Tea Party and the like deserve IRS targeting

[Mothdust]

IRS OUGHT to have targeted the Tea Party BECAUSE the Tea Party and conservative groups SELF ESPOUSE TAX EVASION!! It's only natural that they should be targeted!

[cali]

1. got evidence for that claim, honey?

political targeting is fucking WRONG, genius. ]

the it's just dandy if our side does it people, are no better than wingnuts. In fact they're the same.

[Katashi_itto]

7. Snicker...and then our side wonders why it loses all the time...

"We must be "better" then the wing-nuts!!!

Wing-nuts aren't bound by rules, they don't give a shit about the rules. In the end that's why they will likely win.

Make no mistake this is war, and the Repukes are a terrorist force.

In war, it's the side that can play the dirtiest.

Able to bring the most force to bear.

We are to busy being politically correct to be of any use.

Hell, seeing posts like this actually gives me a bit of hope.

Course on my practical side, I buy Koch Stock too.

Because thats who will likely win this game.

Example:
"Koch Brothers, Worth $50 Billion, Sue Widow Over $16.00 of Nonprofit’s Stock
by PAM MARTENS AND RUSS MARTENS
With the Koch brothers, it’s all about control. They reign over the largest private oil company in the U.S. with estimated revenues of $100 billion. They wield power over a sprawling network of nonprofit front groups with unbridled influence over everything from the Tea Party to economics professors at publicly funded universities. Forbes lists their personal wealth as $25 billion each. They own mansions in the toniest towns in America. And last week, in a decidedly Scrooge-esque maneuver, they filed a lawsuit against a widow who lost her husband to a stroke a mere four months ago over stock she inherited in the Cato Institute worth a measly $16.00."

Above is an example of people that have no hesitation about using real force and will likely win this game.

[cali]

8. gad. grab a clue, sweetums

the targeting of the tea party by the IRS is going to help "our side" just how? It's a fucking scandal that is already sucking all the air our of the room.

Man, I really despise stupid.

[Katashi_itto]

9. I used to respect you too, I actually thought you had something viable to say.

As I said in a different thread, IRS poorly thought out it's mission scope, however it's concept was good.

It's real mistake was even apologizing.

[madokie]

11. And who was in charge of the IRS during this time frame

If you would include this little tidbit I'd be more inclined to think you're not taking this opportunity to bash the president but you didn't and you don't.

Here's a link for who was in charge, Douglas Shulman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Shulman

[cali]

14. I'm not bashing the President

I have no problem believing he didn't know about this. That, however, is cold comfort. This is the type of crap that really can be damaging. It's easy for people to understand, or think they understand, and they will blame the President.

[madokie]

19. You sure could have fooled me

I guess I'm easy

[Raggaemon]

46. Truth be told

Barack Obama could rush into a burning building to rescue a family and republicans would sue him for damages because he kicked down the door.

IRS agents aren't dumb, they've see all those applications from organizations wanting to be seen for doing "social welfare" work, and they've seen their literature, and their ads.

[KittyWampus]

61. honey? sweetums? Why are you using affectionate terms for DU'ers having a discussion?

[Marr]

37. And who is "our side", exactly?

A bunch of (mostly) working class Tea Party chumps (misguided as they are), or an establishment that's firmly in bed with Wall Street and has already proven a will to smash perceived challenges from the little people, like Occupy?

I'm not going to defend or excuse these people.

[woo me with science]

58. +10000

[Mothdust]

81. thank you n.t.

[Skidmore]

16. cali,

I kinda have a whiff of troll in the room.

[Raggaemon]

41. Re: got evidence for that, honey ?

It may be a struggle, but try to imagine being someone at the IRS assigned with the job of auditing, your assignment places you in a position that deals with reviewing applications and filings by groups like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS.

In your position, one thing that you become keenly aware of is that since the Citizens United case ruling there's been an explosion of activity of groups filing and applying for this special treatment as "social welfare" organizations, then you also notice that the vast majority of those groups tend to be conservative in nature, hmmmmm.

So ... you begin reviewing and scrutinizing those applications ( your job ), but the casual observer could look at your work and say you're picking on conservative groups when the fact of the matter is that they tend to dominate the application process for groups requesting special tax treatments under this designation.

Noticed how all those tea-party leaning "grassroots" activist groups were popping up like mushrooms during the battle over health care reform ? See very much of anything resembling the volume of push-back of the same ilk coming from liberal groups ?

