IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups

[MetalHead]

This is Obama's greatest legacy.........when caught with your pants down in public, just make something up, anything really, and the media will cover for you.

You notice a trend here?
They are always the last to know.
Holder did not know about Fast n Furious.
Holder did not know about the AP phone records.
Obama did not know about IRS targeting conservative groups.
Obama "went to bed" the night of the Benghazi attack.

Now,any thinking person would ask,who the fuck is running the show the show here?
How is it possible that the ones in charge are the last ones to know???

It's a fucking lie,they knew EVERYTHING.
They ordered everything,the gun running to Mexico,the gun running in Libya(Benghazi was weapons to Syria via Turkey),the IRS persecution of conservatives,the AP phone records,everything.

Where do you think Harry Reid got his supposed info on Romney about his taxes?
Here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...al-info-on-conservative-groups-to-propublica/

Now they want you to believe that the IRS deal was carried out by 2 rogue low level employees?
Are they fucking kidding?

Nixon was impeached for peanuts compared to whats going on.

The people of this country need to wake the fuck up and soon.

 

[superpunk]

The problem is that they admitted to singling out conservative groups. That's why it's a story. They were much harder on conservative applicants than liberal applicants. That's NOT okay. They are supposed to be a nonpolitical entity.

It's a story because some tea partiers got their panties in a bunch and threw a fit. Fox news sensed they could get their full-****** audience upset and ran with it. It maybe SHOULD be a story, but for different reasons.

Tax (GDP%NPOT) agency officials told lawmakers in a briefing yesterday that 471 groups received additional scrutiny, a total that indicates a crackdown on politically active nonprofit groups that extends beyond the Tea Party outfits.

What is the REAL issue here?

Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who sits on the Senate Finance Committee, which is conducting its own IRS investigation, has introduced legislation with Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski to require all groups spending money on politics to disclose their donors.

“These problems will continue as long as there is an absence of clear and enforceable rules,” Wyden told reporters yesterday. “In the absence of clear and enforceable rules the bureaucracy pretty much makes it up as they go along.”

Political spending by nonprofits incorporated under Section 501(c)(4) of the tax code has increased since the U.S. Supreme Court (1000L) in 2010 removed limits on independent corporate and union spending and other court rulings paved the way for wealthy individuals to spend unlimited sums in elections.

Come on people wake up. Quit dancing for your conservative puppet masters and think for yourselves once in a while.

 

[JBond]

Don't worry, liberals have a whole world of hurt coming their way. It's funny how they think they aren't reaping what they sow.

There's actually no point in discussing anything related to politics if they think this is okay. This so wrong MSNBC is covering it. Again, anyone who tries to defend this isn't even worth 10 seconds of your time.

I actually find it ironic that SP lays into people for being hyper-partisan yet he defends this.

Little Spunk is a shining example of the liberal mentality. Win at any cost no matter how many rules and laws are broken, no matter how many rights are violated, as long as they win. And above all they defend anything the Obama administration does, not matter how fucked up it is. If that involves killing an ambassador, so be it. If is means they have to smuggle thousands of high powered weapons to drug lords resulting in hundreds, possibly thousands of deaths including women and children, so be it as long as the end game of restricting freedom is reached. Today's leftists are more dangerous and deranged than ever. They lack a moral compass. They are low functioning sheeple that are only capable of doing what their master tells them.

 

[superpunk]

Another excellent article in case anyone wants to talk about real issues and not soap-opera ones that fox made up for your third grade consumption...

http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/the_other_irs_scandal.php?page=all

There is a scandal in all of this—several, actually, and some are more significant than the one that is getting all the attention. As the story unfolds, here are some important points to keep in mind:

• Missing from much coverage is the relevant recent history—the role of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision and how it prompted a deluge of requests from new organizations seeking tax-exempt status under tax code Section 501(c)(4) as “social welfare” organizations—despite the fact that many of these are blatantly political operations.

• Congress requires the IRS to review every application for tax-exempt status to weed out organizations that are partisan, political, or that generate private gain. Congress has imposed this requirement on the IRS, and its predecessor agencies, since 1913.

• When it comes to 501(c)(4) organizations, what the IRS is supposed to do is draw a distinction between groups that are “primarily engaged” in politics and groups that really are primarily engaged in “social welfare”—somehow “promoting the common good and social welfare of the community.” It’s kind of mushy. Brad Plumer has a good explainer about this on The Washington Post’s Wonkblog.

• The first scandal here, meanwhile, is that the social welfare tax exemption is being used by existing 501(c)(4) organizations, including some very large ones, to promote partisan political interests—the very activity Congress has explicitly prohibited for a century. The New York Times, after a weak political piece on Saturday, had a clear and useful explainer about this on Tuesday.

• Also worth pointing out: None of the organizations that the IRS scrutinized as a result of the ill-considered screening-by-name regime was denied tax exempt status.

• The second—and widely ignored—scandal in this unfolding story is that the IRS is drowning. Congress is demanding that the agency do more and more with less and less, as we have reported here and elsewhere. As David Levinthal reported Tuesday at the Center for Public Integrity:

The IRS’ Exempt Organizations Division, which finds itself at the scandal’s epicenter, processed significantly more tax exemption applications in fiscal year 2012 by so-called 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organizations — 2,774 — than it has since at least the late 1990s.

That compares to 1,777 applications in 2011 and 1,741 in 2010, he reported.

Meanwhile, maybe reporters could investigate this: Karl Rove, the Republican strategist, initiated the use of the tax exemption for 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations to promote candidates and causes when he formed American Crossroads in 2010. He in turn inspired a Democratic operative—Bill Burton, former deputy press secretary to President Obama—to do the same, starting Priorities USA in 2011.

Are these organizations primarily political? Here is how Open Secrets described Rove’s 501(c)(4) operation and its political influence and ties:

American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, both formed in 2010, are the heavy hitters of the multicandidate outside spending groups. They were started and continue to operate in consultation with GOP operatives Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie. American Crossroads, a super PAC, and GPS, a 501(c)(4) that isn’t required to disclose its donors, spent more than $70 million that year, according to one of its officials, though they only reported spending a little more than half that to the Federal Election Commission. Steven Law, former general counsel of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and chief of staff to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, is president of both groups. The groups raised $51 million in 2011, and have said they plan to spend much more than that in the 2012 elections.

Consider that in the context of a 1963 federal appeals court, which ruled that to qualify for tax exemption under 501(c)(4), “the organization must be a community movement designed to accomplish community ends.”

but no, you morons listen to Rush, watch Fox and read breitbart and think you're informed.

idiots.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

It's a story because they admitted to singling out conservative and libertarian groups.

 

[superpunk]

to do what? fill out a long questionairre?

give me a fucking break. it's embarassing that such a thing caused such an uproar that these melvins had to be pacified with an apology. Put on your big boy pants you PC-loving bitches.

 

[superpunk]

The IRS asks groups with politically charged phrases in their fucking names to prove they aren't involved in politics because that's a fucking requirement for tax exempt status....you idiots lose your shit.

The GOP tries to pass voter laws that ACTUALLY discriminate and you want to pat them on scrotum for it.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by your hypocrisy.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

If the IRS had gone after both sides equally, no one would give a shit. The apathy that SP feels towards the people who lost their lives at Benghazi, that's how normal people would feel if the IRS hadn't singled out conservative and libertarian groups. People don't expect evenhandedness from partisan political organizations. They do, however, expect it from powerful government bureaus responsible for taking their money.

#realtalk

 

[superpunk]

keep crying you PC homo.

Guess what the only group that actually got denied was? Yeah, a progressive group.

feel free to expound on the great oppression felt by these groups due to this "singling out". What exactly happened to these groups? Do you even have any idea what you're upset about? No, you don't. Go look it up on some conservative shit-tank and get back to me.

 

[VTA]

Another excellent article in case anyone wants to talk about real issues and not soap-opera ones that fox made up for your third grade consumption...

http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/the_other_irs_scandal.php?page=all

but no, you morons listen to Rush, watch Fox and read breitbart and think you're informed.

idiots.

Laughable blather.

• Missing from much coverage is the relevant recent history—the role of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision and how it prompted a deluge of requests from new organizations seeking tax-exempt status under tax code Section 501(c)(4) as “social welfare” organizations—despite the fact that many of these are blatantly political operations.

Did all of the organizations that were put on hold identify themselves as such?

• Congress requires the IRS to review every application for tax-exempt status to weed out organizations that are partisan, political, or that generate private gain. Congress has imposed this requirement on the IRS, and its predecessor agencies, since 1913.

But does it do so equally?

• When it comes to 501(c)(4) organizations, what the IRS is supposed to do is draw a distinction between groups that are “primarily engaged” in politics and groups that really are primarily engaged in “social welfare”—somehow “promoting the common good and social welfare of the community.” It’s kind of mushy. Brad Plumer has a good explainer about this on The Washington Post’s Wonkblog.

Did all of the organizations that were put on hold identify themselves as such? And were the one's approved given the same distinction over the same period of time? No (lolconservative bastion of usatodaylol)

• The first scandal here, meanwhile, is that the social welfare tax exemption is being used by existing 501(c)(4) organizations, including some very large ones, to promote partisan political interests—the very activity Congress has explicitly prohibited for a century. The New York Times, after a weak political piece on Saturday, had a clear and useful explainer about this on Tuesday.

Why is this a barometer to judge the applicants who were obstructed? Moral equivalence or just a game of hide the salami?

• The second—and widely ignored—scandal in this unfolding story is that the IRS is drowning. Congress is demanding that the agency do more and more with less and less, as we have reported here and elsewhere. As David Levinthal reported Tuesday at the Center for Public Integrity:

Hallmark of Obama and his ass sniffers. It's the Republicans fault.
Yeah. really excellent article... let's hear some more about Karl Rove. Just name the name and you'll have your audience hooked that it's not a full of shit piece.

lolclrlol

 

[ScipioCowboy]

It's big news because they admitted to singling out conservative and libertarian groups. It's irrelevant whether or not they uncovered enough dirt to deny them.

 

[superpunk]

It's big news because they admitted to singling out conservative and libertarian groups. It's irrelevant whether or not they uncovered enough dirt to deny them.

please just keep repeating the same shit over and over again and don't answer any of the questions I asked you. Your ignorance is noted. You have no fucking idea why you're mad.

 

[cmd34]

please just keep repeating the same shit over and over again and don't answer any of the questions I asked you. Your ignorance is noted.

better if he replies with facts about cats?

 

[superpunk]

suck a dick cmd

 

[cmd34]

no u


I'm witty!

 

[ScipioCowboy]

please just keep repeating the same shit over and over again and don't answer any of the questions I asked you. Your ignorance is noted. You have no fucking idea why you're mad.

Please also make note I only reply to relevant questions.

 

[superpunk]

no u


I'm witty!

You aren't.

 

[iceberg]

better if he replies with facts about cats?

ROFL!

 

[cmd34]

You aren't.

I'm trollie?

 

[NoDak]

please just keep repeating the same shit over and over again and don't answer any of the questions I asked you.

Tell us why anybody should ever take you serious. Especially when you call others a hypocrite.

Meow.