• 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 Cincinnati Unit Gave Speedy Approval to Obama-named Foundation

wbcoleman

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This must come as a huge shock to everyone, right?

IRS stalled conservative groups, but gave speedy approval to Obama foundation - The Washington Post

When the Barack H. Obama Foundation sought tax-exempt status to raise money for good works in Kenya, the Internal Revenue Service provided quick help.

The IRS approved charitable status for the foundation, which was run by President Obama’s brother and named after his father, in about a month’s time. The IRS also agreed to give the group this important financial status retroactively, back to 2009, when it had begun its fundraising.

The 34 days the IRS’s Cincinnati office took to process the foundation’s application stands in contrast to the waits of several months — and sometimes longer than a year — that several conservative groups say they experienced with the same office. Obama has apologized, saying Americans have a right to be angry that the office improperly targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny.
 
Workers at the IRS and several government agencies are represented by an overwhelmingly democratic union. This should not shock anyone.
 
wbcoleman said:
This must come as a huge shock to everyone, right?

IRS stalled conservative groups, but gave speedy approval to Obama foundation - The Washington Post

When the Barack H. Obama Foundation sought tax-exempt status to raise money for good works in Kenya, the Internal Revenue Service provided quick help.

The IRS approved charitable status for the foundation, which was run by President Obama’s brother and named after his father, in about a month’s time. The IRS also agreed to give the group this important financial status retroactively, back to 2009, when it had begun its fundraising.

The 34 days the IRS’s Cincinnati office took to process the foundation’s application stands in contrast to the waits of several months — and sometimes longer than a year — that several conservative groups say they experienced with the same office. Obama has apologized, saying Americans have a right to be angry that the office improperly targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny.
Click to expand...

i will save all you liberals the trouble of having to reply

the IRS doesn't have a political agenda
Lies Lies and more Lies
Its Bushes fault he did it also
where are the WMDs
A you tube vid made them do it
Its just some low level employees
its the sequester
you are a racist
Its a Republican witch hunt
Obama is the greatest

I think that about covers it
 
Last edited:
trfjr said:
i will save all you liberals the trouble of having to reply

the IRS doesn't have a political agenda
Lies Lies and more Lies
Its Bushes fault he did it also
where are the WMDs
A you tube vid made them do it
Its just some low level employees
its the sequester
you are a racist
Its a Republican witch hunt
Obama is the greatest

I think that about covers it
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's Bush's fault, I almost forgot.
 
trfjr said:
i will save all you liberals the trouble of having to reply

the IRS doesn't have a political agenda
Lies Lies and more Lies
Its Bushes fault he did it also
where are the WMDs
A you tube vid made them do it
Its just some low level employees
its the sequester
you are a racist
Its a Republican witch hunt
Obama is the greatest

I think that about covers it
Click to expand...

You forgot the deflect-all catch-all:

"low-level employees"
 
You forgot Eric Holder's patented: "I don't know anything about that."™
 
It was clearly not a political group. Less scrutiny would be required.

Tea Party groups, on the other hand, clearly are engaging in political activity.

The examples you're looking for to show bias will be liberal groups that are left-wing equivalents of the tea party: clearly a primarily political organization.
 
trfjr said:
i will save all you liberals the trouble of having to reply

the IRS doesn't have a political agenda
Lies Lies and more Lies
Its Bushes fault he did it also
where are the WMDs
A you tube vid made them do it
Its just some low level employees
its the sequester
you are a racist
Its a Republican witch hunt
Obama is the greatest

I think that about covers it
Click to expand...

I think you left one out----

Only knew about it from the media
 
Deuce said:
It was clearly not a political group. Less scrutiny would be required.

Tea Party groups, on the other hand, clearly are engaging in political activity.

The examples you're looking for to show bias will be liberal groups that are left-wing equivalents of the tea party: clearly a primarily political organization.
Click to expand...

Was Media Matters caught up in this dragnet? Name all the Leftist NFP's that were. Thanks in advance.
 
apdst said:
Was Media Matters caught up in this dragnet? Name all the Leftist NFP's that were. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

You're the one who wants examples of bias. I don't think any of these groups should have tax-exempt status.
 
Deuce said:
You're the one who wants examples of bias. I don't think any of these groups should have tax-exempt status.
Click to expand...