You know the drill by now, conservatives scream foul, their protests are picked up by outlets like Newsmax, and Drudge, they make their way onto fox, and the next thing you know all the major news outlets run the story, republican politicians yap about the stuff on TV, and here we are !

[joeglow3]

47. Have you seen the breakdown by applications

Is it available?

[Mothdust]

82. exactly

Thank you. i thought most people around here would already get that.

[Mothdust]

79. your name-calling and insults only prove

That you are an abusive person. And using vulgar language to chastise me only shows that you are ill-mannered, but no worries, I'm only pointing out a sort of reality check. You can see my posing below : )

[msongs]

3. tea party means racists who didnt object when bush the white guy did it nt

[cali]

4. so what? that doesn't make it OK. duh

the short sightedness around here about this is frightening in its stupidity.

[Cali_Democrat]

5. Pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tea Party does not mean you are OK with IRS targeting

Where did msongs say IRS targeting is OK? Maybe I missed it.

Help me out here.

[msongs]

10. you are correct I said nothing about IRS targeting, but some people have agendas lol nt

[treestar]

43. In this case it does

There is always prosecutorial discretion and selective prosecution is allowable, so the courts say. Republicans cannot complain unless they don't do it themselves. As usual, they are hypocrites.

[rl6214]

6. It's not right to target anyone, period.

[madokie]

12. If someone is openly advocating not paying taxes then yes it is OK

Thats what the IRS does, collect taxes.

[cali]

15. do you have even a scintilla of evidence that the groups that were targeted advocated

not paying taxes? No? then your claim is shit. Advocating, cutting taxes is not the same thing.

[madokie]

18. Have you not being paying attention?

I have and yes they were advocating not paying taxes so yes the IRS is right in targeting them

[KharmaTrain]

22. The Evidence Is Forthcoming...

...the IG's report that should detail who was targeted and why. As a kid of the Nixon era I am firmly against using the IRS to target political opponents and if someone was deliberately singling out individuals for retribution they should be exposed. But that's not what's going on here...this is an investigation into the sudden rise of 501c4s that have turned into a slush fund for corporates, politicians and a supposed "non-profit". This is about millions of dollars that were laundered through these groups by fine outstanding folks like the Kochs and Karl Rove to subvert campaign finance laws...funding a new "political welfare" system. In the last election Rove made a lot of money as middle man between big money donors (all undisclosed) and the buying of mass amounts of TV time; pocketing a health commission in the process. Now, should that be tax exempt? I'm sure the IRS wants to know...

[Mothdust]

83. the problem lies in targeting people correctly

And is easier said than done, and is easier to judge in hindsight. How else would potus have gotten obl?

[pinboy3niner]

13. But the teabagger orgs are not the same as the "tax resisters"

Their concerns about taxes do not make them tax cheats.

If it's valid to scrutinize applications for 501 tax-exempt status, that scrutiny must apply to ALL applicants, not just those with RW keywords in their names.

[cali]

17. why is something that simple so difficult for so many DUers to grasp?

[X_Digger]

36. Childish thinking, apparently.

Some version of "turnabout is fair play" combined with "the ends justify the means", I think.

[SlimJimmy]

52. Ding ding ding

I think it's pretty clear from the reporting so far, that the targeting was directed specifically at RW groups. That's wrong on so many levels. Put the shoe on the other foot and watch the howls from our compatriots here.

[Javaman]

20. Um, no.

while I'm not fan of those halfwits, what prevents a repuke prez from doing the same to Liberal organizations?

nothing.

[Ganja Ninja]

25. Thay have done the same and worse.

Infiltrating anti-war groups and occupy wall street for example.

[X_Digger]

35. "Mommy, he did it first" stopped being acceptable at about age 8. n/t

[Ganja Ninja]

38. OK so lets see.

Was anyone arrested? Was anyone beaten? Did anyone have a can of tear gas fracture their skull? No none of that happened. All they made them do was go an extra mile to prove they were eligible for the tax exempt status. Big deal!

[X_Digger]

40. Equality under the law. You remember, 14th amendment?

How about freedom of assembly?

We deride (rightly so) "profiling" our groups based on politics, what makes you think it's hunky dory to do it when the shoe is on the other foot? (Other than the chilidsh notion of 'turnabout is fair play'?)

No, inconsistent application of authority based on political persuasion is wrong in every case, regardless of how heavy or light the authority actually is.

[Ganja Ninja]

45. Having a political agenda does not make you above suspicion.

Nor does it make you exempt from scrutiny. Just because they were investigated doesn't means they were being harassed for their political beliefs. But since it's the right wing we dare not go there.

[X_Digger]

48. Not exempt, but not specifically targeted- whether left or right.

The criteria originally used- having 'tea' or 'patriot' in their name, etc- *is* political. As much as having 'green' or 'marijuana' groups be targetd would be.

[Ganja Ninja]

55. You have to look for crime where you expect to find it.

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." - William Shakespeare

In this case people who are always complaining about taxes and government are a logical place to start looking for tax evaders. Simple logic - not political. And as I've already pointed out the government has never been shy about political affiliation when investigating any left wing or perceived left wing group.

[X_Digger]

56. And now we have justification for profiling.. bravo.

Racists everywhere would be proud.

*shakes head*

The inadvertent hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

[Ganja Ninja]

60. Profiling is a legitimate method for determining where to look for possible criminal activity.

If an abortion clinic is bombed where do you start to look for possible suspects? Profiling is used all the time and just because profiling is misused in some instances does not mean it should never be used. Although it can be misused I don't see where anyone was wronged in this instance. No one was detained or treated as guilty until proven innocent. No illegal searches were conducted. No physical altercations of any kind happened and no criminal charge or implications were attributed to any individual.

People are not above scrutiny just because they subscribe to a certain political belief. The government isn't shy about going after organized labor just because they generally support the left.

[X_Digger]

62. You keep circling around to "Mommy, they did it first!"-- as if that somehow makes it right.

Why is that, I wonder?

[Ganja Ninja]

64. What part of this did you not understand?

"People are not above scrutiny just because they subscribe to a certain political belief."

If that applies to the left than it sure as hell better apply to the right as well.

[X_Digger]

68. If people are targeted because of their politics (left or right), that's wrong.

What about *that* can't you understand?

[Ganja Ninja]

69. Again

"People are not above scrutiny just because they subscribe to a certain political belief."

Being in politics does not give anyone immunity from the law. People filing for tax exempt status have to comply with the law. They were targeted because they were filing for tax exempt status at twice the rate as previous years. I suspect that the greatest number of the new filings were right wing oriented groups. So the words "Tea Party" "Patriot" and "9/12" were used because they were where the IRS expected to find shady small time operators most likely to not be in full compliance.

Read this article for a little better understanding of why the IRS did what it did.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/irs-tea-party-targeting_n_3272849.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

[X_Digger]

70. Who here (not me) is saying that politics makes one immune?!?

I think you need to re-read my statement and get back to me.

Like talking to a brick wall.

[Ganja Ninja]

89. It wasn't about politics anyway and that was not why the IRS was targeting them.

You're all worked up over this because you don't understand why the IRS was doing what it was doing. The IRS was looking for scams. They reasoned that the most likely place to find them was was where the pickings were easiest. They used the search terms "tea party" "patriot" & "9/12" because that is where the most gullible dupes are likely to be had. In this case tea party = suckers, patriot = morons & 9/12 = chumps. Stifling dissent had nothing to do with it. They were looking for posers trying to bilk idiots and claim a tax exemption at the same time.

[X_Digger]

90. You keep thinking that.

Me, I'll agree with the president.

http://arimelber.tumblr.com/post/50459124191/president-obama-on-irs-report

The IRS must apply the law in a fair and impartial way, and its employees must act with utmost integrity. This report shows that some of its employees failed that test.

[joeglow3]

49. And crimes are committed by more by lower socio-economic

And minorities make up a greater percentage of the lower socio-economic. Thus, targeting and "investigating" minorities is great.

Wow, your logic works amazing.

[Ganja Ninja]

54. Yes it's a terrible thing.

Lets hope minorities are never targeted. And lets be sure that never happens by defending the Teabag party.

[joeglow3]

63. Ahhh. The "he did it first" argument

Good to know to mindset of my 4 year old is alive and well.

[Ganja Ninja]

65. So you believe that anyone espousing right wing political views should be immune from scrutiny?

The government has never been shy about investigating groups that support the left such as organized labor but right wing groups are off limits for some special reason. Why is that?

[joeglow3]

66. I think are bull shit

I certainly don't excuse one or the other for any reason. The government should not be used as a tool silence dissension from either side of the aisle.

[Ganja Ninja]

67. I fail to see how it was used to stifle dissent in this case.

And that is why I don't give the teabag party any slack in this matter. Frankly politics is a hotbed of dirty dealing and underhanded gamesmanship as well as flat out criminal wrong doing. No reason to treat the teabag party with special reverence or political parties in general. Giving them a break would mean giving everyone else a break.

[Mothdust]

84. politics?

Or entire country was created to be"a hot bed of dirty dealing and underhanded gamesmanship". Did you see Gone With the Wind? : )

[Marr]

39. Actually, the Occupy stuff happened under *this* administration.

When you consider that the real divide in this country isn't right vs. left, but have vs. have-not, I don't see how *anyone* could argue that this IRS thing is somehow acceptable.

[Ganja Ninja]

42. So what's your point?

My point is the government has always targeted the left regardless of whether or not there was an law breaking going on. It was often just pure political harassment. In this case the government seems to have been looking for possible tax evasion. A crime like tax evasion isn't readily apparent. It has to be found out through investigation. Because this group is anti-tax they were targeted as possible violators. Seems like a logical place to look for wrong doing.

[joeglow3]

50. A lot of rap music advocates violence and crime

Thus, anyone heard playing it in their car should be stopped and "investigated." Seems logical and if they did nothing wrong, they can move along.

Great policy.

[Ganja Ninja]

51. Oh perish the thought that the cops would stop anyone just for playing loud rap music.

Please don't let that happen in America.

[Mothdust]

85. some towns have ordinances

Against loud boom boxes. I wish mine did. Very annoying : )

[Puzzledtraveller]

21. Such a dangerous mindset.

[Savannahmann]

23. Are we sure that's the position we wish to take?

Liberals were hunted before, for our political beliefs. The bad old days of Joe McCarthy were supposed to be dead and buried. Look at history, read some books, read about how we had to go and prove we were not communists, and the only way we could was by naming people we suspected might be Communists.

That is what it looks like when people are targeted for their political beliefs. One of the reasons we weren't rounding up Muslims after 9-11 was because we had seen what that looked like too with the internment of Americans of Japanese descent. That was the low point of racism in our nation. What we did to the blacks was bad, very bad, and I am proud that Liberals pushed civil rights.

Liberals started to fight back against McCarthy, and the abuses of the Federal Government. Fred Cook exposed the FBI and their abuses. Reporters started to question the accepted ideals. The Government fought to keep us in line, we pushed hard and protested to end the targeting of people by the Government for political beliefs.

Was that only because we were targeted? Or was the higher principle of freedom of speech, freedom of association, and free thought the goal? I am not a Tea Party guy. I do think there are serious inequities in the tax system. Rich people are able to afford accountants and the like to make sure they don't miss a trick, no deduction is lost. Remember when we complained about Exxon paying no taxes? They did that by taking advantage of every deduction available, and in some cases deductions that they lobbied congress for.

Now, we don't agree with the prescription of those on the right, but I think we can agree that there is a problem that should be addressed. However, I like to look into the future. The future, the RW may once again get the White House. If we support targeting of people based upon political beliefs now because we disagree with those beliefs, how will we feel when they do the same thing to us? Make no mistake, they would do it to us if we stand and declare they deserved it.

In the end, I guess it is the way your Mother taught you. Treat others as you wish to be treated. Beyond that, we can get more public support, more votes, and thus more seats in congress if we stand for principle than if we stand for nothing but political power.

[Mothdust]

86. You are right. I agree with you.

I'm only pointing out that it should come as no surprise. They act so hurt and abused to be victims of their own practices. "Republicans don't care whether their representatives are criminals as long as their good for their districts" -a quote from a real true blue republican, and I believe it.

[Ganja Ninja]

24. I agree they should be targeted for tax violations.

Just like we should target militia members for gun violations. Where there's smoke there's likely to be fire. There no harm in going an extra mile to make sure they are dotting all their "i"s and crossing all their "t"s. It's only prudent.

[Puzzledtraveller]

26. And people and organizations who advocate for marijuana use

because in the majority of states and in the US at large they are breaking the law and encouraging such use by others. No?

[Ganja Ninja]

27. Like they don't do that now.

[Puzzledtraveller]

29. Correct, but are you okay with that too?

[Ganja Ninja]

33. What does that matter?

It's been done in the past and it will be done in the future regardless of how I feel about it. I'm not about to spend any sleepless nights worrying about the right finally getting a small taste of what the left has been living with for the last 100 years.

[cali]

28. and you'll happily support a republican administration making sure that

liberal groups or groups that advocate for death with dignity or marijuana or the environment are targeted, right?

gad.

blowback will bite you.

[Ganja Ninja]

31. Have you been in a long coma or something?

Marijuana advocates, Peace activists, name your left wing cause and you can probably find a government agency that has investigated, infiltrated, harassed, intimidated or just plain tried to screw with them. But now because it's a right wing political organization we have to walk on eggshells so as not to piss them off. Screw them!

[Purplehazed]

32. While were at it....

lets ramp up targeting Muslims, cuz they're all extremists and brown people too cuz we know that they abuse social services.

As you said "where there's smoke there's likely to be fire....it's only prudent"

(sarcasm)

[Ganja Ninja]

34. Again like that isn't already happening.

[SlimJimmy]

53. The IRS went beyond the scope of "going the extra mile" when they demanded that these

groups turn over their membership and donor lists. Clearly a violation of the principle of free association. You know, like we wanted for OWS and other progressive groups.

[fishwax]

30. nah n/t

[Marrah_G]

44. It's wrong to target people based on political views

It's wrong if a Dem administration does it and it's wrong if a Rep administration does it.

It's wrong.

[X_Digger]

57. +1 n/t

[woo me with science]

59. Thank you. nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

72. Excuse me? You're claiming with a straight face that something that we would ALL condemn if

it was done during a Republican Administration - should not be acceptable even if it was done during the time of a Democratic Administration? Is that what you are seriously actually saying? I'm sorry, I just can't follow your logic on this. Could you please explain?

[Marrah_G]

73. I thought I was pretty clear......

Please tell me you are just teasing, because otherwise I am really confused by your post!!!!!!!!

[Douglas Carpenter]

75. sorry, I guess my attempt at irony doesn't always come across right

[Marrah_G]

77. LOL- I'm just not awake!

I ran out of coffee!!!!!!!!

Sorry for being so dense today

[octoberlib]

71. It's wrong to target them but they need to be investigated.

I'm tired of the GOP's hypocrisy. Where was their outrage when Greenpeace and other groups were being targeted under Bush?

Does this mess have any connection to all that "dark money" you guys write about? Yes. Before this scandal broke, 501(c)(4) nonprofit groups were already making headlines for their political spending. Secretive nonprofits like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, and the American Action Network spent huge sums of money to influence the 2012 elections. Campaign watchdogs say those groups have flouted the law, which says 501(c)(4) groups can't make politics their "primary purpose." Watchdogs have demanded that the IRS and the Federal Election Commission crack down on these nonprofits for spending too much time and money on politics.

The IRS's tea party scandal, however, could hinder the agency's willingness to ensure politically active nonprofits obey the law. The IRS will likely operate on this front with even more caution, taking pains not to appear biased or too aggressive. That in turn could cause the agency to shy away from uncovering 501(c)(4) organizations that do in fact abuse their tax-exempt status by focusing primarily on politics.

On the day Lerner offered her apology, Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California­-Irvine, asked: "How will this affect legitimate efforts to get IRS deny c4 status to secret election groups?" Marc Elias, a respected election lawyer who represents Democrats, replied: "Not much of a question—it will hurt it, a lot."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/irs-tea-party-scandal-congress-nonprofit-obama

[Marrah_G]

74. I disagee

[hrmjustin]

76. I disagree! No group should be targeted for their political views.

[Mothdust]

78. if you claim a deduction because of a "home office"

That is a "red flag" for the irs. you are more likely to be audited, it has been said. You are better off not claiming your home office if you don't want to be audited, whether or not you are evading taxes. you don't want to be audited. So, along those lines if you advertise against paying taxes you are "asking for it". Should come as no surprise that you would be audited cause where there's smoke there's fire. I understand many readers here are in "idealism-land" but hey, it's a discussion group. I'm interested in the views of others.

[jambo101]

80. If they got nothing to hide.

then they got nothing to worry about. The IRS target many people,its the nature of the beast. belonging to a political party should'nt absolve anyone of IRS scrutiny.

[pecwae]

87. "Nothing to hide;

nothing to worry about." A destructive, dangerous mindset and meme that was popular some years back.

[jambo101]

91. Surely you arent saying Teabaggers are exempt

They are every bit as open to tax scrutiny as any one else as far as i'm concerned.
Trying to sidetrack the issue by saying its an attack on their political party is a lame excuse, If they were in fact playing funny with the tax money they need to be held accountable just like any one else who is found to be a tax cheat.

[B Calm]

88. I think the IRS was doing their job.

Crybaby tea baggers are all about tax evasion.