General Discussion

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)

17. Neither do I. Who was the bank robber who, when asked

Reply to devilgrrl (Original post)

Mon May 13, 2013, 11:06 AM

May 2013

why he robbed banks, answered "because that's there the money is"? Well, it's the same principle.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

109 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] devilgrrl May 2013 OP

Me either. djean111 May 2013 #1

I have no problem with the IRS going after those Blue_Tires May 2013 #2

and add homegirl May 2013 #25

Welcome to DU, homegirl! calimary May 2013 #109

But the question should be: Why didn't they? kentuck May 2013 #3

Gotta start somewhere. JaneyVee May 2013 #4

Tax evasion is illegal anyway dipsydoodle May 2013 #5

I don't understand.... codemoguy May 2013 #7

In general dipsydoodle May 2013 #8

I see what you're saying... codemoguy May 2013 #9

The main issue internationally dipsydoodle May 2013 #10

Many war tax protesters Ednahilda May 2013 #27

You're talking about dipsydoodle May 2013 #33

You're right, there is a big difference, Ednahilda May 2013 #38

Not true tavalon May 2013 #39

+1! lastlib May 2013 #35

I am having trouble with your definitions ...... oldhippie May 2013 #56

Thank you!!! chimpymustgo May 2013 #6

that isn't what they were doing n/t Enrique May 2013 #11

Well targeting Iliyah May 2013 #12

Anti war groups have a long history of advocating tax resistance onenote May 2013 #13

I have no problem with the IRS targeting *any* organization whose positions belie a disposition... Chan790 May 2013 #58

Shhhh! how dare you! iamthebandfanman May 2013 #90

I want to see Mitt Romney and his ilk broke, penniless, discredited and in prison. gordianot May 2013 #14

This is my hope also. nt siligut May 2013 #21

I have no problem with the IRS going after those Tea Party groups, either. baldguy May 2013 #15

In fact, I think the IRS should redouble their efforts meow2u3 May 2013 #24

Yep. Ed Schultz is doing a pretty good job of explaining what is probably going on. GoCubsGo May 2013 #30

Not to mention... DirtyDawg May 2013 #16

Neither do I. Who was the bank robber who, when asked kestrel91316 May 2013 #17

William Sutton Half-Century Man May 2013 #102

Just like you have no problem with the DEA targeting medical mj facilities, right? n/t X_Digger May 2013 #18

Tax exempt political organizations should not exist -- the loophole for the rich should be closed FarCenter May 2013 #19

Excellent point. nt SunSeeker May 2013 #22

I would love to mimi85 May 2013 #20

what crap. got any evidence that any of these groups were advocating tax evasion? cali May 2013 #23

+1 Warren Stupidity May 2013 #31

it's fucking endless. from drones to being OK with the cozy corporate crap cali May 2013 #40

I agree, premium May 2013 #49

You're right richmwill May 2013 #78

If a group applies for TAX EXEMPT status DonCoquixote May 2013 #87

fine. then target ALL such groups equally, dear. But they didn't. cali May 2013 #91

they sure targeted the left DonCoquixote May 2013 #93

no, the tea party is hardly the only ones with money cali May 2013 #94

OK, let me say this another way DonCoquixote May 2013 #99

I wonder what the response would be here if it were the left that were being targeted. AngryOldDem May 2013 #95

remeber Acorn? DonCoquixote May 2013 #100

The IRS is arguably the most hated government agency. aristocles May 2013 #26

I have a problem with it. ButchT May 2013 #28

They go after any and all advocates of what they don't approve of. Wake up. harun May 2013 #71

These groups were openly advocating tax evation (sic)? Where are your examples? DesMoinesDem May 2013 #29

It's implicit if not expressly stated. moondust May 2013 #37

The OP stated that these groups OPENLY ADVOCATED tax evation (sic). DesMoinesDem May 2013 #43

"These tea party groups want to change the laws to reduce taxes" moondust May 2013 #44

www.google.com DesMoinesDem May 2013 #45

No thanks. moondust May 2013 #46

Just because YOU are ignorant of something and too lazy to google it doesn't mean it isn't a fact. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #47

That's all you had to do. moondust May 2013 #48

You would have had to do far less but were to lazy to do so. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #50

If they are claiming to be 501c3 exempt ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #66

Straw man argument. Provide an example of a group OPENLY ADVOCATING tax evasion. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #68

They ARE committing tax evasion ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #69

Openly advocating something and secretly (or openly) doing something aren't anywhere close DesMoinesDem May 2013 #70

You're adorable ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #72

LOL. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #73

No examples? ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #74

How many times do I have to tell you I'm not arguing with your straw man? DesMoinesDem May 2013 #75

Isn't calling it a "straw man" an argument? ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #77

Again, you do not understand what advocate means. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #79

Straw Man ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #80

I know exactly what a straw man argument looks like. DesMoinesDem May 2013 #81

Oh I get it now. ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #82

so did they "go after" / audit these groups, or just examine their tax-exempt status more carefully? renate May 2013 #32

Going after political groups for voicing their opinion is wrong. Period. n/t cynatnite May 2013 #34

This message was self-deleted by its author devilgrrl May 2013 #36

Perhaps you should check with President Obama. Savannahmann May 2013 #41

"extra scrutiny" does not necessarily mean "going after" moondust May 2013 #42

How about running license plates of all minority owned cars joeglow3 May 2013 #51

In that case, moondust May 2013 #53

In that case, joeglow3 May 2013 #54

Oh gosh. moondust May 2013 #55

So, it gets back to you are cool with stopping all black men joeglow3 May 2013 #62

Of course not. moondust May 2013 #63

And I would agree if it was limited to that joeglow3 May 2013 #67

I have no problem with that either. Apophis May 2013 #52

Republics will squeal like stuck pigs when government looks into the shenanigans of their tax exempt indepat May 2013 #57

Selective enforcement is a terrifying thing. BlueCheese May 2013 #59

taxes are only part of the fiscal situation alc May 2013 #60

What is so difficult to grasp that you encapsulated there is beyond me. TheKentuckian May 2013 #64

You mean you are not mad at them for doing their job? Rex May 2013 #61

Conservative contradiction on 501c3 ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #65

I thought it was 501 c(4) n/t cherokeeprogressive May 2013 #83

Apparently Both ThoughtCriminal May 2013 #85

these statyus are given away like candy DonCoquixote May 2013 #104

I disagree! The IRS should not go after people with a certain view. hrmjustin May 2013 #76

Innocent people never get in trouble marshall May 2013 #84

Or having their emails read or phone calls monitored.... Abq_Sarah May 2013 #86

PLEASE!! You are disgracing the Progressive cause, The Democratic Party and this forum Douglas Carpenter May 2013 #88

+1 iamthebandfanman May 2013 #89

thank you Douglas. cali May 2013 #92

Did the Democratic party target the Tea Party? burnodo May 2013 #96

I don't know of any evidence that is the case. The President as I mentioned who is the expo facto Douglas Carpenter May 2013 #103

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service Ptah May 2013 #97

Yes. And Lawrence O'Donnell got it right Duppers May 2013 #98

Thanks, I usually watch Lawrence but Progressive dog May 2013 #106

This kind of idiocy will make it impossible for the IRS to go after Churches that endorse candidates brooklynite May 2013 #101

this is a huge setback for any attempts to restrain dirty money in politics. For a long time to come Douglas Carpenter May 2013 #105

I thought the GOP was all for profiling. sinkingfeeling May 2013 #107

It's about time they went after conservative groups. RoccoR5955 May 2013 #108