• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Mr.Nick said:
You will just defend democrats no matter what.

My facebook posts is none of the government ****ing business, that and they don't have ANY FINANICAL BENEFIT TO THE GOVERNMENT.

I suppose what I post speaks volumes for where I stand on the political spectrum and that is what the IRS wants to know.

This scandal isn't about taxes - it never was and everyone except the democrat fanboys realizes this.
Click to expand...

I am not defending the government because I like the IRS. I am calling out your absurd and baseless accusations because I believe in truth over partisanship.

There is no scandal here. And I hate to break it to you but the minute you apply for tax exempt status your Facebook page is fair game.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

OpportunityCost said:
Things left out.

How many of the 74 of the 202 overscrutinized were right leaning.
BOLO was the terminology for tea party, 9/12 etc type groups, they specifically looked for them to examine.

Foot note 19 :


All I can add is that this entire document was created by the Treasury who may be culpable for the fallout from the bad policy decisions. So Im going to say its not reliable enough to place your entire argument upon. There are a lot of statistics at work but there are also a lot of factors we dont know about.
Click to expand...

There's a phenomenon called selection bias. It's where we ignore or excuse evidence that we don't like because we don't like it. The IG report lists the facts as we know them now. You can't discard the IG report and expect anyone to take you seriously. This whole "scandal" is based on the IG report.

First, the foot note you're referencing is 18, not 19. Second, it probably would have been useful to examine where it was referenced. In context it means that they were not able to determine which of the tea party cases were identified because they used the name tea party, and which were identified because of political activity. Let me repeat that, your footnote states that the IG was not able to identify any tea party groups which were improperly investigated based solely on the inappropriate criteria in the "Be on the Lookout" list.

However, it is certainly the type of sentence someone who had a bad case of selection bias might latch on to. The kind of thing someone would pick up on when the didn't want to face the reality of the report.

Third, your question (How many of the 74 of the 202 overscrutinized were right leaning) makes no sense.
79 of 96 tea party groups were properly scrutinized
17 of 96 tea party groups were improperly scrutinized.
128 of 202 non tea party groups were properly scrutinized.
74 of 202 non tea party groups were improperly scrutinized.

I gave you the report. I gave you the page numbers, I pulled the relevent sections out, then I highlighted the numbers, then I walked you through the calculations. It's fine that you're not interested in them. But if you're going to ask someone to go through that much effort, you kind of owe it to them to at least think about what you asked for.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

joko104 said:
Apology is not sufficient. Anyone involved should be criminally prosecuted for civil rights violations and official oppression. The IRS should be sued for civil damages.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous. The singling out of conservative groups for review is arguably unconstitutional, but it is not criminal. And the IRS likely has sovereign immunity to civil claims in this case.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

joko104 said:
Apology is not sufficient. Anyone involved should be criminally prosecuted for civil rights violations and official oppression. The IRS should be sued for civil damages.
Click to expand...

that someone who posts such ignorant bull**** wears a badge is of concern
but ally my concern
share with us evidence of civil rights violations and official oppression
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

justabubba said:
that someone who posts such ignorant bull**** wears a badge is of concern
but ally my concern
share with us evidence of civil rights violations and official oppression
Click to expand...

That's part of the investigation isn't it?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

American said:
That's part of the investigation isn't it?
Click to expand...

and joko proposes to both prosecute them and sue them for damages without having even a sniff of evidence of wrongdoing
and he says he wears a badge. that is the scary part
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

This entire episode should be very chilling to all Americans. The very sad and troubling part of it is, that those who perpetrated the actions (and they are surely criminal actions) do not believe they did ANYTHING WRONG!!! However, ask any of them if the harassment was on the other foot they would be looking to throw anyone involved in jail. Double standard is alive and well in the good ole USA.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

justabubba said:
and joko proposes to both prosecute them and sue them for damages without having even a sniff of evidence of wrongdoing
and he says he wears a badge. that is the scary part
Click to expand...

Easy to sit behind a computer and anonymously accuse people of crimes:shrug:
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Woodman909 said:
This entire episode should be very chilling to all Americans. The very sad and troubling part of it is, that those who perpetrated the actions (and they are surely criminal actions) do not believe they did ANYTHING WRONG!!! However, ask any of them if the harassment was on the other foot they would be looking to throw anyone involved in jail. Double standard is alive and well in the good ole USA.
Click to expand...

No, there was nothing even remotely criminal going on here. Just hard working, apolitical career-bureaucrats doing the best job they could with limited resources, only to be turned into a political football by conservative political opportunists.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Mithros said:
...That means that 14 of 206 non conservative groups were also subjected to unnecessary questions.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the figure you are using reflects this nor does the report specifically state the 'others' are 'non-conservative'. What it DOES identify are the numbers of organizations investigated by the 'specific identifiers' noted in the BOLO. Currently we just don't know WHO is in this 202 group.

