Page 47 of 74 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 732

Thread: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups[W:484,732]

  1. #461
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by mak2 View Post
    If talking points are true, are they still talking points?
    They are talking points because they arent true (or debateably true).

  2. #462
    Educator
    CaptinSarcastic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Last Seen
    07-18-16 @ 03:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,199

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    In a nation where we have free speech this should never happen. One of the biggest fears with bloated bureaucracy is that they will use their position to squash or hinder political groups or people they don't like.

    My concern is I wonder how high up this goes. The person in charge of trying to disadvantage conservative groups does not need to have his/her position and abuse his/her authority to try and squash groups they don't like. Charges should be made if applicable, trying to disadvantage a group based on their beliefs is a very severe form government oppression in my opinion and should not be tolerated at all. This is what I would expect from more totalitarian nations with less freedom like China, Iran, or Russia. This should absolutely not be happening in the United States where one of our chief principals is freedom of speech and the right to believe what you want without the government impeding upon that.
    Let's not get carried away.

    While the filtering the IRS used for targeting further review was completely inappropriate, it is important for people to understand that the groups applying for this specific tax exempt status 501 (c) 4 explicitly declared that they would be social welfare organizations and could engage in political speech but MUST be operated exclusively for the promotion of "social welfare", such as civics and civics issues, or local associations of employees with membership limited to a designated company or people in a particular municipality or neighborhood, and with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.

    Let's not kid ourselves, these groups popped up after the Citizens United decision to skirt not only taxation, but to provide anonymity to donors.

    The problem is not that groups with political sounding names like Tea Party were targeted, they should have been. The problem is that there appears to be no filtering done for political sounding names that would be politically left.

    The bigger problem is that Congress has abdicated it's responsibility to provide direction to the IRS. The Citizens United case effectively changed the law and Congress had a responsibility to address the changes the court imposed and pass laws that reflect the new law that Citizens United created. Instead, they left it completely up to a bureaucracy to figure out how to apply the law created by the court.

    But this is not about political speech, since these groups are specifically NOT supposed to be engaged in significant political speech, rather this about finding the groups attempting to skirt the law.

    Again, EVERY political sounding name should have been targeted.
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I do not believe any amount of people committing suicide with firearms justifies requiring firearm sellers to preach to customers about suicide regardless if it would or wouldn't save those who commit suicide.

  3. #463
    Sage
    mak2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    07-08-16 @ 01:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,050

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    I am sitting around the house this AM trying to get fired up to do lawn work. Indy has a Republican thought leader on the radio named Garrison. I have only heard a couple of callers but the last one was a guy who has always voted Republican and a couple of times last year, he donated to the RNC. Unbelievably the damn IRS sent him a letter requesting more information (I dont remember what form, it was some standard form) or they would delay his return. It was a forgotten form almost without a doubt, but now this guy is convienced the IRS is harassing him because he donated to the RNC.
    God Bless the Marine Corps.

  4. #464
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    Talking points:

    -anytime you lose an elections its impeach impeach impeach
    -crazies on the left aren't as bad as crazies on the right
    -Bush did a bunch of bad things
    -conservatives were silent
    -Obama is the most transparent, cleanest president in history
    -obamas under a microscope like no other

    I can go on and on, but come on, these are the same platitudes we hear every day from the left. All he missed was that conservatives hate Obama because their racist.
    I'm not sure that the Democrats want me writing their talking points.

    There are things that I'm not thrilled about with each of these three "scandals". I think security was too lax in Benghazi, there's ostensibly too much of an effort to target leaks, and targeting groups because they have "tea party" in their names is completely unjust and absurd.

    But understand, the Republicans do themselves a great disservice with this constant exaggeration and conspiracy theorizing. Obama **MAY** have some blame in all three of these. But it falls far short of intentionally orchestrating it. If you want people to take you seriously you have to be intellectually honest.



    These are structural failings. Both the administration as well as the GOP share in the blame. The administration is responsible for those under it. And there were obviously mistakes made. But part of the reason that mistakes were made is that funding for embassy security as well as IRS personnel was significantly cut.


    Take the IRS. These aren't evil people, they're your neighbors. They work in an office that's has to process twice as many applications with 30% less people. So they're now working longer hours with a pay freeze processing forms that say that they're the problem.... It's not acceptable, but it's kind of understandable....

  5. #465
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    But in order to engage in electioneering, 501(c)(4)'s had to set up a Federal Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) also known as a connected PAC. The 501(c)(4) could pay administrative costs of SSF through general funds, but the SSF was subject to the Federal Election Campaign Act. As such they had to report donors SSF donors to FEC using Form 3X.
    That's not the case - as we’ve already established, a 501(c)(4) can engage in such political activity so long as it is not its primary purpose. Money spent in that manner can be taxed, and too much money spent in that manner can jeopardize the tax exempt status of the organization. Based on that, a 501(c) may choose to establish a Federal PAC, which is treated as a tax-exempt political organization under §527.

    This SSF will carry the name of the associated 501(c)(4). Both the 501(c)(4) and associated PAC can engage in electioneering communications, and are required by the FEC to disclose the source of the ad, so I might have one "Paid for by Debate Politics" and another "Paid for by Debate Politics PAC." Thus, it's just not true that "in order to engage in electioneering, 501c4's had to set up a connected PAC."

  6. #466
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 11:47 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,073

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Anyone looking at that "federal tax deduction" even more disgustingly these days?

  7. #467
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    I'm not sure that the Democrats want me writing their talking points.

    There are things that I'm not thrilled about with each of these three "scandals". I think security was too lax in Benghazi, there's ostensibly too much of an effort to target leaks, and targeting groups because they have "tea party" in their names is completely unjust and absurd.

