• 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 higher-ups requested info on conservative groups, letters show

MaggieD said:
You'll get no argument from me if they ALL had to pay taxes. But that's not the way it works. ACORN, as an example, was a 501c4, difference being any contribution to THAT organization was tax deductible, unlike c3's. If that wasn't filled with political ideology, I don't know what group was.
Click to expand...

Actually you got your 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(3)'s confused:

501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations
501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees

Contributions to 501(c)(3)s are deductible to the donor; contributions to 501(c)(4)s are not. Acorn was a 501(c)(4). Contributions to that organization were NOT deductible. Many 501(c)(4) organizations, including Acorn, had affiliated 501(c)(3) charities that operated as non-political units. Voter registration is an acceptable charitable activity.

501(c)4 vs 501(c)3 vs 527

CanadaJohn said:
Absolutely right Maggie - they were so filled with political ideology, many of it's members were convicted of election fraud trying to get Obama into the White House.

I suppose, if you're on the loonie left, you could argue that getting the Obama's into social housing was their goal, so all is good.
Click to expand...

You could say Acorn was political because it advocated for its constituency, mostly inter-city poor. However, it did not have an inherent ideology. It represented a group of people with a common characteristic as do most social welfare organizations.

Acorn may be one of the most misunderstood groups of all-time. It was unduly vilified shortly after the last election. Perhaps you are one of those people that does not really understand what ACORN was about and would like to be better informed on the topic to sharpen future posts:

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its not as if the inter-city poor have much of a lobbying effort; Acorn pretty much was it. One of the reasons they were big into voter registration was to try to encourage their constituency to effect change through the power of the vote (as opposed the the correct answer in America, is that you effect change through the power of the checkbook) I don't think the world is a better place without them.

BTW... the voter fraud in ACORN was actually a fraud against ACORN. They hired poor workers and college students and paid them based on the number of voter registrations they turned in. Given the thousands of people that did this job and the fact that pay was piecemeal, it was not unexpected that the workers would turn in bogus entries.... of course, RW radio turned it into something that it was not....
 
Last edited:
OpportunityCost said:
You are already excusing the behavior by saying the problem was it wasnt done to both groups. The problem was it was done at all. Organizations dont have to reveal their member lists, event attendees (if free)---they have to reveal donor lists and funding streams. They certainly dont have to reveal what church they go to and prayer information! The information ebing asked for isnt legal. It never should have been done. It goes a lot higher than a few people in Cincinnati.

Secondly you have all the earmarks of someone crabby about Citizens United---these groups were abusing the law, etc etc. Thats the left talking point and has been since this started---to deflect from whether there was political targeting and one sided investigations.
Click to expand...

If he asked for information that was beyond the scope of his duties that is wrong as well.

Born Free said:
But all the liberal groups were given a pass by the IRS to cheat the American taxpayer and the conservative groups were not. Now do you get why they are angry? The IRS is supposed to treat everyone the same --- Right? Guess not.
Click to expand...

That's literally what I've been saying this entire time, don't act as if you're too stupid to see it. The IRS should treat everyone equally absolutely regardless of their political lean and in my opinion equal should have meant the IRS treated the left wing groups just as hard as the right wing groups, not the right wing groups as easily as the left wing groups.
 
Wiseone said:
If he asked for information that was beyond the scope of his duties that is wrong as well.



That's literally what I've been saying this entire time, don't act as if you're too stupid to see it. The IRS should treat everyone equally absolutely regardless of their political lean and in my opinion equal should have meant the IRS treated the left wing groups just as hard as the right wing groups, not the right wing groups as easily as the left wing groups.
Click to expand...

And you arent seeing the forest for the trees. The IRS has no business asking what they were asking, the scrutiny they were applying was chilling to free speech and affiliation. Simply they dont have any business treating either side in such a way. I would rather we had a few people get tax status they dont deserve than government exceed its authority to go after political opponents. IE government should tread more lightly than citizens.
 
Wiseone said:
1) This is a single IRS office, its not the entire organization and its not policy of the organization.

2) Until the IRS starts dragging people out of their homes to murder them in the streets in the middle of the night, the IRS isn't the gestapo. So stop this bull**** you god damn overly dramatic partisan asshole. You're a disagree to everything you claim to stand for.
Click to expand...

