The IRS scrutiny of the Tea Party organizations was ham-handed

[Jackpine Radical]

But that's where the action was--where else would you expect money-laundering into political funds to happen?

At the time, it isn't as if the country was being overrun by new leftist orgs applying for 501(c)3.

So for them to be criticized for going after the TP gangs is a little like criticizing the FBI back in the day as being anti-Italian for going after organized crime.

[John1956PA]

1. A DUer wrote, "If they were overwhelmed with all the applications, and most were Teabaggers . . .

. . . how do you not look at those?"

[Buzz Clik]

3. Most of the applications were not "teabagger" applications.

Interestingly, of all the applications, not one Tea Party application avoided review.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. That would not have been a problem

had they first established that the TP groups were more likely to break the law than the other groups.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Actually, according to the audit report, it would have have been a problem at all...

... if their criterion was simply looking for signs of political activity by the group. Being triggered for review name rather activities was the problem.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. That step has to at least PRECEDE any other form of discriminatory targeting.

That is, if you can show that the presence of certain terms in the group's title is predictive of illegal political involvement, then you could justify the name search.

I haven't been following this story closely. Did they turn up any extraordinary levels of banned political activity in the TP groups?

[Buzz Clik]

8. Nothing extraordinary, but some activities were discovered.

I don't recall the exact number, but it was about 10% of those applications reviewed. Maybe less.

Here's the report:

www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/201310053fr.pdf

I can revisit it when I get a moment...

[zerosumgame0005]

9. so detail for us all

which bagger group was denied?

[Buzz Clik]

10. ..

www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/201310053fr.pdf

[zerosumgame0005]

11. so why can't you answer the question?

not delayed, denied. The only one I have been able to find being denied during that time is "Emerge America", a group that helps democratic women run for office.

NOT found in the IG's report:

Any evidence that "Tea Party" related groups were identified during this process for nefarious reasons;
Any type of identification, political or otherwise, for the groups whose applications were similarly flagged and delayed ("Tea Party" related groups made up only a minority, approximately 1/3 of the groups whose applications were delayed and held for further examination);
Any indication or evidence whatsoever that the White House, or anybody outside of the IRS units handling these cases, had anything to do with what happened;
Any response to the other question the IG's office was tasked by Congress to investigate, namely: "whether existing social welfare organizations are improperly engaged in a substantial, or even predominant, amount of campaign activity."

from the Brad Blog

[Buzz Clik]

13. Not real crazy about your tone and your demands on my time.

The answer is in the document. If it is crucial to you, find it. Pleasing you is not on my radar screen.

[zerosumgame0005]

14. yes, that is a normal reaction

for someone putting up nonsense then having it called and you having no reply. I don't like YOUR tone in any of you posts, always blindly following repthug/corporation/cop talking points. if you resent being called on your BS then stop posting BS. seems simple enough to me...

[Buzz Clik]

15. Read the article. Quit being so damned lazy.

Do you really think that your aggressive attitude will somehow hide what you're all about? It does not.

You people stick out like sore thumbs. Fucking pathetic.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. It's not o much the looking at them that created the problem.

It was the deliberate search with keywords.

Had I been in charge, I would have randomly sampled new applicants, then if a pattern emerged wherein TP groups were disproportionately abusing their status, I would have had empirical grounds for moving to a second step of searching specifically for those organizations whose characteristics matched the group with high offense rates.

Thus:
Q:
"Why did you search for 'Tea Party,' 'Patriot,' etc.?"
A:
"Because earlier audits had shown that groups with those terms in their names were three times as likely as the average tax-exempt group to abuse their status."

This approach would have had the nice double benefit of, first, avoiding political fallout, and second, of nicely skewering the TP groups as unethical tax dodgers.

[kentuck]

2. It was (is) an elaborate money-laundering scheme...

It is a huge scandal but not the one the Republicans think it is?

[spanone]

12. Former NAACP chairman Julian Bond: It’s OK for IRS to target ‘racist’ tea party

Julian Bond, former chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said during a Tuesday interview on MSNBC that it’s only right and just that the federal government and the IRS target tea party groups.

Tea party groups are, after all, “overtly racist” and the “Taliban wing of American politics,” Mr. Bond said, Mediaite reported. The IRS ought to look over these groups’ shoulders, he said — at the same time condemning former President Bush, for what he alleged was that administration’s biased push for the IRS to investigate the NAACP.


The NAACP was investigated for improper political activities in 2004 after Mr. Bond made a speech that was highly critical of Mr. Bush, Mediaite reported. The group was later cleared of any wrongdoing. But Mr. Bond hasn’t forgotten, and said his group was “unfairly targeted,” Mediaite said.

He denied holding a double standard with today’s IRS targeting of tea party groups and yesteryear’s IRS investigation of the NAACP.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/14/naacps-julien-bond-its-ok-irs-target-racist-tea-pa/