• 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 in 201

This isn't about shoes; it's about the IRS being partisan and punitive.

What I am saying is that IRS should be above the fray and not targeting groups that the current Admin doesn't like or finds threatening.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

This isn't about shoes; it's about the IRS being partisan and punitive.

What I am saying is that IRS should be above the fray and not targeting groups that the current Admin doesn't like or finds threatening.



Why not ? It was always used as a tool by whomever was in power......................
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 2012 election

Why the apology?
I don't see anything inappropriate about it.
Conservative groups are historically the worst tax dodgers.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

And who are all these "socialists" in league with ? Certainly not the born again Orthodox retards of Russia. Doubtful that it's with Red China, the mecca of every business owner on the planet.....................

They use to be in the league with Stalin but they kinds splintered off and figured a different way to achieve their socialist agenda. They were known as the "New Left."

>" In February 1956, nearly three years after the death of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, his successor Nikita Khrushchev delivered his historic “Secret Speech” to a closed session of the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In that address, Khrushchev denounced Stalin for the cult of personality he had cultivated, and condemned Stalin's regime for its gross “violation of Leninist norms of legality.” In the aftermath of Khrushchev's revelations about Stalin's abuses, most of the world's Communist parties abandoned Stalinism and, to varying degrees, adopted the moderately reformist positions of the new Soviet First Secretary. The American far left likewise sought to distance itself from Stalin, rebranding itself as the so-called "New Left," a counter-cultural movement that would hold fast to the overriding ideals of Marxism-Leninsim while formally abjuring the horrific crimes of Stalinism. But before long, this New Left would romanticize the neo-Stalinists of the Third World, embracing a whole new set of totalitarian heroes such as Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, and Daniel Ortega.

The core of the early New Left was formed by the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), a radical organization that aspired to overthrow America's democratic institutions, remake its government in a Marxist image, and help America's enemies emerge victorious on the battlefield in Vietnam. Many key SDS members were "red-diaper babies," children of parents who had been Communist Party members or Communist activists in the 1930s. ...

Most notably, the ex-New Leftists found a home in the Democratic Party. By 1972, they had seized control of the party, as evidenced by the nomination of George McGovern as the Democratic presidential candidate on an antiwar platform that cast America's military involvement in Southeast Asia as an immoral, imperialistic venture. By way of its political ascendancy within the Democratic Party, the New Left, in a political sense, effectively killed off the classical centrist liberals who had vigorously opposed Communist totalitarianism. After accomplishing this parricide, the New Left occupied the corpse of authentic liberalism (i.e., the Democratic Party) and appropriated the name, "liberalism."

Though the New Left officially burned out decades ago, its radical legacy lives to this day in the Democratic Party. "< ->New Left - Discover the Networks

Other sources: -> New Left - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What Is the New Left?

Now you understand what happened to the Democrat Party and why so many liberals left the Democrat Party during the 70's and came under the GOP tent. And why the Reagan Democrats are no longer Democrats but have became independents.





New Left - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

This isn't about shoes; it's about the IRS being partisan and punitive.

What I am saying is that IRS should be above the fray and not targeting groups that the current Admin doesn't like or finds threatening.

I am guessing this is irrelevant to the political leaning of the current administration in power. I haven’t read this whole thread so maybe it was already brought up, but I am guessing the IRS assumes an organization with Tea Party or Patriot in their name or other paperwork means they are more likely to espouse certain beliefs, such as income taxes being unconstitutional, and thus deduce (unjustly) that they will break tax laws.

It certainly doesn’t make it right. Espousing what one believes SHOULD be the law doesn’t mean they are breaking what IS the law. I would have just as much problem with an organization that advocates for pot legalization being targeted by the DEA for surveillance on that alone. Having a political belief is not probable cause.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Examples of questions asked part of a brief by lawyers representing the groups:

http://c0391070.cdn2.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/pdf/irs-questions-aclj-tea-party-clients.pdf

I understand all the revenue and expense questions. Im a little in the dark about the concerns about press releases, who they went to, membership rolls, event agendas, and other pretty intrusive information.

Then we have the fact that the CHief Consul of the IRS was aware of what was going on and crafted language to try to make it appear as though the targeting was appropriate. Meanwhile, the official statement was that this was occurring due to actions of low level officials. The question becomes would the IRS counsel do this on his own initiative or was he acting on orders from even higher up?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

I think you would condone this if it were targeted at left-wing groups.

Because I said so.



Hahahah you should look up the core tenets of fascism.

Stop trying to deflect, you know you voted for a little weasel.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

The IRS Targets Conservative Groups

As it happens, I know something about the chilling effect of an IRS investigation into a non-profit’s 501 (c)-3 status because in 2009, COMMENTARY (a non-profit) received a letter from the Internal Revenue Service threatening the revocation of the institution’s standing as a non-profit due to a claim that on our website we had crossed the line in the 2008 election from analysis to explicit advocacy of the candidacy of John McCain for president. (Non-profits are not permitted to endorse candidates.) The charge was false—all we had done was reprint a speech delivered at a COMMENTARY event by then-Sen. Joseph Lieberman in which he had endorsed McCain.

Taking away a non-profit’s ability to receive tax-exempt charitable contributions is equivalent to a death sentence.

We were told by counsel that, should the IRS rule against us, we would have almost no recourse. You might think free speech rights would trump any such effort, but of course no one is challenging your speech rights, merely finding that what you say runs afoul of laws dealing with non-profits. You have no constitutional right to non-profit status, after all.

Disproving the false charge, which we did eventually in part by literally printing out the 2 million words that had appeared on this site in 2008 and sending them in many boxes to the IRS to show that the words in which Lieberman said he was supporting McCain were essentially a part per million, cost us tens of thousands of dollars and dozens upon dozens of hours of lost work time. The inquiry, which never should have been brought, was closed. But talking to lawyers and strategizing and the like in such a circumstance make the experience an ordeal that leaves you a bit shell-shocked—which is, of course, the point.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Ed Driscoll » ‘The IRS: First they Came for the Tea Partiers, Then They Came for the Jews’

The pro-Israel group Z STREET filed a lawsuit against the IRS in 2010, claiming an IRS agent said the organization would come under extra scrutiny because it’s “connected to Israel.”
In addition, the IRS agent told a Z STREET representative that the applications of some of those Israel-related organizations have been assigned to “a special unit in the D.C. office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.”

The Jewish Press » » IRS Punished Conservative Non-Profits, Perhaps Also Pro-Israel Groups

For example, in 2010, the passionately pro-Israel organization Z STREET filed a lawsuit against the IRS, claiming it had been told by an IRS agent that because the organization was “connected to Israel,” its application for tax-exempt status would receive additional scrutiny. This admission was made in response to a query about the lengthy reveiw of Z STREET’s tax exempt status application.

In addition, the IRS agent told a Z STREET representative that the applications of some of those Israel-related organizations have been assigned to “a special unit in the D.C. office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.”

Z STREET’s lawsuit claims the IRS activity constitutes viewpoint discrimination and a violation of its constitutionally protected right of free speech. The organization is seeking, among other things, complete disclosure to the public regarding the origin, development, approval, substance and application of the IRS policy to treat pro-Israel organizations differently than it does other organizations.

For years the IRS has denied it took any such inappropriate actions and has done its best to prevent Z STREET from pursuing its claim of viewpoint discrimination. The IRS even took the position that because Israel is a country “where terrorism happens,” the service was justified in taking additional time to determine whether Z STREET was involved with funding terrorism. Z STREET is a purely educational organization that has never funded anything, either in Israel or anywhere else.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Wow, I am so impressed. Try to think about what you said I replied to, You said Obama was the most corrupt president in your lifetime. For that to be true you would have to be about 5 or 6 years old. GWB was worse. I guess I need to keep it simple.
Heads need to roll at the IRS. The king O administration is the most corrupt in my life time. Chicago politics in the oval office.

53 years old veteran. Lived in 5 countries, visited every continent except Antarctica. Married to the same woman for 34 years. Father of two, grandfather, fisherman, bow hunter, gun enthusiast. How about you friend? done anything with your life? I suggest you get to know someone before you ask if they are 6 years old.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Wow, I am so impressed. Try to think about what you said I replied to, You said Obama was the most corrupt president in your lifetime. For that to be true you would have to be about 5 or 6 years old. GWB was worse. I guess I need to keep it simple.
Was GWB actual long term friends or associates with the likes of Bill Ayres, and so may others of such immoral qualities...

Sorry my friend, you are sorely mistaken.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

It's not a witch-hunt against everybody; it's a witch-hunt against very specific groups.

Political groups masquerading as social welfare or educational groups. Often those well funded groups take in tax-free donations based of specific rules which they may or may not be following. If there was just cause to profile them, then this is legitemate. If not...well, the IRS will have a problem.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Who cares what she thinks?

