Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Bad week for the USA - IRS corruption.

Bad week for the USA - IRS corruption.
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2013, 07:35 PM
 
As information comes to light, I feel some of my worst fears regarding abuse of power have been partially realized.

I'd like to start a discussion on the implication of the IRS corruption fouling the democratic process, as well as recent statements from mid-level managers that appear to be false.

Who do you feel should be held accountable for this corruption? What should be done about it and how do we prevent this from happening again?

I take solace that congressmen from both sides of the isle have condemned the act, though it troubles me deeply that such corruption went on for so long under this administration. Thoughts?
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 08:09 AM
 
The official word on this is that as part of an effort to properly ensure tax exemotion status was granted or not, a "streamlined" process was set up in the office that validates such status. Good so far...except that the official word goes on to say that the people in that office did not pay attention to how their actions would be perceived by outsiders. They were "not sufficiently sensitive" to how their actions, questionnaires, etc. came across. I will definitely buy that part. There is also supposedly the issue that there were a huge number of applications for status in the last couple of years, and the legal lines between "social welfare organizations" and political entities are pretty vague.

Given all of that, I think that IRS had a mid-level problem that wasn't caught by their high-level management. I also think the fact that most of the top positions involved are held by "acting" rather than permanent appointees is a major issue. I wonder if the GOP might be sitting on confirmation of those positions, and at this point are now reconsidering that strategy...

I seriously doubt this was an officially sanctioned act, but if people get stupid to this extent in IRS, I am really uncomfortable with how the whole agency is being managed and supervised. And it can't be a partisan fix, either. Everybody needs to feel that the IRS is agnostic and fair (at least politically). But this is a good time to fix more than just poor oversight. Like maybe just about everything about the IRS should be reviewed and overhauled.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 10:00 AM
 
Even more troubling is that the IRS LEAKED some of the data to liberal organizations.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...rvative-Groups
( Last edited by BadKosh; May 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 02:13 PM
 
There are letters from (D) Senators pressuring the IRS to after right of center groups.

Senate Democrats Pushed for IRS Tea Party Snooping Before Criticizing It - Brian Walsh (usnews.com)

From 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/us...ics/07irs.html

WASHINGTON — With growing scrutiny of the role of tax-exempt groups in political campaigns, Congressional Republicans are pushing back against Democrats by warning about the possible misuse of the Internal Revenue Service to audit conservative groups.
Related


Leading Republicans are suggesting that a senior official in the Obama administration may have improperly accessed the tax records of Koch Industries, an oil company whose owners are major conservative donors.

And the Republicans are also upset about an I.R.S. review requested by Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who leads the Finance Committee, into the political activities of tax-exempt groups. Such a review threatens to “chill the legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights,” wrote two Republican senators, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Jon Kyl of Arizona, in a letter sent to the I.R.S. on Wednesday.

Republicans were quick to point out that the I.R.S. was put under tight restrictions about access to Americans’ tax returns as a result of political shenanigans by the Nixon administration involving tax audits.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 04:17 PM
 
Where are the defenders on this? Why is there silence from The Left Side of the forum this time? Remember when this type of thing was dismissed as tinfoil hat stuff?

Wow, it turns out that some of the conspiracy theories weren't just theories.
He can be fixed -- you can't.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 05:19 PM
 
NAACP members and leaders watching the excitement over the IRS’ alleged targeting of Tea Party groups might be wondering where the outrage was in 2004, when the IRS, then during the George W. Bush administration, not only targeted the NAACP for extra scrutiny, they hit them with the tool that has made Americans fear the revenue agency most: an audit.
Still, the focus on the NAACP, and whether it deserved its tax exempt status, extended beyond the IRS to Republican lawmakers and the Tea Party itself.

As early as December 2000, Republican members of Congress sent letters to the IRS commissioner, Charles O. Rossotti, questioning whether the NAACP should keep its 501(c)3 designation, based on statements from leaders of the group questioning the Supreme Court decision that placed George W. Bush in the White House. Some of those members who wrote to the IRS in 2000, like Maine Sen. Susan Collins, are now calling the alleged targeting of conservative groups by the IRS “absolutely chilling.”

And after the civil rights organization passed a resolution in July 2010 during their annual convention in Kansas City, calling on tea party groups to repudiate racist elements within their organizations, tea partiers and their allies on Capitol Hill reacted angrily, with a group called the St. Louis Tea Party passing a counter-resolution, calling on the IRS to revoke the NAACP’s tax-exempt status.

The current leadership of the NAACP says the group’s past experience with politicization of the IRS makes them sensitive to Republicans’ concerns.

“As an organization targeted by the IRS under the last Bush Administration, we know all too well the capacity for the IRS to abuse its power and the chilling impact that can have,” NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous told theGrio in a statement Tuesday. “The recent allegations of bias, if true, cannot be tolerated in a free society.”

“We are pleased that the president has acknowledged the need for a full and comprehensive investigation,” Jealous said. “If abuse is uncovered, the responsible parties must be held ‘fully accountable’ for their actions. The IRS plays a critical role in our society and must not engage in political discrimination.”

The question is, whether the same outrage applies when it comes to the clear abuse of the charitable designation in the tax code by political groups, or when the targets are not conservatives.
Republican outrage over IRS targeting Tea Party didn’t extend to NAACP | theGrio



OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 05:52 PM
 
Georgetown University professor and MSNBC contributor Michael Eric Dyson revealed on MSNBC’s Now on Wednesday that he has been the target of political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service during the administration of President George W. Bush. Dyson claimed that, after criticizing Bush on television for his government’s response to Hurricane Katrina, he was audited for five consecutive years by the IRS.

In a discussion about the unfolding scandal in which IRS agents are implicated in forcing conservative groups to undergo more scrutiny in requests for tax-exempt status than liberal groups, the MSNBC panel agreed that added scrutiny across the board would be welcome.
MSNBC Contributor Claims He Was Audited 5 Years In A Row By IRS For Criticizing Bush | Mediaite



OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 05:53 PM
 
The thread title is wrong. This isn't corruption, this is abuse of power. Big difference.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
As information comes to light, I feel some of my worst fears regarding abuse of power have been partially realized.
They were fully realized years ago, but conservatives just don't care about anyone else but themselves.

Originally Posted by finboy View Post
Where are the defenders on this? Why is there silence from The Left Side of the forum this time?
Why do you imagine any liberals or leftists would want to defend this?

Remember when this type of thing was dismissed as tinfoil hat stuff?
No. Because liberals complained of being targets in the past. The real question is: why do conservatives only complain about abuse of power when they are the targets?

But that's like every other question I want to ask conservatives. Like, why do they only complain about deficits when a Democrat is President, but never when a Republican is President? Or why do they only complain about government handouts when they go to poor people, but not when they go to big businesses like oil companies? Why are expansions of Medicare ok when they go to Republican-voting old people, but not to Democrat-voting poor people? And on and on.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 06:39 PM
 
We already know that the IRS developed “inappropriate criteria” in flagging for review more than 90 Tea Party groups that were applying for tax-exempt status as 501(c)(4)s. But did any liberal groups receive heavy scrutiny, or did they get a free pass?

Some new reporting from Bloomberg suggests that at least three Democratic-leaning groups faced similar inquiries from the IRS:


The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
One of those groups, Emerge America, saw its tax-exempt status denied, forcing it to disclose its donors and pay some taxes. None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected.

Progress Texas, another of the organizations, faced the same lines of questioning as the Tea Party groups from the same IRS office that issued letters to the Republican-friendly applicants. A third group, Clean Elections Texas, which supports public funding of campaigns, also received IRS inquiries.
This doesn’t get the IRS off the hook, however. Legal experts tend to agree that the IRS should carefully scrutinize all would-be 501(c)(4)s that tread the line between “social welfare” and politics. But, they add, it’s important for the IRS to stay neutral and not appear like it’s putting an unfair focus on certain political views. That’s why the IRS Cincinnati office’s push to flag all Tea Party groups for review was deemed “inappropriate.”

“It’s part of [the IRS's] job to look for organizations that may be more likely to have too much campaign intervention,” Loyola law professor Ellen Aprill said yesterday. “But it is important to try to make these criteria as politically neutral as possible.”
Meanwhile, there’s still the disparity that Nicholas Confessore reported here. At the same time the IRS was investigating smaller groups applying for 501(c)(4) status, it gave a pass to larger organizations like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS or Bill Burton’s Priorities USA that were allowed to receive anonymous donations — groups that were overtly political and heavily involved in the 2012 campaign.
Report: The IRS also targeted at least three liberal groups



OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 06:59 PM
 
Sweet!
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 07:14 PM
 
We can only hope!

"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Snow-i  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 09:19 PM
 
Well as long as they are equally corrupt!

400+ conservative groups and three liberal groups. No bias here!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 09:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
But that's like every other question I want to ask conservatives. Like, why do they only complain about deficits when a Democrat is President, but never when a Republican is President?
But Obama promised Hope, and Change, and Transparency, to be the anti-Bush.

Seems like he's just a liar after all. Knew that from day one.

-t
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2013, 10:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Well as long as they are equally corrupt!

400+ conservative groups and three liberal groups. No bias here!
That wasn't my point which I surmise you already know. The IRS more than any federal agency should be evenhanded and neutral. That being said it stands to reason that if these groups are self described as "conservative" or "progressive" then there is reason to believe that it's raison d'être is "political" and not "social welfare". And therefore subject to extra scrutiny.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 01:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Well as long as they are equally corrupt!

400+ conservative groups and three liberal groups. No bias here!
Proves the point. Less than 1% false negatives shows they must have worked extra hard NOT to hit liberal groups.

-t
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 04:19 AM
 
Here's a funny. I've been audited 5 of the last 7 years, the last two years I haven't been since I "changed gears" to match my financial strategies with the current administration. I talked about this back in 2009 and everyone told me I was batshit crazy, appears I wasn't.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 08:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Here's a funny. I've been audited 5 of the last 7 years, the last two years I haven't been since I "changed gears" to match my financial strategies with the current administration. I talked about this back in 2009 and everyone told me I was batshit crazy, appears I wasn't.
Am I to take this to mean you now spend twice as much as you earn and as such the IRS under this Administration is happy with you?
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 08:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Well as long as they are equally corrupt!

400+ conservative groups and three liberal groups. No bias here!


Call me cynical, but under this Administration it'd be just as easy to conclude that someone from the IRS contrived the three "liberal" groups and denied their status to cover the 400+ Conservative group denials. I mean... that's just how transparent this bs has become. if you've approved several Tea Party organizations and denied others, you're at least in dire need of some standardization. BTW, the EPA is doing the same thing in denying conservative watchdog groups their FOI requests and fee waivers more than 90% of the time while granting the requests for 92% of "green" groups. This is the type of culture that starts at the top, no direct involvement mind you (there never is right?), but an environment riddled with these kinds of abuses and while we've all been citing how partisan this Administration is to deaf ears, we're finally getting some empirical data to show it's much worse than once thought. It's across the board.

You can bet the "BUT BUSH!" crowd is going to be crawling out from the woodwork on this one, but we're talking about a whole new league of egregious by the second-most important bureaucracy in government. Using this arm for political motives is bad when regarding two or three groups, 400+ is much worse, much more visible, and a problem I'd say is out of control.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 08:45 AM
 
Oh and with regard to the NAACP, they've been rendered nothing more than the new KKK in better attire. If they claim a problem with being denied particular tax status, I'm going to need the information from someone other than them.

Wait! You mean they were audited?!? Cry me a river and then come on in, the water's fine.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 09:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Am I to take this to mean you now spend twice as much as you earn and as such the IRS under this Administration is happy with you?
Umm, no. However, I do invest and follow a financial strategy that's more compatible with a Left-leaning administration. Flexibility is key, otherwise you become mired in old habits and stop building wealth. The fashionable trend with the top .1% is to bow to "progressive" reform, avoiding confrontation with the most vocal members of that movement. Go with what they want, provide backing for that agenda, and grandstand for their causes. That produces the most net gain, because it's easier to fill your pockets when the cameras are pointing the other way.

What? You don't think the super wealthy people standing on the Left actually care about the mainstream Liberal agenda, do you?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 11:58 AM
 
Is this the same IRS that will be the enforcement arm of ObamaCare?
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 12:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post


Call me cynical, but under this Administration it'd be just as easy to conclude that someone from the IRS contrived the three "liberal" groups and denied their status to cover the 400+ Conservative group denials. I mean... that's just how transparent this bs has become. if you've approved several Tea Party organizations and denied others, you're at least in dire need of some standardization.
I'm going to have to stop you right there. The reports out there make it clear that no Tea Party groups were DENIED 501(c)(4) Status. The issue is that their applications underwent additional scrutiny during the application process. And one of the progressive groups cited above was actually denied. That being said, the entire situation is a complete farce brought on by the Citizens United decision.

News that employees at the Internal Revenue Service targeted groups with “Tea Party” or “patriot” in their name for special scrutiny has raised pious alarms among some lawmakers and editorial writers.

Yes, the I.R.S. may have been worse than clumsy in considering an avalanche of applications for nonprofit status under the tax code, and that deserves scrutiny whether or not the agency’s employees were spurred by partisan motives. After all, some of these “tea party” groups are most likely not innocent nonprofit organizations devoted to the cultural significance of hot beverages — or to other, more civic, virtues. Rather, they and others are groups that may be illegally spending a majority of their resources on political activity while manipulating the tax code to hide their donors and evade taxes (the unwritten rule being that no more than 49 percent of a group’s resources can be used for political purposes).

The near vertical ascent in political spending by these “dark money” groups was prompted by the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in the Citizens United case, among others, freeing them to be more active in this realm.

And it’s a bipartisan scandal, though it’s hard to tell that judging by the names some groups have adopted — as the I.R.S. should know. Can you tell which of these lean left and which ones right? Patriot Majority USA, Crossroads GPS, American Future Fund and the Citizens for Strength and Security Fund. (Nos. 1 and 4 are liberal, 2 and 3 are conservative.)


The majority of the organizations that appear to be most politically active — from groups that run their own ads, like American Action Network and Americans for Prosperity, to the mysterious Center to Protect Patient Rights, which distributes money to other political groups — already have exempt status. There’s little evidence that the I.R.S. is looking into these groups.

The latest news will make that job more difficult. It’s unfortunate and unacceptable that these groups may have received more scrutiny and suspicion than they deserved — the I.R.S. reportedly even asked what books their leaders were reading.

But even more regrettable is the long-term damage to the credibility of the I.R.S. as an impartial arbiter of whether organizations merit tax-exempt status. This will be difficult to undo, particularly because of the secrecy required for the agency to effectively examine organizations without generating doubts about them, as well as to prevent other organizations from coming up with strategies to evade scrutiny in the future.
The Real I.R.S. Scandal | NYTimes.com

OAW
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 12:51 PM
 
But it BECAME political when the IRS agents GAVE the information on the conservative groups to leftists.

Face it, the IRS agents and the entire food chain mixed up in this need to do JAIL TIME as a harsh warning. Forget about those pensions too!

Lets make it take 5 times longer for conservative groups to get up and running, AND lets deny any pro-life group that status since Planned Parenthood has requested us to do that for them. I can't wait to see what happens next. PURE BS LIBERAL POLITICS.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 01:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Oh and with regard to the NAACP, they've been rendered nothing more than the new KKK in better attire. If they claim a problem with being denied particular tax status, I'm going to need the information from someone other than them.

Wait! You mean they were audited?!? Cry me a river and then come on in, the water's fine.
To equate the nation's oldest civil rights organization with the nation's oldest domestic terrorist organization is beyond the pale. You're not generally one to engage in such blatant right-wing trolling. Quite frankly, because you're much better than that. So I'm not sure what that's all about. In any event, let's be clear on the reason for raising the example. These same GOP lawmakers who are OUTRAGED over this recent bad behavior by the IRS were not only SILENT when the IRS targeted the NAACP, prominent black churches, and other civil rights organizations that were critical of Bush Administration policies regarding education, the economy, and the Iraq War ... many of them EXPLICITLY REQUESTED IRS investigations of these organizations which opposed their policies. It's one thing to take the position that the IRS should be APOLITICAL. It certainly should be in my view. All the time. Period. But it is RANK HYPOCRISY to demand the IRS investigate organizations that oppose you on a POLITICAL basis ... and then get your panties all in a bunch on national TV when the same kind of shenanigans comes back your way. I'm just saying ....

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; May 16, 2013 at 02:41 PM. )
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 01:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
But it BECAME political when the IRS agents GAVE the information on the conservative groups to leftists.
Haven't heard anything about that. A citation from an actual news organization* would be appreciated.

OAW

* - In other words, not some Glenn Beck/Alex Jones type of conspiracy theory site.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 01:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Haven't heard anything about that. A citation from an actual news organization* would be appreciated.

OAW

* - In other words, not some Glenn Beck/Alex Jones type of conspiracy theory site.
How about from the groups that received the applications?.

IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs From Conservative Groups - ProPublica

http://www.propublica.org/article/ir...ntial-docs\\In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)

On Friday, Lois Lerner, the head of the division on tax-exempt organizations, apologized to Tea Party and other conservative groups because the IRS’ Cincinnati office had unfairly targeted them. Tea Party groups had complained in early 2012 that they were being sent overly intrusive questionnaires in response to their applications.

That scrutiny appears to have gone beyond Tea Party groups to applicants saying they wanted to educate the public to “make America a better place to live” or that criticized how the country was being run, according to a draft audit cited by many outlets. The full audit, by the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration, will reportedly be released this week. (ProPublica was not contacted by the inspector general’s office.) (UPDATE May 14: The audit has been released.)
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 01:32 PM
 
Then there is The IRS denying/delaying non profit status to Pro Life groups at the behest of Planned Parenthood.

Broadening IRS Victims Include Pro-Life Advocates, As Congress Investigates
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
PURE BS LIBERAL POLITICS.
Calm down, Jethro. If you'd take off your rose colored glasses, you'd see that both sides do it. It's pure partisan politics at its best.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Fair enough. Clearly the law was violated on nine occasions in this situation. Whether intentionally or accidentally remains to be seen as evidenced by this exchange:

“It has come to our attention that you are in receipt of application materials of organizations that have not been recognized by the IRS as tax-exempt,” wrote one spokeswoman, Michelle Eldridge. She cited a law saying that publishing unauthorized returns or return information was a felony punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 and imprisonment of up to five years, or both.

In response, ProPublica’s then-general manager and now president, Richard Tofel, said, "ProPublica believes that the information we are publishing is not barred by the statute cited by the IRS, and it is clear to us that there is a strong First Amendment interest in its publication.”
OAW
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Calm down, Jethro. If you'd take off your rose colored glasses, you'd see that both sides do it. It's pure partisan politics at its best.
Um, NO! Its NOT the same. Its a matter of scope. The claim used by many leftists has been "well the Republicans did it too" or the ever popular "Both sides are the same". So much for the liberals claiming the repubs were wearing those tinfoil hats. Seems WE were right and the libs were wrong and poor judges of people and situations.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Um, NO! Its NOT the same. Its a matter of scope. The claim used by many leftists has been "well the Republicans did it too" or the ever popular "Both sides are the same". So much for the liberals claiming the repubs were wearing those tinfoil hats. Seems WE were right and the libs were wrong and poor judges of people and situations.
If you define "a matter of scope" as the last two years then perhaps you are right. OTOH, if you look at the history of the IRS across Administrations it's another ball of wax.

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Oh and with regard to the NAACP, they've been rendered nothing more than the new KKK in better attire.
I think I'm gonna vomit.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 02:54 PM
 
We need to come up with something for them to burn on lawns.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 03:06 PM
 
I sometimes say I regard ebuddy as MacNN's intelligent conservative. I'm gonna stop saying that.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 04:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Um, NO! Its NOT the same.
Um, YES. It IS the same.

Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Its a matter of scope.
You're right. Put it into context across multiple administrations since Roosevelt. Using the executive office to abuse various departments has been an integral part of U.S. politics at least for the past 100 years. It is a disturbing practice, but it's an old one. It isn't new.

Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Seems WE were right and the libs were wrong and poor judges of people and situations.
Yeah, "you all" were right. Using the FBI, CIA, and IRS to try and destroy the lives of civil rights activists such as Martin Luther King and Carrie Catt. You know a bad person when you see them, being such a good judge of character and all. Damn women and negros gettin' all uppity, how dare they.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 05:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
The thread title is wrong. This isn't corruption, this is abuse of power. Big difference.
Actually, abuse of power is a form of corruption. True, it is different from what most think of as corruption in public office, which usually involves graft or other personal gain, but any misuses of office, whether for personal or political purposes, are still corruption.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Yeah, "you all" were right. Using the FBI, CIA, and IRS to try and destroy the lives of civil rights activists such as Martin Luther King
Newsflash: that was JFK and RFK.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 07:46 PM
 
And LBJ
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 08:01 PM
 
More like an out-of-control J. Edgar Hoover primarily.

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
More like an out-of-control J. Edgar Hoover primarily.

OAW
Hoover kept tabs on his political opponents, including the Kennedys. But sorry, the Kennedys own what they did to MLK entirely. (Well, of course in typical D-party whitewash of their own horrible history and blame it on someone else fashion they don't 'own' it, but I'm talking about in *reality* they own it.

The FBI and Martin Luther King - David J. Garrow - The Atlantic

On October 10, 1963, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 09:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
Hoover kept tabs on his political opponents, including the Kennedys. But sorry, the Kennedys own what they did to MLK entirely.
Do you not see that Kennedy's authorization was due to pressure from Hoover given your own words here? Your own citation here goes into great detail about how Kennedy did so "reluctantly" after considerable efforts by the FBI investigating him as a supposed "Communist sympathizer".

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2013, 10:04 PM
 
Yeah, yeah we know. There's always a "b-but so-and-so made him do it!" excuse for every abuse perpetrated by a D. Hoover made him do it, Bush made him do it, blah blah blah.

I'm sure Hoover made RFK go on all the communist which hunts that he gleefully took part in too. "Are you nah or have you evah been a membah of the communist pahty..." you can pretty much quote that phrase with a Kennedy accent. Let's blast McCarthy (R), but forever give a pass to the( D) who named him as godfather to his children, engaged in the same stuff and worse straight out of the executive branch. Who was it McCarthy wiretapped again, I forget.

Blatantly violating the constitution and abusing government power against citizens is perfectly okay... so long as there's a D behind it. In fact, just blame Republicans.

But don't worry, it's not like anyone is surprised that the side that's always granting a pass to big government for whatever abuses it perpetrates so long as they think some handouts are forthcoming would really ever hold any of their sacred cows accountable for anything.

Some things never change.
     
Snow-i  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 12:35 AM
 
IRS official who oversaw unit targeting Tea Party now heads ObamaCare office | Fox News

Simply astounding. This ****er was going to head up ObamaCare enforcement?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 08:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
I'm going to have to stop you right there. The reports out there make it clear that no Tea Party groups were DENIED 501(c)(4) Status. The issue is that their applications underwent additional scrutiny during the application process. And one of the progressive groups cited above was actually denied. That being said, the entire situation is a complete farce brought on by the Citizens United decision.
17 months delay is in fact denial. Reports of Tea Party organizations changing their names to the likes of "GreenHouse Initiatives" getting approved within 3 weeks... They were trying to get information out to the electorate in time for the 2012 election. A 17 month delay was a denial, plain and simple. They know it and you know it. Notwithstanding the intrusive and illegal requests for donor information and 3 years of all news articles on them and the like from these organizations intimidated a large number of them away -- denial. This is why folks are losing their jobs, albeit one month prior to resignation anyway. Social welfare --- don't believe me? It counts and in this regard to (c)(4), always has. You can't pick and choose based on the movements that offend you most. That's why people are losing their jobs. Not far enough, but proof their pudding is being served daily.

The rest is just shameless apologetics. The fact of the matter is that an arm of the Federal Government was using lopsided criteria to silence detractors of this Administration and its policies.
( Last edited by ebuddy; May 17, 2013 at 08:41 AM. )
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 08:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
To equate the nation's oldest civil rights organization with the nation's oldest domestic terrorist organization is beyond the pale. You're not generally one to engage in such blatant right-wing trolling. Quite frankly, because you're much better than that. So I'm not sure what that's all about. In any event, let's be clear on the reason for raising the example. These same GOP lawmakers who are OUTRAGED over this recent bad behavior by the IRS were not only SILENT when the IRS targeted the NAACP, prominent black churches, and other civil rights organizations that were critical of Bush Administration policies regarding education, the economy, and the Iraq War ... many of them EXPLICITLY REQUESTED IRS investigations of these organizations which opposed their policies. It's one thing to take the position that the IRS should be APOLITICAL. It certainly should be in my view. All the time. Period. But it is RANK HYPOCRISY to demand the IRS investigate organizations that oppose you on a POLITICAL basis ... and then get your panties all in a bunch on national TV when the same kind of shenanigans comes back your way. I'm just saying ....

OAW
Couple of things;
A. I said the NAACP has been rendered; meaning they've not always been this way. This is what I maintain they've become. When the chairman emeritus of the NAACP cites the Tea Party as the Taliban wing of American politics, he's got to be called out for the quack he is. If there is suggestion that the NAACP does not adhere to such incendiary rhetoric, I'd like to hear it. Otherwise, they're in fact no better than any extremist wing of American politics that does not call out the shenanigans of their most profound representation. That's the way it works. Don't like it? Decry the incendiary rhetoric. Until I seem some semblance of regard for diversity of opinion out of the NAACP, I'm not going to afford them any respect... in our modern age.

B. The reason heads are rolling at the top of the IRS (other than political theatre) is because the indictments are too egregious and vast to ignore. It's not this application or that as conservative groups have been complaining about similar instances as the NAACP for decades, it was a wholesale canvassing of conservative groups and delayed, intrusive, and obstructive response with regard to their requests.
ebuddy
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 11:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Um, YES. It IS the same.



You're right. Put it into context across multiple administrations since Roosevelt. Using the executive office to abuse various departments has been an integral part of U.S. politics at least for the past 100 years. It is a disturbing practice, but it's an old one. It isn't new.



Yeah, "you all" were right. Using the FBI, CIA, and IRS to try and destroy the lives of civil rights activists such as Martin Luther King and Carrie Catt. You know a bad person when you see them, being such a good judge of character and all. Damn women and negros gettin' all uppity, how dare they.
An unsuccessful projection. you are NOT a mindreader. Now, can you stay on topic?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 12:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
An unsuccessful projection. you are NOT a mindreader. Now, can you stay on topic?
lolwut?
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 01:03 PM
 
For whatever reason I feel this story and the AP story mark the bullshit event horizon.

I have zero faith in any news organization objectively reporting on either story.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 02:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Couple of things;
A. I said the NAACP has been rendered; meaning they've not always been this way. This is what I maintain they've become. When the chairman emeritus of the NAACP cites the Tea Party as the Taliban wing of American politics, he's got to be called out for the quack he is. If there is suggestion that the NAACP does not adhere to such incendiary rhetoric, I'd like to hear it. Otherwise, they're in fact no better than any extremist wing of American politics that does not call out the shenanigans of their most profound representation. That's the way it works. Don't like it? Decry the incendiary rhetoric. Until I seem some semblance of regard for diversity of opinion out of the NAACP, I'm not going to afford them any respect... in our modern age.

B. The reason heads are rolling at the top of the IRS (other than political theatre) is because the indictments are too egregious and vast to ignore. It's not this application or that as conservative groups have been complaining about similar instances as the NAACP for decades, it was a wholesale canvassing of conservative groups and delayed, intrusive, and obstructive response with regard to their requests.

ebuddy, stop being a dumbass.

Saying provocative things is not the same thing as being an organized hate group with a mission that has actually done stuff including commit acts of terrorism. Are you going to say that anything the NAACP has done can be compared to acts of terrorism?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2013, 04:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Saying provocative things is not the same thing as being an organized hate group with a mission that has actually done stuff including commit acts of terrorism. Are you going to say that anything the NAACP has done can be compared to acts of terrorism?
I was going to respond myself but this sums it up fairly well. And if my friend ebuddy doesn't think that there is plenty of "incendiary rhetoric" coming out of the Tea Party ranks on the DAILY ... well then he surely hasn't been paying attention.

OAW
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:56 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2