IRS official admits she is bad a math. Can't produce any examples of liberal groups being audited.
Obama retaliates against State Department whistleblowers.
This is far more aggregius than what happened at Watergate. Why has the press not held Emporer Obamas feet to the fire?
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:
You also realize after 20 tears at State, the whistleblower had a career going no where beforethe attack, right?
You do realize that the wisteblower's personal life is completely irrelevant, and that intelligent people view your bringing it up as a red herring, right?
you are an idiot so die wrote:
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:You also realize after 20 tears at State, the whistleblower had a career going no where beforethe attack, right?
You do realize that the wisteblower's personal life is completely irrelevant, and that intelligent people view your bringing it up as a red herring, right?
Putting him at a desk job because nothing else is open for his ability level is neither a red herring nor punishment you nit wit.
"Aggregius"?!
Yet another child left behind.
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:
You also realize after 20 tears at State, the whistleblower had a career going no where beforethe attack, right?
First of all, what on earth does the whistleblower Hicks have to do with the IRS specifically targeting conservative groups? Secondly, Hicks was 2nd in command beyond Amb. Stevesn, so I would hardly call that "going no where". Lastly, attempts to diminish Hicks as a Republican hack are ridiculous since he twice voted for Obama for President and supported Hillary during the primary.
The problem is being cause by PACs masquerading as tea-party non-profits. Political groups do not qualify as non-profits. PACs are using the tea-party claim as being for the better good, and therefore should be allowed non-profit tax goodies.
Conservative groups are not being targeted. There are just a lot of them trying to pay less taxes, and burden those who do pay taxes with more of the tax load.
what on earth wrote:
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:You also realize after 20 tears at State, the whistleblower had a career going no where beforethe attack, right?
First of all, what on earth does the whistleblower Hicks have to do with the IRS specifically targeting conservative groups? Secondly, Hicks was 2nd in command beyond Amb. Stevesn, so I would hardly call that "going no where". Lastly, attempts to diminish Hicks as a Republican hack are ridiculous since he twice voted for Obama for President and supported Hillary during the primary.
All the liberal lies are catching up with them. Now they dug themselves so deep with so many lies that they have to lie about the lies they lied about. As with all liars the lies pile up to the point where the liars start to choke on their own lies.
Karma has busted the door open. The house of lies is crashing down on the liars now. Even many of the loyal liars are running for cover and leaving the originators of said lies holding the bag of lies. I see impeachment hearings on the horizon. And that's no lie.
Pretend PACs wrote:
Conservative groups are not being targeted.
So why did the IRS come out and apologize to conservative groups for being targeted? See, fools like you will never stop your lies until they strangle your neck and you can no longer breathe. When you're lying there some day dying of throat cancer look back on all of your lies and ask yourself if you wish you had done things differently.
Because routing tax exemption applications for review simply based on the words Tea Party or Patriot is inappropriate. On the other hand, so is applying for tax exemption if you are a lobbying organization. So the IRS needs to do these reviews for more organizations in general on both sides.
The apology was necessary. This is not a major scandal. You can be sure that Congress will try to make it one instead of serving the American people, however.
Tea-party organizations were sent letters of inquiry demanding information that would seldom if ever be demanded of any other applicant in the process.
The IRS demanded lists of donors, names of spouses and family members, detailed information about political views and associations — all of that “under penalties of perjury.”
Many applicants dropped out of the process.
The questions were remarkably invasive: For example, the IRS demanded to know not only whether political candidates participated in public forums conducted by the groups, but which issues were discussed, along with copies of any literature distributed at the forum and material published on websites. (The IRS has been less forthcoming with its own materials related to this investigation.)
If the organizations collected dues, the IRS demanded to know how much they were. It demanded everything down to the résumés of employees.
The inquiry was not limited to members of the organization, its executives, or its directors, but included even their family members: The IRS demanded to know — again, under penalty of perjury — whether any of their family members might be thinking about running for office. Its demand for the names of all donors — and all recipients of grants — is in violation of IRS policy.
Lobbying organizations of all kinds should be screened ruthlessly before being allowed not to pay their taxes like all for-profit organizations.
The IRS operated for political purposes?
I am shocked. We have such an incorruptible system.
Nothing new here wrote:
We have such an incorruptible system.
+1
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:
You do realize the IRS doesnt answer to the Prez, correct?
It's fun making up facts, isn't it?
The IRS is not an independent agency. The commissioner serves at the pleasure of the President and can be removed for any reason. 26 USC § 7803(a)(1)(D).
Adam Smith wrote:
Tea-party organizations were sent letters of inquiry demanding information that would seldom if ever be demanded of any other applicant in the process.
The IRS demanded lists of donors, names of spouses and family members, detailed information about political views and associations — all of that “under penalties of perjury.”
Many applicants dropped out of the process.
The questions were remarkably invasive: For example, the IRS demanded to know not only whether political candidates participated in public forums conducted by the groups, but which issues were discussed, along with copies of any literature distributed at the forum and material published on websites. (The IRS has been less forthcoming with its own materials related to this investigation.)
If the organizations collected dues, the IRS demanded to know how much they were. It demanded everything down to the résumés of employees.
The inquiry was not limited to members of the organization, its executives, or its directors, but included even their family members: The IRS demanded to know — again, under penalty of perjury — whether any of their family members might be thinking about running for office. Its demand for the names of all donors — and all recipients of grants — is in violation of IRS policy.
The demand for the name of the donors, which as you said violates IRS policy, is why an apology is not nearly sufficient and heads should roll. Last year, when Tea Party groups were accusing the IRS of unfairly singling them out, the IRS vehemently denied the accusations. This administration is beyond corrupt. However, having grown up in Illinois, I am used to this style of politcs.
what on earth wrote:
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:You also realize after 20 tears at State, the whistleblower had a career going no where beforethe attack, right?
First of all, what on earth does the whistleblower Hicks have to do with the IRS specifically targeting conservative groups? Secondly, Hicks was 2nd in command beyond Amb. Stevesn, so I would hardly call that "going no where". Lastly, attempts to diminish Hicks as a Republican hack are ridiculous since he twice voted for Obama for President and supported Hillary during the primary.
The OP is the one who brought it up, but I assume he's suggesting some dark plan by the WH to control everything.
He's been arounfd a long time and if Hicks hasnt been giben a top job, he probably wont get one now. I'm sure you are aware there are only so many # 1 and 2 slots available.
I've never claimed he was a Republican hack. I do claim that people saying its worse than watergate are either gop hacks or too young to remember watergate.
800 dude wrote:
Uncle Pervy not signed in wrote:You do realize the IRS doesnt answer to the Prez, correct?
It's fun making up facts, isn't it?
The IRS is not an independent agency. The commissioner serves at the pleasure of the President and can be removed for any reason. 26 USC § 7803(a)(1)(D).
My apologies on that one, I forgot the IRS reports to Treasury. That said, Doug Shulman was a Bush appointee. I hardly think he was working a behind the scene plan with Obama to target the tea party.
Inappropriate, yes. Dark Obama plan, sorry, no.
I also do think any group, unions, churches, pacs, should be carefully looked at before getting tax exempt status.
No worries. And I agree that it doesn't look like this went very far up. I still think it's worth investigating.
Karma has busted the door open. The house of lies is crashing down on the liars now. Even many of the loyal liars are running for cover and leaving the originators of said lies holding the bag of lies. I see impeachment hearings on the horizon. And that's no lie.[/quote]
I'm quite sure if Bush and Cheney have been able to avoid war crimes charges, this isnt goimg to sink Obama.
Well stated. If there is a pattern of certain claims being linked with a greater likelihood of tax evasion that places you in a higher risk category. You are then more likely to be audited. (Its good efficient utilization of IRS resources.) Tea party groups claiming to be nonpolitical certainly meets the criterion.
Pretend PACs wrote:
The problem is being cause by PACs masquerading as tea-party non-profits. Political groups do not qualify as non-profits. PACs are using the tea-party claim as being for the better good, and therefore should be allowed non-profit tax goodies.
Conservative groups are not being targeted. There are just a lot of them trying to pay less taxes, and burden those who do pay taxes with more of the tax load.