Further realize that the audit was a 'statistical sample of 244 I.R.C. § 501(c)(4) cases closed from May 2010 through May 2012 or open as of May 31, 2012, from a universe of 2,459 applications that the IRS determined required additional information from the organizations applying for tax-exempt status'. Considering the miniscule number within that sample logic dictates that many of the others have progressive/liberal leanings. Why aren't the officials not countering the 'targeting' accusations by pointing out those with the presumed leanings? Or are we to believe that the VAST majority are conservative leaning which the results of the sampling doesn't support?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Mithros said:
There's a phenomenon called selection bias. It's where we ignore or excuse evidence that we don't like because we don't like it. The IG report lists the facts as we know them now. You can't discard the IG report and expect anyone to take you seriously. This whole "scandal" is based on the IG report.
Click to expand...

That and the apology from the IRS for specifically targeting those groups. Anyone who would argue that certain groups were not specifically targeted is missing the obvious.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Heebie Jeebie said:
That and the apology from the IRS for specifically targeting those groups. Anyone who would argue that certain groups were not specifically targeted is missing the obvious.
Click to expand...
Mr.Nick said:
Now it's random stacks of paper?

When are the excuses going to end? even the fracking president apologized and people are being fired over this scandal yet progressives are attempting to defend it?

Funny how progressive organization weren't targeted.... So I suppose our government sorts paper via political ideology - democrats and republicans.
Click to expand...
No one is arguing that conservatives weren't targeted, and everyone agrees that it is wrong.

However, groups with conservative keywords were also ridiculously likely to need investigation. At least 82% of conservative groups were properly investigated. That compares to 6% of other groups.

That means if you're looking through a stack of paper and you see conservative buzz words, there's a REALLY good chance that the group needs to be investigated. On the other hand, if the application doesn't have conservative sounding words, it's pretty unlikely that it will need to be investigated.

Imagine that you have to sort through 1000 Ikea packages to find 60 that are missing parts. To do the job right, you need to open up each package and count every little screw, nut, and washer. However, you also know that there are a 21 packages painted florescent yellow, and they're mostly all wrong. In fact 17 all of the florescent yellow packages have missing parts.

You pick up the next package and find that it's bright yellow. Human nature says that you're going to count the number of washers a few more times than you would for a plain package.

Yes it's wrong, but it's also understandable.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Mithros said:
No one is arguing that conservatives weren't targeted, and everyone agrees that it is wrong.

However, groups with conservative keywords were also ridiculously likely to need investigation. At least 82% of conservative groups were properly investigated. That compares to 6% of other groups.

That means if you're looking through a stack of paper and you see conservative buzz words, there's a REALLY good chance that the group needs to be investigated. On the other hand, if the application doesn't have conservative sounding words, it's pretty unlikely that it will need to be investigated.

Imagine that you have to sort through 1000 Ikea packages to find 60 that are missing parts. To do the job right, you need to open up each package and count every little screw, nut, and washer. However, you also know that there are a 21 packages painted florescent yellow, and they're mostly all wrong. In fact 17 all of the florescent yellow packages have missing parts.

You pick up the next package and find that it's bright yellow. Human nature says that you're going to count the number of washers a few more times than you would for a plain package.

Yes it's wrong, but it's also understandable.
Click to expand...

So you concede that at least there was discrimination involved, however it's just a coincidence?

I've had it with the sympathizers...

This is what happens when you appoint Chicago politicians and mix them in a cereal box with loyal democrats... "its not that big of a deal, we got caught so sorry."

There is no other explanation and I'm not a democrat so I don't buy alternative ideas.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Dickieboy said:
I don't believe the figure you are using reflects this nor does the report specifically state the 'others' are 'non-conservative'. What it DOES identify are the numbers of organizations investigated by the 'specific identifiers' noted in the BOLO. Currently we just don't know WHO is in this 202 group.

Further realize that the audit was a 'statistical sample of 244 I.R.C. § 501(c)(4) cases closed from May 2010 through May 2012 or open as of May 31, 2012, from a universe of 2,459 applications that the IRS determined required additional information from the organizations applying for tax-exempt status'. Considering the miniscule number within that sample logic dictates that many of the others have progressive/liberal leanings. Why aren't the officials not countering the 'targeting' accusations by pointing out those with the presumed leanings? Or are we to believe that the VAST majority are conservative leaning which the results of the sampling doesn't support?
Click to expand...

Yep, good catch. And it turns out that all of the news articles I read about this quoted it incorrectly.

The Determinations Unit sent requests for information that we later (in whole or in part) determined to be unnecessary for 98 58 percent) of 170 organizations that received additional information request letters

the Determinations Unit requested donor information from 27 organizations that it would be required to make public if the application was approved, even though this information could not be disclosed by the IRS when provided by organizations whose tax-exempt status had been approved.

From footnote 29 " Of the 27 organizations, 13 had Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names.​

So we don't know what percentage of conservative groups were targeted for specific questions, we only know that about half of the 27 groups asked to provide donor lists as part of the application process had 13 had Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names.

As an aside, this was improper during the application process, as all application materials are to be made public upon approval. However, 501(c)(4)s must release all donor information over some amount to the IRS, but they are allowed to redact this from the public.
 
Last edited:
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Guy Incognito said:
No, there was
nothing even remotely criminal going on here. Just hard working, apolitical career-bureaucrats doing the best job they could with limited resources, only to be turned into a political football by conservative political opportunists.
Click to expand...

Well then why is Lois Lerner pleading the 5th in the morning ?

If it's just about collecting taxes that is.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Mithros said:
No one is arguing that conservatives weren't targeted, and everyone agrees that it is wrong.

However, groups with conservative keywords were also ridiculously likely to need investigation. At least 82% of conservative groups were properly investigated. That compares to 6% of other groups.

That means if you're looking through a stack of paper and you see conservative buzz words, there's a REALLY good chance that the group needs to be investigated. On the other hand, if the application doesn't have conservative sounding words, it's pretty unlikely that it will need to be investigated.

Imagine that you have to sort through 1000 Ikea packages to find 60 that are missing parts. To do the job right, you need to open up each package and count every little screw, nut, and washer. However, you also know that there are a 21 packages painted florescent yellow, and they're mostly all wrong. In fact 17 all of the florescent yellow packages have missing parts.

You pick up the next package and find that it's bright yellow. Human nature says that you're going to count the number of washers a few more times than you would for a plain package.

Yes it's wrong, but it's also understandable.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that these groups were as you put it, "...ridiculously likely to need investigation."? You refer to "keywords", well we have that list from the IRS that they were using....

"The report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration described in detail the use of “inappropriate criteria” to screen political advocacy groups. An IRS unit created a “lookout” list for organizations with keywords such as “tea party” or “patriot” in their names."

IG report: ?Inappropriate criteria? stalled IRS approvals of conservative groups - Washington Post

"The Internal Revenue Service's scrutiny of conservative groups went beyond those with "tea party" or "patriot" in their names—as the agency admitted Friday—to also include ones worried about government spending, debt or taxes, and even ones that lobbied to "make America a better place to live," according to new details of a government probe."

Wider Problems Found at IRS - WSJ.com

What about those words, or phrases, other than pure ideology leads you to believe that they need extra scrutiny over say a group with "progress" in their name?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Guy Incognito said:
I accept your de facto concession that you have no evidence.
Click to expand...

You cannot accept that which has not been proferred. I really don't get the beta-male schtick I see too frequently here on DP about "I accept your de facto concession" anyway, but let's just stick to the facts. You said, "The burden of proof is on you. Where is your evidence that there was a plot to attack conservatives for political purposes??" Where did I post that I think there is a plot?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

If no crime exists here, and everything is on the up and up with the IRS in this, then why is Lerner taking the 5th?

"WASHINGTON — A top IRS official in the division that reviews nonprofit groups will invoke the 5th Amendment and refuse to answer questions before a House committee investigating the agency’s improper screening of conservative nonprofit groups.

Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening — or why she didn’t disclose it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor III. Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday."

Top IRS official will invoke 5th Amendment - latimes.com
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Fenton said:
Well then why is Lois Lerner pleading the 5th in the morning ?

If it's just about collecting taxes that is.
Click to expand...
Because there is a republican witch hunt going on.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

If there really is a witch hunt, then I hope Lerner will change her mind and be a warrior for the truth.

Pretty sure, however, that she's not going to be able to explain away Maxwell's forced "reassignment."
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

TurtleDude said:
I deny that, there is no way congress could raise a sales tax rate without most people knowing about it
Click to expand...

and there is no federal sales tax....
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

nota bene said:
If there really is a witch hunt, then I hope Lerner will change her mind and be a warrior for the truth.

Pretty sure, however, that she's not going to be able to explain away Maxwell's forced "reassignment."
Click to expand...

In a witch hunt the truth is irrelevant. To point is to burn the witch.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Perhaps Lerner is a witch.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

Guy Incognito said:
Because there is a republican witch hunt going on.
Click to expand...

If she's not a witch no need for the 5th...of course, I could be wrong.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups [W:484

nota bene said:
If there really is a witch hunt, then I hope Lerner will change her mind and be a warrior for the truth.

Pretty sure, however, that she's not going to be able to explain away Maxwell's forced "reassignment."
Click to expand...

Speaking of scapegoat Ray Maxwell ... let's hope he wields a silver hammer.


obama - bin laden - situation room.jpg

Conspicuous by their absence ...

obama - benghazi - situation room - without obama and hillary.jpg​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom