• 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 conspiracies fall apart as BOLO list targeting ‘progressive’ groups revealed

sangha said:
OMG!!! Who would have thought that the IRS would treat tax cheats differently than people who followed the rules!!!
Click to expand...

Who would have thought the IRS convicted people before they even met with them?

Wonderful world you promote there.
 
sangha said:
OMG!!! Who would have thought that the IRS would treat tax cheats differently than people who followed the rules!!!
Click to expand...
MediaMatters is a 501c4. Do they follow the rules?
 
OpportunityCost said:
Whoops. OP debunked.
Treasury IG: Liberal groups weren't targeted by IRS like Tea Party - The Hill's On The Money
Click to expand...

Only the word "progressive" wasn't used?

Flagging "tea PARTY" is a no brainer. Whoever applied with the word "party" in their name was an idiot or breaking the rules. Parties ARE NOT ELIGIBLE for 501(c)(4) status. Period. Tea party put up candidates, remember?

But you guys don't want to know who owns you politicians. Ignorance is apparently bliss.
 
What if...? said:
Doesn't media matters just **** with fox news?
Click to expand...
They seem to focus primarily on presenting the progressive perspective of the "news". Can't really see how that relates to social welfare. It seems pretty obvious that they're political at their core.
 
What if...? said:
Only the word "progressive" wasn't used?

Flagging "tea PARTY" is a no brainer. Whoever applied with the word "party" in their name was an idiot or breaking the rules. Parties ARE NOT ELIGIBLE for 501(c)(4) status. Period. Tea party put up candidates, remember?

But you guys don't want to know who owns you politicians. Ignorance is apparently bliss.
Click to expand...
Did any "Tea Party" groups with 501c4 status put up candidates? It's an important distinction and I would agree that if any 501c4's did this then that is a definite no no.
 
pbrauer said:
The liberal Media Matters and conservative Media Reaserch Center are both 501c3s.

About Us | Media Matters for America

About Us | Media Research Center
Click to expand...
I thought they were 501c4. If they are actually 501c3 then that makes it even worse!

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations, and any community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, to promote the arts, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.[10][11] There are also supporting organizations which are often referred to in shorthand form as "Friends of" organizations.
Click to expand...
Not exactly the language one would apply to Media Matters OR Media Research center...
 
Jack Fabulous said:
They seem to focus primarily on presenting the progressive perspective of the "news". Can't really see how that relates to social welfare. It seems pretty obvious that they're political at their core.
Click to expand...

I think its actually deconstructing the conservative perspective.

Are they a conduit for anonymous campaign money? Buying attack ads, or for a specific candidate.

You can be as ideological as you want, its when you actively participate in direct political ACTIVITY that you approach the "line".
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Did any "Tea Party" groups with 501c4 status put up candidates? It's an important distinction and I would agree that if any 501c4's did this then that is a definite no no.
Click to expand...

This is the jewel in the oyster.

How was the irs to know which groups were the Tea Party PARTY and which were just using that name?

Their job is to make sure people aren't abusing the system. Not forming geoups SOLELY to be conduits for anonymous campaign money instead of that only being "part" of their purpose.

So they came up with "keywords", like search engines use, and put them on BOLO lists.

LOOKS bad, and that's why we have the hubbub.

Does not change the fact they were free to operate as if approved for a LONG time and then have their approval be retroactive.

If they were legit, there was NO reason they couldn't have done so, and NO reason for anyone not to donate to them, as donations aren't deductible.

The ONLY reason they wouldn't get donations if if they WERE being formed to solely funnel anonymous money into the election and when this was revealed later would result in exposure of donor lists.

This is optics and scandalmongering. No meat in this sandwich.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
If you could turn of the snark for a moment, how is Media Matters not an agent for education purposes?
Click to expand...
What in my post could you POSSIBLY interpret as "snark"?

Here is the definition for 501c3...
501(c)(3) exemptions apply to corporations, and any community chest, fund, cooperating association or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, to promote the arts, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.[
Click to expand...

Here is the definition for 501c4...
501(c)(4) organizations are generally civic leagues and other corporations operated exclusively for the promotion of "social welfare", such as civics and civics issues, or local associations of employees with membership limited to a designated company or people in a particular municipality or neighborhood, and with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.[36] An organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting the common good and general welfare of the people of the community
Click to expand...

And here is the definition for 527...
A 527 organization or 527 group is a type of U.S. tax-exempt organization organized under Section 527 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 527). A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office.

Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional political action committees, "Super PACs", and political parties are "527s." However, in common practice the term is usually applied only to such organizations that are not regulated under state or federal campaign finance laws because they do not "expressly advocate" for the election or defeat of a candidate or party.
Click to expand...

Check out the front page of Media Matters...

Media Matters for America

And check out the front page for Media Research Center...

Media Research Center


These organizations ARE NOT educational, they are political and they both have agendas that aren't even hidden. They exist as political counterbalances. So, given that, filing 501c3 is even a bigger joke than if they filed 501c4. They're extensions of the Republican and Democratic party for the most part.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
What in my post could you POSSIBLY interpret as "snark"?

Here is the definition for 501c3...


Here is the definition for 501c4...


And here is the definition for 527...


Check out the front page of Media Matters...

Media Matters for America

And check out the front page for Media Research Center...

Media Research Center


These organizations ARE NOT educational, they are political and they both have agendas that aren't even hidden. They exist as political counterbalances. So, given that, filing 501c3 is even a bigger joke than if they filed 501c4. They're extensions of the Republican and Democratic party for the most part.
Click to expand...

Education and politics are NOT mutually exclusive.
 
sangha said:
OMG!!! Who would have thought that the IRS would treat tax cheats differently than people who followed the rules!!!
Click to expand...

That's just more of your outright dishonesty. They both filed the same exemptions, how is one a tax cheat and the other not?

Dude, lie much?

Wait, silly question.
 
Last edited:
What if...? said:
Only the word "progressive" wasn't used?

Flagging "tea PARTY" is a no brainer. Whoever applied with the word "party" in their name was an idiot or breaking the rules. Parties ARE NOT ELIGIBLE for 501(c)(4) status. Period. Tea party put up candidates, remember?

But you guys don't want to know who owns you politicians. Ignorance is apparently bliss.
Click to expand...

I see you want to ignore the word the other buzzwords and the disparate treatment of conservative and liberal groups.

As for bolded, its irrelevant. Whats relevant is that the IRS discharges the law as completely as they can, not how they want it to be. Whats relevant is they treat both liberal and conservative groups equally regardless of what they feel the definition of social welfare may be.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
These organizations ARE NOT educational, they are political and they both have agendas that aren't even hidden. They exist as political counterbalances. So, given that, filing 501c3 is even a bigger joke than if they filed 501c4. They're extensions of the Republican and Democratic party for the most part.
Click to expand...
NO, it is not NOT political, it does NOT lobby nor campaign for candidates as a major part of its activities.

If you truly believe that Media Matters is violating its classification, report them and get back to us with the IRS response.
But you won't do that, whining is easier.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
If you could turn of the snark for a moment, how is Media Matters not an agent for education purposes?
Click to expand...

Then how would the tea party groups going around and holding rallies on political issues not be for educational services? They are educating on the conservative viewpoint of issues, how is that different from MMA? or MRC?

You guys want to have it both ways. Pick one or the other and pass a law to that effect.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
What in my post could you POSSIBLY interpret as "snark"?

Here is the definition for 501c3...


Here is the definition for 501c4...


And here is the definition for 527...


Check out the front page of Media Matters...

Media Matters for America

And check out the front page for Media Research Center...

Media Research Center


These organizations ARE NOT educational, they are political and they both have agendas that aren't even hidden. They exist as political counterbalances. So, given that, filing 501c3 is even a bigger joke than if they filed 501c4. They're extensions of the Republican and Democratic party for the most part.
Click to expand...


I disagree with your view that the two groups are NOT educational. I also disagree with your belief that Media Matters is an "extension" of the Democratic Party (thanks for using the correct word )

A better page for people to read about Media Matters would be this one - Issues | Media Matters for America

for the Media Research Center, try this page - About Us | Media Research Center
 
Gimmesometruth said:
NO, it is not NOT political, it does NOT lobby nor campaign for candidates as a major part of its activities.

If you truly believe that Media Matters is violating its classification, report them and get back to us with the IRS response.
But you won't do that, whining is easier.
Click to expand...

After calling for an end to snark you could not be quite so snarky a few posts later.....
 
What if...? said:
This is the jewel in the oyster.

How was the irs to know which groups were the Tea Party PARTY and which were just using that name?

Their job is to make sure people aren't abusing the system. Not forming geoups SOLELY to be conduits for anonymous campaign money instead of that only being "part" of their purpose.

So they came up with "keywords", like search engines use, and put them on BOLO lists.

LOOKS bad, and that's why we have the hubbub.

Does not change the fact they were free to operate as if approved for a LONG time and then have their approval be retroactive.

If they were legit, there was NO reason they couldn't have done so, and NO reason for anyone not to donate to them, as donations aren't deductible.

The ONLY reason they wouldn't get donations if if they WERE being formed to solely funnel anonymous money into the election and when this was revealed later would result in exposure of donor lists.

This is optics and scandalmongering. No meat in this sandwich.
Click to expand...
The part of the "scandal" that needs investigation is whether or not the IRS worked directly with "concerned parties" to provide information about 501c4s and groups that HAD APPLIED as 501c4s but were still under review. The process allows a group to operate as a 501c4 until their application is denied. This is where heads could start to roll...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom