WaPo: IRS apologizes for inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in 2012 election

[twa]

you might be right and Obama and Holder simply overreacted from some strange desire to placate conservatives.

 

I wouldn't put money on it though LOL

 

you do understand the difference between the IG's audit and a FBI"s investigation don't you?

 

I don't think playing the 'Nothing to see here" game is gonna fly this go round...no matter how many turds take the 5th

[chipwhich]

you do understand the difference between the IG's audit and a FBI"s investigation don't you?

 

IG audit and FBI investigation serious?  The hell you say!!!

[visionary]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-tea-party-lawsuits-91999.html

25 tea party groups sue Obama administration, IRS

 

A conservative watchdog group filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of 25 tea party groups against the Internal Revenue Service and Obama administration officials.

The complaint, filed by the American Center for Law and Justice, alleges that the Obama administration overstepped its authority and violated the First and Fifth amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

 

“As this unconstitutional scheme continues even today, the only way to stop this flagrant and arrogant abuse of our clients’ rights is to file a federal lawsuit,” said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, in a statement. “The lawsuit sends a very powerful message to the IRS and the Obama administration – including the White House: Americans are not going to be bullied and intimidated by our government.”

 

[Duckus]

It is a pretty easy case. The constitution is clear.

Groups have the constitutional right to be approved as a 501c4 tax free organization after they voluntarily apply through a non-mandatory IRS process.

[Zazzaro703]

Personally, I hate that some of you are actively rooting for this country to fail (going on 6 years now).

But at least it makes it easier for me to know who to put into the box o' stupid with the YE creationists and the juggaloes.

I don't think it's so much rooting for this country to fail, it's more being disgusted that a Romney/Obama card was really the best 2 candidates in the US? Obama/McCain? W? That's the best we got? Our way of government needs serious revisions as its now all about the money and power and not for the people. Some of our elected officials say and do whatever they need to say and do to get elected and then those promises during the campaign never come into play. Whether it be outright lies, the two main parties sabotaging each other, I don't see how anyone can look at how our government operates and say "yup working as intended". Our government reminds me of a kindergarten classroom and we the people deserve better. To even run for office you need to be wealthy, so most of our officials come from money. How can they fairly represent ALL of us when their experiences are limited. We need a greater variety of people in office, not just people that are rich enough to run for office.

[#BgMase76#]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-tea-party-lawsuits-91999.html

 

I'm stumped by this. Simply look at the tax regulation. The IRS changed the word "exclusively" to "primarily" w/out Congress's permission. So even if we look at this scenario using "primarily". Is the tea party not a political group? Under the law and subject to perjury these people signed paperwork stating they were social welfare groups. How arrogant and stupid is this whole scenario? I lied on a federal application and got called on it. Now I feel like my constitutional rights have been violated. This is ridiculous beyond compare. How about we enforce the law. Start handing out jail sentences and fines for these same ppl who have broken the law. Tax exempt status is not a constitutional right. It's a privileged status for specific purposes. Does anyone else find the horrific irony of an anti-government, anti- tax group crying foul because they got caught?

[@DCGoldPants]

 

IRS Targets Medical Marijuana Businesses In Government's Ongoing War On Pot

                                   

The tea party has company.

For the past several years, the Internal Revenue Service has been

systematically targeting medical marijuana establishments, relying on an

obscure statute that gives the taxing agency unintended power. The IRS

has been functioning as an arm of justice, employing the U.S. tax code

as a weapon in the federal government's ongoing war against legal

cannabis.

The majority of Americans favor legalization of marijuana,

while 18 states and the District of Columbia have already legalized

medical marijuana. But pot businesses in those states are vulnerable to

the federal government's strategic application of IRS Code Section 280E,

a law enacted in 1982 after a drug dealer claimed his yacht and weapons

purchases as legitimate business expenses -- and long before medical

marijuana was first legalized in California in 1996.

Now the IRS is applying a rule originally aimed at illegal (and often

violent) drug trafficking to businesses that are entirely legal under

their states' laws. Medical marijuana dispensaries are facing audits and

heavy tax bills that could force them out of business.

"Whether or not this is a coordinated tactic to try and shut down the

industry, or send a chill through the industry, or if it's just the IRS

trying to collect as much revenue as they can from easy targets, it's

clearly outside the spirit and intent of the law," said Kris Krane, a

former executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy who now

serves as principal of 4Front Advisors, a medical marijuana dispensary

consulting firm.

According to the Treasury Department, Section 280E disallows

"deductions incurred in the trade or business of trafficking in

controlled substances." Individuals involved in the sale of controlled

substances -- including marijuana -- may not deduct standard business

expenses from their federal taxes. That means, unlike other small

businesses, medical marijuana dispensaries can't write off the cost of

rent, payroll, product or advertising. As a result, stores that might

not even be profitable can end up being taxed out of business.

 

More from the link.

[SnyderShrugged]

I'm stumped by this. Simply look at the tax regulation. The IRS changed the word "exclusively" to "primarily" w/out Congress's permission. So even if we look at this scenario using "primarily". Is the tea party not a political group? Under the law and subject to perjury these people signed paperwork stating they were social welfare groups. How arrogant and stupid is this whole scenario? I lied on a federal application and got called on it. Now I feel like my constitutional rights have been violated. This is ridiculous beyond compare. How about we enforce the law. Start handing out jail sentences and fines for these same ppl who have broken the law. Tax exempt status is not a constitutional right. It's a privileged status for specific purposes. Does anyone else find the horrific irony of an anti-government, anti- tax group crying foul because they got caught

 

Why are you saying the targeted groups broke the law?  Has that been proven?  You probably should read the entire thread, specifically Larry's excellent work on the details of the tax categories.    You seem to have made some incorrect assumptions in regards to this story.

[visionary]

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/05/white-house-no-need-for-special-prosecutor-on-irs-165072.html

White House: No need for special prosecutor on I.R.S.

 

On the heels of a poll showing 76 percent of Americans support the appointment of a special proscutor to investigate the I.R.S., the White House dismissed the idea, saying there's enough people reviewing the agency already.

Deputy press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters aboard Air Force One on Thursday that Congress is investigating, the administration is cooperating, the Department of Justice has initiated a criminal probe and a new acting director has already been named to lead the I.R.S.

“There are a lot of people looking at this from a lot of different perspectives," Earnest said. "We’re confident those who need to be held accountable will be.”

The Quinnipiac survey released Thursday found that 63 percent of Democrats, 88 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of independents support the appointment of an independent prosecutor to investigate the I.R.S. following revelations that the agency targeted conservative groups and others for extra scrutiny in applications for nonprofit status.

 

[Duckus]

Why are you saying the targeted groups broke the law?  Has that been proven?  You probably should read the entire thread, specifically Larry's excellent work on the details of the tax categories.    You seem to have made some incorrect assumptions in regards to this story.

 

Why are you saying the targeted groups broke the law?  Has that been proven?  You probably should read the entire thread, specifically Larry's excellent work on the details of the tax categories.    You seem to have made some incorrect assumptions in regards to this story.

 

Some one them, yes.

 

From the New York Times:

 

When CVFC, a conservative veterans’ group in California, applied for tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, its biggest expenditure that year was several thousand dollars in radio ads backing a Republican candidate for Congress.

The Wetumpka Tea Party, from Alabama, sponsored training for a get-out-the-vote initiative dedicated to the “defeat of President Barack Obama” while the I.R.S. was weighing its application.

 

And the head of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, whose application languished with the I.R.S. for more than two years, sent out e-mails to members about Mitt Romney campaign events and organized members to distribute Mr. Romney’s presidential campaign literature.

 

...

But a close examination of these groups and others reveals an array of election activities that tax experts and former I.R.S. officials said would provide a legitimate basis for flagging them for closer review.

 

....

 

At least some of the conservative groups that are complaining aboutI.R.S. treatment were clearly involved in election activities on behalf of Republicans or against Democrats. When CVFC, the veterans’ group, first applied for I.R.S. recognition in early 2010, it stated that it did not plan to spend any money on politics. The group, whose full name in its application was CVFC 501©(4), listed an address shared with a political organization called Combat Veterans for Congress PAC. CVFC told the I.R.S. that it planned to e-mail veterans about ways in which they “may engage in government” and provide “social welfare programs to assist combat veterans to get involved in government.”

But later in 2010, as it awaited an I.R.S. ruling, the organization spent close to $8,000 on radio ads backing Michael Crimmins, a Republican and a former Marine, for a House seat in San Diego, according to Federal Election Commission records.

The spending is not detailed in the group’s tax return for 2010, raising questions about whether it properly accounted for the expense to the I.R.S. The group also checked off a box marked “No” when asked if it had engaged in direct or indirect political activities on behalf of a candidate for political office.

 

True the Vote - one of the groups leading the lawsuit and has been featured around conservative circles was a sued - a judge rules their activities were actually that of a PAC and not a non-profit.

 

The truth is that Tea Party groups had absolutely no idea what they were doing. Most of the people who started these organizations were not political or non-profit professionals, they were regular folks. That is a GOOD thing, and I have no problem with it. The problem is that many of the groups had ZERO understand of the law, the process, and what they could and could not do. I don't blame them, it is freaking confusing. But there are a lot of examples of Tea Party groups who clearly did not understand that they couldn't simply raise money and support candidates.

[@DCGoldPants]

If anything comes from all this. I hope they dump a bunch of the different non-profit subgroups from the tax laws. People complain how many pages there are and how its a waste of time and effort. It should be easy, non-profit shouldn't be easy to get...and it shouldn't allow their mini-pacs to do whatever.

 

p.s. - I still think the IRS is in the wrong here. Even if 90 out of 100 applications were from Tea Party type groups.

[skinsmarydu]

I admit I totally missed the quote on the screen on GMA from the new "acting" IRS commissioner because I was shocked at who it was...

Danny Wuerffel.

[Larry]

If anything comes from all this. I hope they dump a bunch of the different non-profit subgroups from the tax laws. People complain how many pages there are and how its a waste of time and effort. It should be easy, non-profit shouldn't be easy to get...and it shouldn't allow their mini-pacs to do whatever.

 

p.s. - I still think the IRS is in the wrong here. Even if 90 out of 100 applications were from Tea Party type groups.

 

Yeah, the thought has occurred to me that these political groups wouldn;t NEED to be tax exempt, if they didn't HAVE a profit. 

 

If the Tea Party Partiot Citizens Progressive Committee of BFE doesn't make a profit, then their taxes are zero, anyway. 

 

But I assume that I'm missing something. 

[Bang]

Does it ever occur to anyone that all we do is sniff **** and tell each other that their **** smells worse?

 

 

we can pretend to say all we want about 'both do this' and 'both do that', but when it comes right down to it, we still think some **** smells nicer than others, and so we stick to it, regardless of the fact that it's still ****.

 

There's no fixing this anymore. We too readily play along with the ****ty games.

 

Frankly, as i've felt for a long time, we can thank our purchased media who are much more concerned with flinging their brand of **** at us than solving any problems. They've transformed us into enablers of the worst. We commend greed, we expect grift, we reward thieves and we respect scum. And somehow we always expect that it's the other guy's fault. 

It's like being surprised by a hill on a roller coaster. another HILL? OMG!!!!

 

The ONLY fix, as i see it, is if we all drop out. Turn it off. Turn all of it off and think for ourselves for a change.

IMO, if people do think for themselves, answers become obvious.

 

Sharpen the guillotine. Put it to work. 

 

~Bang

[The Evil Genius]

Bang - are you having a Timothy Leary type of moment? 

[chipwhich]

If anything comes from all this. I hope they dump a bunch of the different non-profit subgroups from the tax laws. People complain how many pages there are and how its a waste of time and effort. It should be easy, non-profit shouldn't be easy to get...and it shouldn't allow their mini-pacs to do whatever.

 

p.s. - I still think the IRS is in the wrong here. Even if 90 out of 100 applications were from Tea Party type groups.

 

Yeah, the thought has occurred to me that these political groups wouldn;t NEED to be tax exempt, if they didn't HAVE a profit. 

 

If the Tea Party Partiot Citizens Progressive Committee of BFE doesn't make a profit, then their taxes are zero, anyway. 

 

But I assume that I'm missing something. 

 

Tea Party Patriot Citizens aside, when you collect money it is taxable.  All expenses aren't tax free.  Expenses don't wipe out collected revenues based on what type of expenses they are.  So you have apply to be tax exempt so that your expenses are tax free.

[Bang]

Bang - are you having a Timothy Leary type of moment? 

Had that moment long ago

 

 

But really,, the usuals are defending their usual turfs,, whether it is in this thread about this scandal, or another thread about a supposed scandal, or anything at all that can be made to look like a scandal.

 

the glee in which we pursue our own downfall really is disheartening.

We really don't give a **** how embarrassing we are. We don't have any shame at all.

 

~Bang

[@DCGoldPants]

I can see an interview with Issa years from now where he's asked "Where do you think you went wrong in your IRS investigation?"

 

 

Lindsey Graham: 'No Evidence' White House Directed IRS To Target Conservatives

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Monday became the latest Republican
to reject Darrell Issa's comments that White House press secretary Jay
Carney is a "paid liar" in relation to the IRS controversy. But Graham
went further than his Republican colleagues, saying there's no evidence
that the White House ordered the tax agency to target conservative
groups.

During an interview with "Kilmeade and Friends" on Fox News Radio,
Graham said Issa, a California Republican, was a key player in
investigating the matter as the chairman of the House Oversight
Committee. But, he conceded, "you can go too far" with personal
allegations.

"Let's not make it personal. Jay Carney is not the issue here. He's
the spokesman for the White House," Graham told host Brian Kilmeade,
adding that it "never helps" to resort to personal name-calling.

On Sunday, Issa accused the White House of ordering the IRS to target conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status in 2012, even though a 48-page report
by the IRS Inspector General and testimony from multiple IRS officials
cleared the White House of any involvement. Issa has nonetheless
insisted IRS agents were being "ordered from Washington." He
specifically directed his criticism at Carney, who has maintained the
administration played no role in the targeting and only learned of the
matter once an investigation was complete.

"Their paid liar, their spokesperson -- picture behind -- he’s still
making up things about what happens and calling this a local rogue,"
Issa said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) also pushed back
on Issa's "liar" charge during a TV appearance Monday morning. But
Graham took things a step further and disagreed with Issa that there was
any conclusive evidence linking the Obama administration directly to
the tax agency's actions.

 

More from the link.
                                   

[Larry]

But, the lack of evidence merely proves the fact that it's being covered up.

[deejaydana]

we still have a ways to go to see how high this targeting of conservative groups reaches but it just does not look good for the Administration. Some of the stories coming out do show, ostensibly, criminal behaviour. I would ask this of the Obama apologists though: how would you respond if Liberal groups had been targeted in the ways that are now coming to light? This type of behaviour form the gov't is just completely unacceptable and this story warrants ALL of the coverage it's getting (or not depending on news source). I know this: this thread has gotten really scare on the usual left minded members chiming in. I'm really enjoying that after all the flak the Tea Party has taken the past 2 years.

[Larry]

we still have a ways to go to see how high this targeting of conservative groups reaches but it just does not look good for the Administration.

 

 

"There's no evidence whatsoever, and even noted Republicans are saying so.  But, not only am I firmly convinced that, if we just keep digging, we'll find dirt on the Administration.  I'm convinced that we already have." 

[deejaydana]

keep hoping Larry. Look how many times the Administration has changed their story in the span of two weeks time. Things are heating up, let's see how they handle it when it creeps up the chain of command. two weeks back they stated it was isolated to the Cincy office when that NEVER could have been the truth. It's gonna be a fun ride.

[mistertim]

keep hoping Larry. Look how many times the Administration has changed their story in the span of two weeks time. Things are heating up, let's see how they handle it when it creeps up the chain of command. two weeks back they stated it was isolated to the Cincy office when that NEVER could have been the truth. It's gonna be a fun ride.

 

So no evidence has been found indicating that the White House directed the IRS to do this, and even some conservatives are now admitting it. You counter by essentially saying "well, but maybe they did it anyway, there's still time to find evidence". Larry responds by repeating the fact that no evidence has been found and noted Republicans are now admitting it. Your rebuttal is saying the same thing you said before in a slightly different way.

 

And its Larry who is "hoping"?

[@DCGoldPants]

Accuse first and ask questions later

By Dana Milbank,

  A third House committee joined the stampede to examine the IRS on Monday, and its chairman did exactly

what you would expect somebody to do before launching a fair and

impartial investigation: He went on Fox News Channel and implicated the

White House.

                      

Asked by Fox’s Bill Hemmer what he hoped to learn at Monday afternoon’s hearing, Appropriations Committee Chairman

(R-Ky.) offered this bit of pre-hearing analysis:

 

“Of course, the enemies list out of the White House that IRS was

engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the conservative

political viewpoint across the country — an enemies list that rivals

that of another president some time ago.”

It was a sentence in

need of a verb but packed with innuendo. And it is part of an approach

by House Republicans that seems to follow the Lewis Carroll school of

jurisprudence. Not only are they placing the sentence before the

verdict, they’re putting the verdict before the trial.

Rep.

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee,

announced his conclusions on CNN Sunday, declaring White House press

secretary Jay Carney a “paid liar” for saying that the targeting of

conservative groups was the work of a “rogue” element operating out of

the IRS’s Cincinnati office. “The reason that Lois Lerner tried to take

the fifth is not because there is a rogue in Cincinnati,”

.

“It’s because this is a problem that was coordinated in all likelihood

right out of Washington headquarters and we’re getting to proving it.”

Getting to proving it?

 

Congressional investigators have not produced evidence to link the

harassment of conservative groups to the White House or to higher-ups in

the Obama administration. But the lack of evidence that any political

appointee was involved hasn’t stopped the lawmakers from assuming that

it simply must be true. And so, they are going to hold hearings until

they confirm their conclusions.

               

 

 

More from the link.

 

Crazy thing is....they may be right. But they are going so far ahead of this that their chosen methods almost always backfires.

[Bang]

Guilty until proven innocent.

 

More great American values.

 

~Bang