Not if they think a former IRS lawyer staging as a 'tea party darling' isn't ironic. :)
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Was GWB actual long term friends or associates with the likes of Bill Ayres, and so may others of such immoral qualities...

Sorry my friend, you are sorely mistaken.


He was a long time associate of Ken Lay and the Enron folks. So, yes Bush did have friends with immoral qualities.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Key:


Certainly inexcusable behavior, just trying to make sure nobody reads the headline and pictures some massive conspiracy.

Except that that was the one and only office that reviews such applications.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Yes, we can't have people out there teaching people about their rights now can we?

He didn't say that. He said teaching people about the constitution isn't inherently conservative.


Additional reporting says this seems to have happened in a couple more cities at least. Somebody is getting so fired. (and possibly arrested)
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

He was a long time associate of Ken Lay and the Enron folks. So, yes Bush did have friends with immoral qualities.
Make up your mind. Friend or associate? You say one, then imply the other.


Now a business associate is different. I should have specified, and I think Obomba has countless unethical friends rather than just associates.

The personal friends Obomba had in the past should have disqualified him from any ethical person's vote in my opinion.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

Make up your mind. Friend or associate? You say one, then imply the other.


Now a business associate is different. I should have specified, and I think Obomba has countless unethical friends rather than just associates.

The personal friends Obomba had in the past should have disqualified him from any ethical person's vote in my opinion.

I don't know anymore about how well Bush knew Ken Lay than anybody else does about how well Obama knew Ayres. Maybe just acquaintances, maybe business associates, maybe secret gay lovers....I'm not accusing, I just don't know.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

IRS targeted groups that criticized the government, IG report says

Looks like it went beyond just being conservative only, unless you want to count teaching people about the Constitution as being conservative.

The IRS targeted groups that probably should have been targeted, but for the wrong reason. By definition 501(c)(4) groups are not allowed to have a predominatly politial purpose. Instead, that status is reserved for social welfare groups. Good examples of legitimate 501(c)(4) groups are the AARP and the NRA.

What happened in 2010 was that in the aftermath of Citizens United, corporations were suddenly allowed to contribute unlimited amounts of money to influence political campaigns. However, most corporations and CEO's didn't want to have their names and reputations associated with a candidate or position. They wanted to influence elections anonomously, gaining the benifits of supporting a candidate without the backlash from the other side.

By the spirit of the law, these groups should have been filed as tax exempt 527's which are intended primariliy to influence elections. By filing as a 527, they would have been allowed unlimited participation in politics and would have been excempt from the lengthy application process. However, they would have had to make their donors public. Instead they filed as 501(c)(4) groups for the sole purpose of hiding their donors.

In summary: 527's are allowed to be predominatly political, but must release donors. 501(c)(4)'s must not be predominatly political, are much harder to obtain, require far more paperwork, are subject to many more restrictions, but don't have to release donors.

After 2010 there was an explosion of these groups. Before Citizens' united there were around 1500. That doubled over the next year or so. The biggest push was amoung conservative groups. However, liberal groups were also guilty of this abuse.

Filing as a 501(c)(4) was an attempt by many of these groups to skirt the law. It's really impossible to read it any other way. The IRS rightly attempted to crack down on this abuse. However, it did it in a very un-American way. The guidleines should have targeted political groups in general, rather than singling out conservative issues.

This is a significant issue, and it warrents a thorough public investigation. However, it's nothing like Nixon's white house auditing members of the political opposition. For one, the head of the IRS was a Bush appointee.
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

I really don't see any problem with investigating teabaggers for tax evasion. After all it is a major platform of their party to not pay any taxes. In my honest opinion it is the job of the IRS to profile and investigate any group who rallies against paying taxes.
Its like the dept of homeland security investigating middle easterners who go to anti American rallies...That is what their job is to do.
If not them... Who?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

You are right, in some cases the RWers are all for profiling, but in others, not so much...
I really don't see any problem with investigating teabaggers for tax evasion. After all it is a major platform of their party to not pay any taxes. In my honest opinion it is the job of the IRS to profile and investigate any group who rallies against paying taxes.
Its like the dept of homeland security investigating middle easterners who go to anti American rallies...That is what their job is to do.
If not them... Who?
 
Re: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 201

You are right, in some cases the RWers are all for profiling, but in others, not so much...

Which cases would those be?

What's so scary to me is that any citizen would defend the despicable actions of the IRS here.
 
Back
Top Bottom