    But understand, the Republicans do themselves a great disservice with this constant exaggeration and conspiracy theorizing. Obama **MAY** have some blame in all three of these. But it falls far short of intentionally orchestrating it. If you want people to take you seriously you have to be intellectually honest.



    These are structural failings. Both the administration as well as the GOP share in the blame. The administration is responsible for those under it. And there were obviously mistakes made. But part of the reason that mistakes were made is that funding for embassy security as well as IRS personnel was significantly cut.


    Take the IRS. These aren't evil people, they're your neighbors. They work in an office that's has to process twice as many applications with 30% less people. So they're now working longer hours with a pay freeze processing forms that say that they're the problem.... It's not acceptable, but it's kind of understandable....
    The rant you posted earlier was not intellectually honest. That was was my only criticism. Instead of dealing with whats going on now, you resort to the typical blame Bush, republicans are just being rediculous ad hominems.

  8. #468
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    That's not the case - as we’ve already established, a 501(c)(4) can engage in such political activity so long as it is not its primary purpose. Money spent in that manner can be taxed, and too much money spent in that manner can jeopardize the tax exempt status of the organization. Therefore, a 501(c) may choose to establish a Federal PAC, which is treated as a tax-exempt political organization under §527.

    This SSF will carry the name of the associated 501(c)(4). Both the 501(c)(4) and associated PAC can engage in electioneering communications, and are required by the FEC to disclose the source of the ad, so I might have one "Paid for by Debate Politics" and another "Paid for by Debate Politics PAC." Thus, it's just not true that "in order to engage in electioneering, 501c4's had to set up a connected PAC."
    Post Citizens' United you are absolutley correct, the 501(c)(4) can engage in electoral communications using general treasury funds so long as it's not the primary purpose. But this wasn't the case pre-Citizens' United.

    Here's an article about disclosure
    http://afjactioncampaign.org/wp-cont...-Reporting.pdf
    If you set up an SSF, here's the form you have to file. http://fec.gov/pdf/forms/fecfrm3x.pdf , I believe that pages 20 and 21 are where donors exceeding some amount must be disclosed.

    Organizations engaging in independent expenditures, must fill out http://fec.gov/pdf/forms/fecfrm5.pdf. You'll note that all donations over 200$ received for the purpose of making an independent expenditure must be reported.

    Independent expenditure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This was the law before Citizens United, and it's the law now. What has changed is that Citizens United allows companies and organizations to contribute to the independent expenditure fund with their general treasury.

  9. #469
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,324

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    I'm not sure that the Democrats want me
    writing their talking points.

    There are things that I'm not thrilled about with each of these three "scandals". I think security was too lax in Benghazi, there's ostensibly too much of an effort to target leaks, and targeting groups because they have "tea party" in their names is completely unjust and absurd.

    But understand, the Republicans do themselves a great disservice with this constant exaggeration and conspiracy theorizing. Obama **MAY** have some blame in all three of these. But it falls far short of intentionally orchestrating it. If you want people to take you seriously you have to be intellectually honest.



    These are structural failings. Both the administration as well as the GOP share in the blame. The administration is responsible for those under it. And there were obviously mistakes made. But part of the reason that mistakes were made is that funding for embassy security as well as IRS personnel was significantly cut.


    Take the IRS. These aren't evil people, they're your neighbors. They work in an office that's has to process twice as many applications with 30% less people. So they're now working longer hours with a pay freeze processing forms that say that they're the problem.... It's not acceptable, but it's kind of understandable....
    Oh BULL SH**.

    We're NOT doing a diservice by wanting our Politicians to be accountable. YOUR'E doing a disservice by mitigating these failings.

    Look, Obama's General Council knew of the IGs report outcome THREE Weeks prior to when Obama claimed he learned about it.

    THREE WEEKS. So you expect me to believe that a seriously damaging report on the IRS targeting Conservative Groups was kept from Obama for THREE WEEKS ??

    I'm not a Obama supporter, so I'm not easily fooled by some Liberals Bs lies.

    So as far as I'm concerned OBAMA KNEW. He knew the day the report made it to his General Council, he knew about Benghazi as he was , I promise, sitting in the situation room giving orders to stand down. NOT sleeping as he want's his low info voters to believe.

    Again, you and people like you that desperately trt ro explain away his obvious lies and disinformation are the ones doing the Country a diservice.

    Obama's MO is he was disconnected completely from everything bad, but was right on top of the Osama killing with full 8 x 10 color photographs of him sitting in the Situation room.

    Holders MO is that he was disconnected, from Fast and Furious and from the AP wire tapping scandal.

    Hillary's MO is that she was disconnected and that any thing that wen't wrong in Benghazi was the fault of some nameless faceless bureaucrat.

    Are you f****in kidding me ? What a bunch of low life scum. Look, I have no compassion for people that would lie to the parents of the victims of Benghazi to save their political asses.

    If we can pin high crimes and misdemeanors on Obama, he needs to pack his sh** up and go. If we can charge Hillary with perjury, then gods speed.

    Your'e trying to defend your ideology, I'm arguing for our Politicians to be held accountable, to be held to the same standards as their consituency.

  10. #470
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

    Whats the deal with this?

    Steven Miller, the acting IRS commissioner, said Friday that last week’s revelation that the IRS gave special scrutiny to Tea Party groups came from a planted question.

    Lois Lerner, an IRS official with oversight of tax-exempt groups, disclosed the scrutiny at an American Bankers Association conference last Friday after a question from a lawyer who has served on IRS advisory boards.

    Questioned by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), Miller acknowledged that IRS officials were aware that the question would be coming.


    Read more: Question that revealed IRS scandal was planted, chief admits - The Hill's On The Money
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
    Planting questions to out the scandal, and no one even told SecTres or POTUS?

Page 47 of 74 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •