• 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!

AP Exclusive: IRS knew tea party targeted in 2011

LowDown

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
AP News: AP Exclusive: IRS knew tea party targeted in 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) - Senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups as early as 2011, according to a draft of an inspector general's report obtained by The Associated Press that seemingly contradicts public statements by the IRS commissioner.
Click to expand...

So it wasn't just low level employees at the IRS. Humm....

Why do they choose to fess up now? Because the results of an investigation by the Inspector General are due out later this week. So it is an attempt to limit damage.
 
I dont see the problem.. any organisation that gets tax exemption should be the constant target of the IRS to see if they abuse the tax exemption rules.
 
LowDown said:
AP News: AP Exclusive: IRS knew tea party targeted in 2011



So it wasn't just low level employees at the IRS. Humm....

Why do they choose to fess up now? Because the results of an investigation by the Inspector General are due out later this week. So it is an attempt to limit damage.
Click to expand...

Not fully up to speed, but doesn't a name lime "taxed enough already" prick the ears of the IRS much the way "NORML (national organization for reform of marijuana laws)" does that of the DEA?

Coulda just been beaurocratic.
 
PeteEU said:
I dont see the problem.. any organisation that gets tax exemption should be the constant target of the IRS to see if they abuse the tax exemption rules.
Click to expand...

Problem is the IRS was being used as a Political tool to try and silence people. If IRS looked into the equal amount of liberal groups like say AFL-CIO which is a 501(c)(5).
 
What if...? said:
Not fully up to speed, but doesn't a name lime "taxed enough already" prick the ears of the IRS much the way "NORML (national organization for reform of marijuana laws)" does that of the DEA?

Coulda just been beaurocratic.
Click to expand...

That's not supposed to ever happen.
 
What if...? said:
Not fully up to speed, but doesn't a name lime "taxed enough already" prick the ears of the IRS much the way "NORML (national organization for reform of marijuana laws)" does that of the DEA?

Coulda just been beaurocratic.
Click to expand...

its called profiling. and it is illegal
 
PeteEU said:
I dont see the problem.. any organisation that gets tax exemption should be the constant target of the IRS to see if they abuse the tax exemption rules.
Click to expand...

you don't see a problem with the IRS singling out these groups?...really?
 
PeteEU said:
I dont see the problem.. any organisation that gets tax exemption should be the constant target of the IRS to see if they abuse the tax exemption rules.
Click to expand...

The problem, is that only one group was targetted. It's called, "discrimination" and it's illegal. Someone needs to go to prison over this, because it's criminal.
 
austrianecon said:
Problem is the IRS was being used as a Political tool to try and silence people. If IRS looked into the equal amount of liberal groups like say AFL-CIO which is a 501(c)(5).
Click to expand...

So it is bad when the IRS is used as a political tool, but when the military and Justice departments are used as political tools, then it is not a problem?
 
What if...? said:
So I'm going to assume that you don't approve of ANY profiling?
Click to expand...

Yes, the coercive powers of government should never be used for partisan purposes.
 
LowDown said:
AP News: AP Exclusive: IRS knew tea party targeted in 2011



So it wasn't just low level employees at the IRS. Humm....

Why do they choose to fess up now? Because the results of an investigation by the Inspector General are due out later this week. So it is an attempt to limit damage.
Click to expand...

Using the IRS to target ones political enemies goes all the way back to LBJ. LBJ also used the FBI to dig up dirt on those who opposed him. But LBJ had a compliant congress controlled by his own party and they were not about to challenge him.
 
PeteEU said:
So it is bad when the IRS is used as a political tool, but when the military and Justice departments are used as political tools, then it is not a problem?
Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm with the Cons on this one.
 
Thrilla said:
you don't see a problem with the IRS singling out these groups?...really?
Click to expand...

No.

First of all they were relatively new and they have to be "vetted" in my opinion. Any new organisation that wants tax exemption should not only be vetted but put under the microscope at the start to make sure that it is actually meeting the requirements. I would wager that the IRS under Bush and Reagan did exactly the same thing with all the "liberal" groups. We do know that Bush liked to politicize government agencies and groups for his own political gain... the AG scandal for example.. or the hiring scandals, or Boeing scandal and so on.

Secondly, considering that some of the people involved in the Tea Party groups across the lands, also have criminal records for fraud.. then I would expect the IRS to check that these groups are just not another fraud.

And for the record I would expect that the IRS did this for any organisation regardless of the political or religious leaning. Getting tax exemption should be a privilege they earn, and not one that is automatically granted just because they call them-self a religious or political group.
 
The IRS has long been the most intrusive, counter-constitutional faction of the US government. They obfuscate due process, seize property and resources without court approval and have done so for many decades. We do not need the IRS and never have. Implement a flat tax of 10% (no deductions, no exceptions) and close the IRS for good. If you can't calculate your taxes by moving a decimal point, then you are in very sad shape. Oh, elected officials in any office at any level must pay 2% over the flat rate. That will keep the rate low, for certain.
 
LowDown said:
Yes, the coercive powers of government should never be used for partisan purposes.
Click to expand...

And you of course have the same opinion of the Bush administration that did far far worse right?
 
PeteEU said:
No.

First of all they were relatively new and they have to be "vetted" in my opinion. Any new organisation that wants tax exemption should not only be vetted but put under the microscope at the start to make sure that it is actually meeting the requirements. I would wager that the IRS under Bush and Reagan did exactly the same thing with all the "liberal" groups. We do know that Bush liked to politicize government agencies and groups for his own political gain... the AG scandal for example.. or the hiring scandals, or Boeing scandal and so on.

Secondly, considering that some of the people involved in the Tea Party groups across the lands, also have criminal records for fraud.. then I would expect the IRS to check that these groups are just not another fraud.
Click to expand...



They were vetted, when they applied for the exemption. After the exemption was approved, it's hands off.

And for the record I would expect that the IRS did this for any organisation regardless of the political or religious leaning. Getting tax exemption should be a privilege they earn, and not one that is automatically granted just because they call them-self a religious or political group.
Click to expand...

I don't think those tax free stati should exist, to begin with; but since they do, everyone is to be treated equally.
 
PeteEU said:
And you of course have the same opinion of the Bush administration that did far far worse right?
Click to expand...

You can prove The Bush Admin did worse?
 
rocket88 said:
Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm with the Cons on this one.
Click to expand...

With the, "Cons"? One would think you would be with, "America", on this one.
 
Woodman909 said:
The IRS has long been the most intrusive, counter-constitutional faction of the US government. They obfuscate due process, seize property and resources without court approval and have done so for many decades. We do not need the IRS and never have. Implement a flat tax of 10% (no deductions, no exceptions) and close the IRS for good. If you can't calculate your taxes by moving a decimal point, then you are in very sad shape. Oh, elected officials in any office at any level must pay 2% over the flat rate. That will keep the rate low, for certain.
Click to expand...

If you close the IRS then who will collect the taxes?
 
apdst said:
They were vetted, when they applied for the exemption. After the exemption was approved, it's hands off.
Click to expand...

What? And trust that they continue to meet the rules that got them the freaking exemption? Great scam you got going there then... get an exemption and never ever get controlled again... and just abuse the system forever..


I don't think those tax free stati should exist, to begin with; but since they do, everyone is to be treated equally.
Click to expand...

I agree it should not exist. As for being treated equally... that is always the principle, but you know as well as I do, that both sides hardly follow that principle.
 
PeteEU said:
No.

First of all they were relatively new and they have to be "vetted" in my opinion. Any new organisation that wants tax exemption should not only be vetted but put under the microscope at the start to make sure that it is actually meeting the requirements. I would wager that the IRS under Bush and Reagan did exactly the same thing with all the "liberal" groups. We do know that Bush liked to politicize government agencies and groups for his own political gain... the AG scandal for example.. or the hiring scandals, or Boeing scandal and so on.

Secondly, considering that some of the people involved in the Tea Party groups across the lands, also have criminal records for fraud.. then I would expect the IRS to check that these groups are just not another fraud.

And for the record I would expect that the IRS did this for any organisation regardless of the political or religious leaning. Getting tax exemption should be a privilege they earn, and not one that is automatically granted just because they call them-self a religious or political group.
Click to expand...

According to your logic then all black entertainers need to be singled out by the IRS and given extra scrutiny because Wesley Snipes and Lauryn Hill where both convicted of felony tax evasion
 
apdst said:
You can prove The Bush Admin did worse?
Click to expand...

You mean like spying on the Quakers? Warrentless wiretaps? The no fly list where Democratic politicians suddenly appeared on? The AG scandal where non political AGs were fired after they refused to go after local Democrats on the orders of local Republicans? You mean those abuses?
 
trfjr said:
According to your logic then all black entertainers need to be singled out by the IRS and given extra scrutiny because Wesley Snipes and Lauryn Hill where both convicted of felony tax evasion
Click to expand...

Err no that is your logic. ... and failed one at that.
 
PeteEU said:
What? And trust that they continue to meet the rules that got them the freaking exemption? Great scam you got going there then... get an exemption and never ever get controlled again... and just abuse the system forever..




I agree it should not exist. As for being treated equally... that is always the principle, but you know as well as I do, that both sides hardly follow that principle.
Click to expand...

Well, ya see, here in America--the land of the free--there's a such-a-thing as civil rights. It basically means that Americans are protected from persecution by the government for their political, or religious views.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom