Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 174

Thread: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

  1. #101
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    it really doesn't seem like it was a serious issue
    such dismissiveness is astonishing

    it's almost rude

    McCaskill Calls For Firing Of All Involved In IRS Targeting Scandal « CBS St. Louis

    more power to you, of course

    party on, apologists

  2. #102
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    The commisioner testified that he was pretty sure that there was a significant increase. Maybe there wasn't? Maybe the numbers are wrong? Unsure..
    The figure I posted came directly from the IG’s report…as he has no ‘axe to grind’ who do you want to believe on the numbers? An auditor who gets paid to be right(?) or one who is ‘pretty sure’?

    As for misinformation, in the audit reports "TeaParty" was shorthand for conservative, at least most of the time. So when they say X number of "Tea Party" Groups, they don't mean that X number of groups were targeted because of their names. It's subtle, but it means that there weren't conservative groups outside of the 70ish reported.
    No, per the IG report ‘tea party’ was the target phrase (among a few) used in search queries to target applications.

    Also, it's pretty clear that this was something the IRS struggled with. It was department wide. Basically there was a huge influx of conservative groups filing as public welfare groups under the guise of "education". The difference between education and politicking is difficult to define. So they knew that this was a concerted effort to "scam" the IRS, but they couldn't' figure out how to draw a consistent line. Someone devised a number of criteria. One of them was the BOLO with politically insensitive/biased keywords. This is "scandal" one.
    I have yet to find a listing of the ~300 organizations that were targeted for ‘more intense’ scrutiny. As you claim ‘huge influx of conservative groups’ perhaps you have a source that could substantiate this. Or is your claim based on an assumption that since inarguably Citizens United promoted this influx it was only conservative groups that would take advantage of it? Really?

    The report doesn't show that conservative groups were targeted unfairly because they were conservative. Less than half of all groups exposed to invasive question were conservative groups.
    You’re right, the report shows that SOME organizations were targeted purely based on select words/phrases in their names. And yes, ~27 groups were ‘exposed to invasive’ of which ~13 were conservative but as I have yet to see a list, who were the other 13? Liberal? Progressive? Churches? Fraternities? Historical? Who knows but it seems presumptuous to think that if half conservative the other half were progressive/liberal…?

    As terrible as this sounded at first, it really doesn't seem like it was a serious issue. I mean, here we have 27 groups that had to answer a few too many questions, half of which were conservative. This was scandal two. Contrast that with the banks which incorrectly foreclosed on 4 million homeowners. IDK... the IRS doesn't seem so bad.
    Does the difference in approval times not mean something?

    Ps. Please start another thread if you want to discuss bank foreclosures…thx.
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  3. #103
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,461

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    They were still able to act as a non-profit group while waiting the approval of the IRS.
    But donors can't make tax deductable donations.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #104
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,461

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    The figure I posted came directly from the IG’s report…as he has no ‘axe to grind’ who do you want to believe on the numbers? An auditor who gets paid to be right(?) or one who is ‘pretty sure’?


    No, per the IG report ‘tea party’ was the target phrase (among a few) used in search queries to target applications.


    I have yet to find a listing of the ~300 organizations that were targeted for ‘more intense’ scrutiny. As you claim ‘huge influx of conservative groups’ perhaps you have a source that could substantiate this. Or is your claim based on an assumption that since inarguably Citizens United promoted this influx it was only conservative groups that would take advantage of it? Really?


    You’re right, the report shows that SOME organizations were targeted purely based on select words/phrases in their names. And yes, ~27 groups were ‘exposed to invasive’ of which ~13 were conservative but as I have yet to see a list, who were the other 13? Liberal? Progressive? Churches? Fraternities? Historical? Who knows but it seems presumptuous to think that if half conservative the other half were progressive/liberal…?



    Does the difference in approval times not mean something?

    Ps. Please start another thread if you want to discuss bank foreclosures…thx.
    Or, a guy that will say anything at this point, because he is afraid he's fixing to go to prison...LOL!!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #105
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Darrell Issa calls top Treasury official to testify on IRS - Lauren French - POLITICO.com

    Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin will appear at a panel hearing on Wednesday, a committee aide tells POLITICO. He’ll testify alongside J. Russell George, the IRS inspector general who released a damaging report this week that slammed lax management at the agency.

    IRS commissioners technically report to the deputy Treasury secretary so Wolin’s testimony will provide important insight into what the administration knew about the agency’s practice of subjecting conservative groups to extra scrutiny as they applied for a tax exemption.

    President Barack Obama has said he only learned of the activity when news reports surfaced on May 10.

    Wolin will be the first administration official to testify before Congress on the scandal, which has cost two IRS officials their jobs this week. Wolin worked closely with former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and speculation has swirled that he plans to soon leave the administration.
    nyt reported yesterday that tigta testified in ways and means that mr wolin was informed of the ig's audit on june 4, 2012

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us....html?hp&_r=1&

    do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth...

    stay tuned

    oh, and why is it again that this prevaricating potus cannot state unequivocally that he did not know about the illegal activity going on at his irs for 2 years?

    Bloomberg TV: “Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your counsel’s office found out on April 22nd?”

    President Obama’s response: “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the Inspector General report before the IG report had been leaked to the press."
    U.S.-Turkey Relations - C-SPAN Video Library

    again:

    Though the White House counsel’s office was informed of the IRS probe in late April, Obama has insisted that he only learned about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups through media reports last Friday. But he wouldn’t say definitively that the White House was unaware of the targeting before then.
    Obama pushes back on IRS, AP, Benghazi - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

    also appearing wednesday---ms lerner, who's not good at math (and if anyone ends up in jail, she's first) and mr shulman who falsely and knowingly testified repeatedly to congress that tea party apps were not subject to any special treatment

    how can you defend any of this?

  6. #106
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Jack Lew learned of IRS probe in March - Lauren French - POLITICO.com

    Treasury Secretary Jack Lew learned in March that an inspector general was investigating the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, but he did not know the details until last Friday.

    Lew said in an interview with Bloomberg TV today that he met with the inspector general closely after assuming his post, but he was presented only with a list of ongoing investigations, not specific details of the audit on conservative groups.

    “I didn’t know any of the details of it until last Friday,” Lew said.
    steven miller and douglas shulman, the last two irs commissioners under this prevaricating president, both knew

    indeed, they were informed, according to tigta, of even "the details" in may of 2012

    ACTING IRS CHIEF KNEW IN 2012 | POLITICO

    they've been lying to congress since

    “When I learned about it — from the moment I learned about it, I was outraged,” [Lew] said. “As a citizen, it is a matter of the highest priority that the IRS be beyond suspicion in terms of its integrity.”

    It was public knowledge that an investigation was ongoing when Lew was briefed. The Treasury inspector general for tax administration also sent a letter to Rep. Darrell Issa in July 2012 saying it would audit the agency.

    “The heads-up that I got was something that was a matter of public knowledge. It was posted on the IG’s website in the fall of 2012,” Lew added. “I was not aware of any details. My deputy was not aware of any details until it became a matter of public knowledge.
    they too get their news from jon stewart?

    Lew also defended Sarah Hall Ingram, a commissioner who has been targeted by Republicans for formerly overseeing the tax exempt division before heading to her current post helping the agency implement the health care law.

    Ingram, Lew said, was not involved in the targeting program.

    “Chronology matters in cases like this,” he said. “I’ve asked some questions since becoming aware of this, and my understanding is her responsibilities moved over from the tax exempt unit to implementation of the Affordable Care Act before there was any opportunity to be involved in this.”
    he better clam up, the way things are going words keep coming back

    Ingram served as the commissioner of tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012.

    “We have zero tolerance for this kind of behavior,” Lew said.
    ah, don't be such a killjoy, lew

    the last 2 commissioners of this irs were prodigiously tolerant

  7. #107
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    i told you to clam up, lew

    ap, quoted by politico:

    “Ingram was in charge of the tax exempt division when IRS agents first started targeting conservative groups.”
    Report: ACA chief IRS role disputed - Katie Glueck - POLITICO.com

    that was fast

  8. #108
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    The figure I posted came directly from the IG’s report…as he has no ‘axe to grind’ who do you want to believe on the numbers? An auditor who gets paid to be right(?) or one who is ‘pretty sure’?


    No, per the IG report ‘tea party’ was the target phrase (among a few) used in search queries to target applications.


    I have yet to find a listing of the ~300 organizations that were targeted for ‘more intense’ scrutiny. As you claim ‘huge influx of conservative groups’ perhaps you have a source that could substantiate this. Or is your claim based on an assumption that since inarguably Citizens United promoted this influx it was only conservative groups that would take advantage of it? Really?


    You’re right, the report shows that SOME organizations were targeted purely based on select words/phrases in their names. And yes, ~27 groups were ‘exposed to invasive’ of which ~13 were conservative but as I have yet to see a list, who were the other 13? Liberal? Progressive? Churches? Fraternities? Historical? Who knows but it seems presumptuous to think that if half conservative the other half were progressive/liberal…?



    Does the difference in approval times not mean something?

    Ps. Please start another thread if you want to discuss bank foreclosures…thx.
    You're first point is right. There was no increase in the number of applications, though there was an increase in the number of conservative groups filing in 10, but the real increase didn't happen before '11.

    Your second point is wrong. The actual words Tea Party appeared on paper, but they appear to be shorthand for both overly political groups and as a catchall for conservative groups. There is no evidence that any group was singled out because it had tea party in its name.

    Determinations Unit personnel indicated that they used the description Tea Party as a shorthand way of referring to the group of cases involving political campaign
    intervention rather than to target any particular group. The specialist used Tea Party, Patriots, and 9/12 as part of the criteria for these searches.

    While the heading of the document listing these 18 cases referred to Tea Party cases, not all of the organizations listed had Tea Party in their names.

    The list included 40 cases, 18 of which did not have Tea Party in their names.

    That said there was enough of an increase to warrant an investigation by the determinations unit. According to the officials in charge, they viewed Tea Party as a catchall for politically sounding names. Initially they found that there were 18 such groups, not all of whom had tea party in their names, and two of which had already been approved.

    Prior to the BOLO listing development, an e-mail was sent updating the description of applications involving potential political campaign intervention and providing a coordinator contact for the cases. The description was changed to read, “These cases involve various local organizations in the Tea Party movement [that] are applying for exemption under 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4).”

    The BOLO listing was developed by the Determinations Unit in order to replace the existing practice of sending separate e-mails to all Determinations Unit employees as to cases to watch for, potentially abusive cases, cases requiring processing by the team of specialists, and emerging issues. The description of applications involving potential political campaign intervention on the BOLO listing was the same description used in the July 27, 2010, e-mail.

    Tea Party groups were identified because they were the ones abusing 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(3) NFP status. This wasn't an effort to get conservatives. It was a recognition that conservatives were trying to scam the system.

    To your last point, there is no listing of the 298 groups which were sent to group of specialists for extra scrutiny. However, the audit found that 207 were processed correctly, 91 should not have been included, but there were 144 political groups which were missed. As of yet, there has not been any breakdown of these numbers by politcal views.

    Finally, it is absurd to hold the IRS to a standard above which you would hold any other organization without also acknowledging that you're holding them up to a much higher standard. From all initial reports, it appears that these were understaffed employees with significant management turnover trying to do an impossible job in good faith. I've dealt with the IRS. Unless you are actively trying to screw them, they are incredibly understanding and helpful.

  9. #109
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,865
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    You're first point is right. There was no increase in the number of applications, though there was an increase in the number of conservative groups filing in 10, but the real increase didn't happen before '11.

    Your second point is wrong. The actual words Tea Party appeared on paper, but they appear to be shorthand for both overly political groups and as a catchall for conservative groups. There is no evidence that any group was singled out because it had tea party in its name.

    Determinations Unit personnel indicated that they used the description Tea Party as a shorthand way of referring to the group of cases involving political campaign
    intervention rather than to target any particular group. The specialist used Tea Party, Patriots, and 9/12 as part of the criteria for these searches.

    While the heading of the document listing these 18 cases referred to Tea Party cases, not all of the organizations listed had Tea Party in their names.

    The list included 40 cases, 18 of which did not have Tea Party in their names.

    That said there was enough of an increase to warrant an investigation by the determinations unit. According to the officials in charge, they viewed Tea Party as a catchall for politically sounding names. Initially they found that there were 18 such groups, not all of whom had tea party in their names, and two of which had already been approved.

    Prior to the BOLO listing development, an e-mail was sent updating the description of applications involving potential political campaign intervention and providing a coordinator contact for the cases. The description was changed to read, “These cases involve various local organizations in the Tea Party movement [that] are applying for exemption under 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4).”

    The BOLO listing was developed by the Determinations Unit in order to replace the existing practice of sending separate e-mails to all Determinations Unit employees as to cases to watch for, potentially abusive cases, cases requiring processing by the team of specialists, and emerging issues. The description of applications involving potential political campaign intervention on the BOLO listing was the same description used in the July 27, 2010, e-mail.

    Tea Party groups were identified because they were the ones abusing 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(3) NFP status. This wasn't an effort to get conservatives. It was a recognition that conservatives were trying to scam the system.

    To your last point, there is no listing of the 298 groups which were sent to group of specialists for extra scrutiny. However, the audit found that 207 were processed correctly, 91 should not have been included, but there were 144 political groups which were missed. As of yet, there has not been any breakdown of these numbers by politcal views.

    Finally, it is absurd to hold the IRS to a standard above which you would hold any other organization without also acknowledging that you're holding them up to a much higher standard. From all initial reports, it appears that these were understaffed employees with significant management turnover trying to do an impossible job in good faith. I've dealt with the IRS. Unless you are actively trying to screw them, they are incredibly understanding and helpful.
    Check out Alexandra Petri's hilarious take on IRS "helpfulness."

    ComPost - Washington Post
    ComPost
    Next to normal — daily madness and the DSM-5. What's in a name? By Alexandra Petri May 17, 2013. Comments. Share: More ». Facebook · Twitter · Reddit ...
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  10. #110
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Check out Alexandra Petri's hilarious take on IRS "helpfulness."

    ComPost - Washington Post
    ComPost
    Next to normal — daily madness and the DSM-5. What's in a name? By Alexandra Petri May 17, 2013. Comments. Share: More ». Facebook · Twitter · Reddit ...
    Have you ever dealt with them?

    I had an issue where Turbo-Tax didn't file my return. I insist that I made it through the confirmation sequence, they insist that I never pushed the button. My suspicion is that their servers weren't capable of handling the volume of requests they were getting, and would reply back as confirmed without storing the result in their db. I didn't discover the problem for almost a year. When I called Turbo-Tax they were borderline rude, and said that I'm on my own and that I should just deal with the IRS. The IRS on the other hand was incredibly helpful, waived all fees, and walked me through what I needed to do to.

    I've dealt with customer service, banks, credit card companies etc... None of them were anywhere near as helpful and polite as the IRS. No one likes the people taking your money. But the IRS made you feel like they were trying to help you, rather than take your money.

    (BTW.. by in large, every horror story about the IRS involves people trying to scam the IRS. Compare this to the foreclosure stories where people who never missed a payment, had their homes sold out from underneath them)

Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... 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
  •