What evidence do you have that anyone was harrased because of political donations? The only harrassment that you could possibly be talking about is that donations given to a tax exempt 501(c)(4) organization are not in fact tax exempt, even though many people incorrectly claim them.Its not dishonest at all. They meet the definition the IRS set forth. Perhaps your issue is with the label the IRS puts on it instead. Furthermore, disclosing donors leads to widespread political corruptions as seen by this story. The IRS agents are wanting orgs to expose their donors so they can harrass them. Which is why donors dont want to disclose. I see no reason why the IRS needs to know that I gave money to a private group who advocates for an issue.
...Of course you never heard about this because they didn't have fox noise and right-wing hate shows on the radio whining day and night. The tea party are the biggest bunch of crybabies on the face of the earth.
What evidence do you have that anyone was harrased because of political donations? The only harrassment that you could possibly be talking about is that donations given to a tax exempt 501(c)(4) organization are not in fact tax exempt, even though many people incorrectly claim them.
Also, according to the report, all donor lists were destroyed upon completion of the investigation.
Of course you never heard about this because they didn't have fox noise and right-wing hate shows on the radio whining day and night. The tea party are the biggest bunch of crybabies on the face of the earth.
The purpose of these IRS agents focusing on Tea Party groups was to prevent them from being able to influence politics. The purpose of exposing private peoples interactions with these groups is to stifle their speech. There is simply no reason that the govt needs to know who gave money to a political group.
In a lot of ways you're totally correct. The entire purpose of the application process was to determine if the groups were excessivly engaged in politics, which is prohibited for any organization seeking 501(c)(4) status. Free speech is not the same as unlimited anonymous speech.
And can you explain why they singled out only conservative groups? According to the report, 100% of the Tea Party groups were singled out. Seeing any abuse at all yet?
Incompetence is not the same as abuse.
The report said that of the 4510 applications processed by the EO office, 207 were correctly submitted to a team of specialists, 144 had strong indications of political involvement but were approved, and 91 were subject to potentially unessasary investigation. Those 91 were not broken down by political lean, but appear to be a more of a result of a poor understanding of the types of political actions that may be taken by 501(c)(4)s.
It may be that conservative groups were subjected to statistically more scrutiny than other groups with political leanings. Certainly the language used had the appearance of bias. However, there has not been any statistial evidence presented yet that indicates that conservatives were targeted at a higher rate.
So you equate terrorism to unfair tax breaks.
OK.
“I wish there was more GOP interest when I raised the same issue during the Bush administration,
In a lot of ways you're totally correct. The entire purpose of the application process was to determine if the groups were excessivly engaged in politics, which is prohibited for any organization seeking 501(c)(4) status. Free speech is not the same as unlimited anonymous speech.
They searched out groups who had names with "Tea Party", "Patriots", "9/12", etc... in it. Gee, you think there was bias? I guess the head of the IRS doesn't agree with you, that they didn't go far enough, he just resigned.
I think you need to cite some proof of that in some way. I imagine it would be covered a lot more exhaustively by the press if it had happened under a republican.
And can you explain why they singled out only conservative groups? According to the report, 100% of the Tea Party groups were singled out. Seeing any abuse at all yet?
I'm guessing that you are not aware of the abuses/violations committed by the IRS, or are in favor of an IRS that can do as they please and ignore our rights. Otherwise, it's hard to fathom anyone with the slightest intelligence saying that "the IRS didn't go far enough".
Stop holding Democrats to a different standard - Salon.com
Two scandals deflated, one persists - Salon.com
A few Democrats tried to get the word out.
The funny thing about this whole story at the end, is that 2/3rd of the organizations that the IRS looked at weren't Tea Party related and the only one that got denied exemption status was a Democrat linked PAC.
The more I read about what actually happened, the more I realize the GOP is using this as a witch hunt. There is a valid reason to come down on the 501(c)4s, the IRS turns out didn't primarily focus their audits on Tea Party groups and didn't deny a single one exemption status to a Conservative leaning application.
So long as they treat everyone equally. Which isnt what happened here. Targeting a specific ideology is not equality under the law.
Salon is laughably Left Wing and not a trusted source
Claiming any of this is a "witchhunt" stinks of desperation
I don't see this as an either/or anyway, but I surely don't see coming to peace with "letting the IRS go ape **** " on anybody. It can't be partisan.
Yeah right, maybe you can try and dig up some proof of your false claims.
No one cares what you think. Ever. You resort to calling people liars when they point out your own posts refute you. Even when they quote the very articles you post.
Yet here you are replying, dodging and making stuff up :lol:
The irony on this post is beyond the capacity of man to measure.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?