The IRS behaves like the Gestapo... through intimidation. And if you didn't notice... cases were sent where? Washington DC. If you didn't notice, the head of the IRS took the 5th... which means our government took the 5th. It's as if they're some type of 3rd world Banana Republic thugs that can make statements but answer no questions.

Tell me... why does the head of the IRS visit Obama 118 times? Are they lovers? During the Bush years the head of the IRS visited and average of 1/4 times per year.

You also notice Lois Lerner approved a certain Nigerian's application... personally signing it in a month... and doing so retroactively?

Our IRS has become a weapon for a certain political constituency. Gestapo/IRS is fitting.
 
zimmer said:
The IRS behaves like the Gestapo... through intimidation. And if you didn't notice... cases were sent where? Washington DC. If you didn't notice, the head of the IRS took the 5th... which means our government took the 5th. It's as if they're some type of 3rd world Banana Republic thugs that can make statements but answer no questions.

Tell me... why does the head of the IRS visit Obama 118 times? Are they lovers? During the Bush years the head of the IRS visited and average of 1/4 times per year.

You also notice Lois Lerner approved a certain Nigerian's application... personally signing it in a month... and doing so retroactively?

Our IRS has become a weapon for a certain political constituency. Gestapo/IRS is fitting.
Click to expand...

You're the second asshole I've seen here who'll talk up a big game about Constitutional rights but the second someone actually uses one in a way they don't want its we're suddenly living under the Gestapo in a dictatorship.

You've got no integrity or honesty.
 
Wiseone said:
You're the second asshole I've seen here who'll talk up a big game about Constitutional rights but the second someone actually uses one in a way they don't want its we're suddenly living under the Gestapo in a dictatorship.

You've got no integrity or honesty.
Click to expand...


So targeting political opponents for audits is a constitutional right now?
 
Wiseone said:
You're the second asshole I've seen here who'll talk up a big game about Constitutional rights but the second someone actually uses one in a way they don't want its we're suddenly living under the Gestapo in a dictatorship.

You've got no integrity or honesty.
Click to expand...

This statement certainly bolsters your honesty and integrity...

:roll:

Ill say it again, Id rather some people get a tax status they dont deserve than people be afraid of the IRS auditing them because of who they affiliate with politically. Government should be treading more lightly than citizens.
 
Wiseone said:
You're the second asshole I've seen here who'll talk up a big game about Constitutional rights but the second someone actually uses one in a way they don't want its we're suddenly living under the Gestapo in a dictatorship.

You've got no integrity or honesty.
Click to expand...

Sorry... you have no integrity, and here is why:

You yourself admitted the IRS was used as a one-sided weapon, and it is. It was used to silence and intimidate the opposition. The Gestapo was used for the same purpose.

You complained about the one-sided IRS/Gestapo reference, where I said it's nice you admit they've behaved as such... and to quell your laughable backpedaling I pulled you exact quotes from your post to support the claim.

I didn't say we were living under a Gestapo dictatorship... I said the IRS was behaving in a Gestapo like manner... and they are. Thugs do what they did.

Nice try... but try, try again.

:)

jmotivator said:
So targeting political opponents for audits is a constitutional right now?
Click to expand...
It seems for Wiseone... yes indeed! There are mulitple sets of rules and the most stringent are used against Conservative groups and individuals.

Wiseone ignored the IRS chief meeting Obama 118 times in 2-years during an election year. Did Obama meet with the CIA that often?

Odd isn't it... when compared to Bush43... who met with the IRS chief once in 4-years!?
 
Wiseone said:
1) This is a single IRS office, its not the entire organization and its not policy of the organization.
Click to expand...
In light of recent additional information that the DC Goons were calling for information... I believe you can say the head of the fish is rotten.

It made no sense that all this came from a couple rogue agents... as that would have put their asses on the line; instead we learn it came from high up... that DC wanted/demanded the cases. Being responsible leaders of the organization... they take the 5th and claim their 150+ White House visits were for Easter Egg hunts... OH! they were hunting alright... their political opposition.

Our IRS/Gestapo... a tool to silence the opposition. You don't like Gestapo? OK... KGB... Stasi... just a cog in the machine of intimidation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom