hilary Shelton about the investigation as well as the intimidation and suppression of voters around the country. [includes rush transcript]




A bigger question is how in the hell are they a tax free charitable organization?
Click to expand...

What is really ironic, these groups don't have to apply for tax exempt status.

Social welfare nonprofits are not required to apply to the IRS to operate. Many politically active new conservative groups apply anyway. Getting IRS approval can help with donations and help insulate groups from further scrutiny. Many politically active new liberal nonprofits have not applied.

Gee, I wonder why new liberal nonprofits have not applied?

One of the applications the IRS released to ProPublica was from Crossroads GPS, the largest social-welfare nonprofit involved in the 2012 election. The group, started in part by GOP consultant Karl Rove, promised the IRS that any effort to influence elections would be “limited.” The group spent more than $70 million from anonymous donors in 2012.

Applications were sent to ProPublica from five other social welfare groups that had told the IRS that they wouldn’t spend money to sway elections. The other groups ended up spending more than $5 million related to the election, mainly to support Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
 
Bfgrn said:
Here is a response from your typical totalitarian liberal. Please don't read it, it will destroy your dogma.


Why Should Any of These Groups Have Tax-Exempt Status?

Jared Bernstein
Fmr. Obama administration economist
Click to expand...

Why did The IRS release the confidential info of the groups members to a spurious organization?
An organization that has a tax exempt status.
Still sidestepping?
 
007 said:
Why did The IRS release the confidential info of the groups members to a spurious organization?
An organization that has a tax exempt status.
Still sidestepping?
Click to expand...

Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
Edmund Burke

I am not sidestepping, I am just wondering WHY you didn't actually READ the article you provided a link to?

Update: Testifying before a House committee Friday, former acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said that the disclosure of unapproved applications of conservative nonprofits to ProPublica last year, as well as the separate disclosure of confidential documents of the National Organization for Marriage, was “inadvertent.” Miller also mentioned that there had been discipline in one of the cases because procedures had not been followed.

We followed up on the issue, and the IRS sent this statement:

“When these two issues were previously raised concerning the potential unauthorized disclosures of 501(c)(4) application information, we immediately referred these cases to TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration] for a comprehensive review. In both instances, TIGTA found these instances to be inadvertent and unintentional disclosures by the employees involved.”

The IRS did not respond to questions on who had been disciplined and how. TIGTA did not respond to requests for comment.
 
I read the article by a spurious liberal attack rag.

I'm speaking to the intent of the IRS when the confidential info was illegally released.

To endanger conservatives and incite liberal fanatics to murder the children of conservatives.
That is the goal of all liberals.
Look at sandy hook!!
You are all partying over that great liberal victory!!!!

Yayyyy!!!!
Dead white republican babies!!!
The liberal dream!
 
Bfgrn said:
Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
Edmund Burke

I am not sidestepping, I am just wondering WHY you didn't actually READ the article you provided a link to?

Update: Testifying before a House committee Friday, former acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said that the disclosure of unapproved applications of conservative nonprofits to ProPublica last year, as well as the separate disclosure of confidential documents of the National Organization for Marriage, was “inadvertent.” Miller also mentioned that there had been discipline in one of the cases because procedures had not been followed.

We followed up on the issue, and the IRS sent this statement:

“When these two issues were previously raised concerning the potential unauthorized disclosures of 501(c)(4) application information, we immediately referred these cases to TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration] for a comprehensive review. In both instances, TIGTA found these instances to be inadvertent and unintentional disclosures by the employees involved.”

The IRS did not respond to questions on who had been disciplined and how. TIGTA did not respond to requests for comment.
Click to expand...

Love the opening quote, thanks, I haven't heard it before.
 
Steelplate said:
Yes...the were applied to conservative groups....because there was an explosion of them..it set off red flags...it wasn't to defund anyone. It was to make sure they qualified for tax exempt status...they over reached in the process because of confusion with the Citizen's United ruling and how it worked with how it was traditionally done in the past.

I know you guys love a big conspiracy, followed by the words impeachment....but like I said...the way I understand it, it was isolated incidents in a few offices caused by people not knowing what the hell they were doing.

But hey....I may be wrong....it's been done before....many times..mostly by your side of the aisle...so there are precedents. Let the facts come out....of course...when they do, and if the administration is cleared of wrongdoing....you still won't believe it...so why.am I even responding?
Click to expand...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...n-irs-tax-exempt-applications-in-2010/275985/

There Was No Surge in IRS Tax-Exempt Applications in 2010
Fewer groups sought recognition as 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations that year than in 2009, according to the Treasury Department.
Garance Franke-Ruta May 17 2013, 1:17 PM ET

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

A number of people have sought to explain the IRS targeting of Tea Party, patriot, and 9/12 group applications -- as well as those from other conservative groups -- for "specialist team" treatment (mainly delays and excessive and inappropriate questions) in 2010 by pointing to the Citizens United decision that year allowing for unlimited, undisclosed fundraising by such groups. That's the explanation IRS official Lois Lerner gave a week ago when she first revealed that the agency had improperly handled a slew of applications -- the political shorthand was a mistaken attempt to deal with a surge in applications.

"[W]e saw a big increase in these kind of applications, many of which indicated that they were going to be involved in advocacy work," Lerner said.

But Todd Young, a Republican congressman from Indiana, pointed out at Friday's House Ways and Means Committee hearing with former acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General J. Russell George that this was not the case, according to the very data the IRS provided to the Treasury IG's office.

There were, he noted, actually fewer applications for tax-exempt status by groups seeking to be recognized as social-welfare organizations that year than the previous one, according to this IRS data. The real surge in applications did not come until 2012 -- the year the IRS stopped the practice of treating the Tea Party class of groups differently from others.

All of which raises, once again, the question financial journalist David Cay Johnson asked in a column today: "Why is Lois G. Lerner still on the taxpayer's payroll?"
Click to expand...
 
007 said:
I read the article by a spurious liberal attack rag.

I'm speaking to the intent of the IRS when the confidential info was illegally released.

To endanger conservatives and incite liberal fanatics to murder the children of conservatives.
That is the goal of all liberals.
Look at sandy hook!!
You are all partying over that great liberal victory!!!!

Yayyyy!!!!
Dead white republican babies!!!
The liberal dream!
Click to expand...

In both instances, TIGTA found these instances to be inadvertent and unintentional disclosures by the employees involved.”
 
Hey 007, here are your wonderful, compassionate, tolerant conservatives...

Pete Santilli, Radio Host: Hillary Clinton Needs To Be 'Shot In The Vagina'

"I want to shoot her right in the vagina and I don't want her to die right away; I want her to feel the pain and I want to look her in the eyes and I want to say, on behalf of all Americans that you've killed, on behalf of the Navy SEALS, the families of Navy SEAL Team Six who were involved in the fake hunt down of this Obama, Obama bin Laden thing, that whole fake scenario, because these Navy SEALS know the truth, they killed them all. On behalf of all of those people, I'm supporting our troops by saying we need to try, convict, and shoot Hillary Clinton in the vagina."

Santilli also criticized Obama, saying he deserves the same punishment as Clinton.

"Barack Obama needs to be tried, convicted, and shot for crimes against the United States of America," Santilli said. "And if anybody has a problem with that, then you are an enemy of our state."

more
 
maineman said:
Edmund Burke a liberal? Hardly. As a former resident of the British Isles, I thought you would have been more familiar with him.
Click to expand...
Liberals in the UK are a different animal.
Edmund Burke, not a British name.
Belongs in the savage island next door.
 
Bfgrn said:
Hey 007, here are your wonderful, compassionate, tolerant conservatives...

Pete Santilli, Radio Host: Hillary Clinton Needs To Be 'Shot In The Vagina'

"I want to shoot her right in the vagina and I don't want her to die right away; I want her to feel the pain and I want to look her in the eyes and I want to say, on behalf of all Americans that you've killed, on behalf of the Navy SEALS, the families of Navy SEAL Team Six who were involved in the fake hunt down of this Obama, Obama bin Laden thing, that whole fake scenario, because these Navy SEALS know the truth, they killed them all. On behalf of all of those people, I'm supporting our troops by saying we need to try, convict, and shoot Hillary Clinton in the vagina."

Santilli also criticized Obama, saying he deserves the same punishment as Clinton.

"Barack Obama needs to be tried, convicted, and shot for crimes against the United States of America," Santilli said. "And if anybody has a problem with that, then you are an enemy of our state."

more
Click to expand...
Who elected this santilli?

Oh, he's not elected.

Sorry you lose.

Idiot.

Do people murder children in the name of this santilli?
No, ok, so he is representative of himself and no one else.

Do all conservatives support him?
No.

But all liberals support every act by other liberals so long as they are directed at conservatives.
You support the horrific abuse directed at sarah Palins kids, do you not?
The mockery of her poor innocent disabled kid, that's good right?

Conservatives are of higher moral standard than the immoral sadistic left.
 
Bfgrn said:
In both instances, TIGTA found these instances to be inadvertent and unintentional disclosures by the employees involved.”
Click to expand...
Of course they did, Obama has his back covered.
Non indoctrinated thinkers know the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top