I don't either, but the reality is, they do and they have the right to equal treatment under the law. That right has been violated by the IRS.

Somehow it doesn't surprise me in the least that the Libbos are defending this kind of government greed and tyranny.
 
apdst said:
I don't either, but the reality is, they do and they have the right to equal treatment under the law. That right has been violated by the IRS.

Somehow it doesn't surprise me in the least that the Libbos are defending this kind of government greed and tyranny.
Click to expand...

And yet, no examples of equivalent groups.
 
Deuce said:
It was clearly not a political group. Less scrutiny would be required.

Tea Party groups, on the other hand, clearly are engaging in political activity.

The examples you're looking for to show bias will be liberal groups that are left-wing equivalents of the tea party: clearly a primarily political organization.
Click to expand...

Why should anyone assume a priori that a group headed by Obama's brother is "clearly not a political group"?
 
Deuce said:
And yet, no examples of equivalent groups.
Click to expand...

Precisely! There's no record of left-wing groups complaining about this BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO.
 
In the 27 months that the Internal Revenue Service put a hold on all Tea Party applications for non-profit status, it approved applications from similar liberal groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," these groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.
Click to expand...

USAToday: IRS gave liberals a pass; Tea Party groups put on hold
 
apdst said:
Was Media Matters caught up in this dragnet? Name all the Leftist NFP's that were. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Media Matters was formed in 2006, well before the period of time we are discussing. Its tax-exempt status would have been determined at that time.

What is lost in all of this; why this is no where near the scandal that people are making it out be is that the 501(c)4 status is for groups who's PRIMARY purpose is promoting social welfare, not a political agenda. Specifically, it is appropriate for "Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees". The IRS has a duty to screen those that are political organizations from the 501(c)4 applicant pool, as that status is not appropriate for them.

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The controversy deals with 2009 to 2011, when the tea party was just getting going. Many, do I dare say most, of the new groups formed at that time were tea party groups. Hence, its just intelligent triage, which you want your IRS do be doing, to put the tea party applications in a separate pile, because they substantially political organizations that are walking a fine line in qualifying to be a 501(c)(4). In much the same way, claiming a home office as a business expense will get your tax return looked at (not necessarily audited, but looked at more closely). There is nothing political about this; it is just smart business.

There were not a lot of new left-wing political groups being formed during this period. The economy was slow in 2009. The environment was hardly conducive to starting a new new business or a new health and welfare organization. Moreover, the nature of many left-wing groups, such as environmental groups or social welfare advocacy groups, better fit the 501(c)(4) definition as their purpose usually better fits the definition of the 501(c)(4) (social matters first; political advocacy second)....

Moreover, the law (from Wikipedia article cited above) "...allows Section 501(c)(4) organizations to self-declare and hold themselves out as tax-exempt; they do not have to obtain any approval from the Internal Revenue Service, though they may.[46]...."... and no group was actually turned down. No harm; no foul!

This is yet another controversy that the Cons have sunk their teeth into thinking there is something there; but when the fog of political war clears people will realize this is much to do about little.
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
not founded in 2006:

OFA, Obama Outside Group, Raises $4.8 Million In First Quarter 2013 - HuffPo

indeed a half million dollar gift to the 501c4 gets you regular attendance at those white house quarterly meetings

how exciting!
Click to expand...

... that, to me, is a legitimate scandal.... the problem with Cons is they never have clue about the distinction between a real scandal and a faux scandal. Even in DP you can see a great many people that have no clue as to what was wrong about Watergate.
 
... that, to me, is a legitimate scandal
Click to expand...

few care about your mere opinion, the world is not your mom

a great many people that have no clue as to what was wrong about Watergate
Click to expand...

tell it to them---in history class

meanwhile, why can't barack obama---today---state unequivocally he didn't know what was going on at his irs for 2 years?

Obama pushes back on IRS, AP, Benghazi - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

why is the nyt so declarative: "the obama administration knew about the irs scandal 5 months before the election"

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=3&
 
wbcoleman said:
Precisely! There's no record of left-wing groups complaining about this BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO.
Click to expand...

No record of them being fast-tracked. And Progress Texas indicates their application took a year and a half.

wbcoleman said:
Why should anyone assume a priori that a group headed by Obama's brother is "clearly not a political group"?
Click to expand...

Because its described as a charity group acting in a different country.
Do you have any indication that this is not the case?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom