IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups
Source: WaPo
Internal Revenue Service officials in Washington and at least two other offices were involved in the targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, making clear the effort reached well beyond the branch in Cincinnati that was initially blamed, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.
IRS officials at the agencys Washington headquarters sent queries to conservative groups asking about their donors and other aspects of their operations, while officials in the El Monte and Laguna Niguel offices in California sent similar questionnaires to tea party-affiliated groups.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-denounces-reported-irs-targeting-of-conservative-groups/2013/05/13/a0185644-bbdf-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Alan M
(22 posts)Some of the stuff that is going on makes you scratch your head and wonder. How stupid are the people at the IRS to do this sort of thing?
elleng
(130,128 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)and anyone who doesn't realize that this shit is a serious problem for the admin, really, really has no grasp of political realities.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Why is Ron Paul tax free? Audit him. And audit the NRA
why are they tax free?
Why is anything tax free? Let's tax them all.
we need more taxes, not less, after all, who shovels the snow and takes out the trash?
Without taxes, it don't get done.
brooklynite
(93,851 posts)...absent a violation of the Law. You have a problem with that, you go to Congress, not the IRS.
premium
(3,731 posts)says they can, don't like it? Then work to change it.
And get off this NRA audit crap, it's already been done, probably several times.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)all the distractions are to foreshadow not allowing a vote to put a new SCOTUS on the court.
I do hope any retirements are such to not retire til the next is SEATED like O'Connor did.
because at this point, a new justice won't be allowed to be seated any quicker than Al Franken was (when we did NOT have 60 for what, 9 months?)
premium
(3,731 posts)despite how much you wish for it to happen, it's not going to happen.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)Anarchy/vigilantism? Who's talking about that, except you?
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)Who here is talking about Anarchy/vigilantism?
Response to graham4anything (Reply #28)
kestrel91316 This message was self-deleted by its author.
elleng
(130,128 posts)but entities seeking 501c(4) status are and were being examined to determine whether they are entitled to same, which is as it should be; its their job.
sofa king
(10,857 posts)But suddenly I don't think it is a good idea to fully elaborate on that. Just remember that the I.R.S. has a sister-service within the same Department that also has investigative duties of an arguably higher importance.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)when you look at who is behind these conservative groups.....
Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)How do you "not" look at a political group "non" politically when exemption is determined on how political the group is?
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)especially when they find out who is funding these organizations. Scary in fact.
hoosierlib
(710 posts)This is not looking good...but keeping the faith
blm
(112,920 posts)From Bush appointing the head of IRS, to GOP senators and congressmen fighting TeaParty challenges in their primaries, to Citizens United causing swarms of these political groups to set up shop within a very short timeframe, burdening the IRS with even more processing of claims. Many of these claims of persecution are BS ginned up by self-righteous RWers whining about a standard process for tax exempt status.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)golfguru
(4,987 posts)They are a menace. They should be investigated at every turn.
IRS is a good tool to use on them.
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)then become the norm and when they get the WH again our side is then on the other end of this
treestar
(82,383 posts)Would almost surely do this anyway.
But they are only being looked at to see if they comply with law. As they used to say, if they have nothing to hide . .
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)blm
(112,920 posts)this flood of processing these RW groups.
legendleague3
(7 posts)While we still have the power, Obama should be using every method available to shut down/silence hate and lie spewing conservatives. If they break the law it's not the IRS' fault- if they weren't lawbreakers in the first place they wouldn't have any fear of audits, right? As a bonus, if the IRS can dig up enough dirt it could be used next election to really slam the reTHUGS.
deurbano
(2,891 posts)Nor should he have that power. (Nor should he exercise that power if he did have it.)
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)nobody should be in favor of any non-partisan governmental function/service/agency using its power for political reasons.
welcome to DU tho.
legendleague3
(7 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)Remember Richard Nixon? Isn't that exactly what he did?
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
Welcome to DU, enjoy your stay.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)while they are a menace, this does not justify what the IRS has done. During the Bush years, it might very well have been our own party members and liberal groups that faced more intense federal scrutiny. No. This isn't right. I'll fight them at the voting booth, at the polls, I'll gladly argue points of policy until I'm blue in the face... I'll tell the worst of the right wingers to their faces what I think of them... but I will not sit here and say that it is okay for the federal government or the IRS to single them out. However much we disagree, they are still Americans and are entitled to the same rights that we are.
THIS is what makes our party superior. The fact that, for the most part, that attitude holds true among democrats and liberals. We are, generally speaking, not hateful, we do not wish suffering upon our political opponents no matter how strongly and passionately we disagree. At least I try not to. On those occasions when I do, when I let the political game get the better of me and become full of hatred for the right... I force myself to take some deep breaths, count to ten... and remember that they are, for the most part, neither stupid nor deliberately cruel. They are ignorant.
Ignorance is it's own punishment. We need not make it greater.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)Here he is posting on DU. You do know, don't you, it is illegal? It was one of the impeachment counts against Nixon.
golfguru
(4,987 posts)I thought it was the Watergate coverup is what got his azz kicked out of the WH.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)http://classes.lls.edu/archive/manheimk/371d1/nixonarticles.html
Watergate ultimately lost his political support so the impeachment could move forward. But it was just one of several articles of impeachment.
cali
(114,904 posts)hey, let's target all socialists, all communists, all anarchists, all... liberals.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)I can't stand them.
CANDO
(2,068 posts)to investigate the status of a group filing for tax exempt status, is it not? And I don't believe that they were only going after conservative groups. They were caught in an avalanche of teabag groups filing all at once, with the background knowledge of billionaires funding some of them.
Honeyporter735
(40 posts)It was illegal then and just as illegal as it is today.
They are asking questions of which they have no legal right to do so. Like providing all facebook postings made on you groups wall by you and all others responding on your fb wall. Any interviews you or any of your members on the radio, tv or newspapers.
They even want the names of all non paid volunteers
I could go on and on but get the idea.
The whole plan was to gather more information and to also make it too hard to comply so they'd be unable to go through their application.
This never should have happened and should frighten the hell out of the entire country. And it is an impeachable offense.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)WaPo is saying what? Lets find out during the hearings and I hope it opens up a can of worms againt the un-patrioic trolls called the tea party.
deurbano
(2,891 posts)<<The White House is legally prohibited from contacting the IRS about a tax matter, under a prohibition adopted after the Watergate scandal. And although it can contact the Treasury Department about tax issues, neither Treasury nor the IRS can disclose specific taxpayer information. The IRS can release information only about a petition for tax-exempt status once it has been approved.
Obama is not in a position to remove Lerner, a career official who can be terminated for cause only under normal civil service proceedings. The IRS has two political appointees: the commissioner, who serves a five-year term, and the chief counsel.>>
The IRS commissioner at the time in question was a Bush appointee, approved by unanimous consent (so, apparently not controversial?) in the Senate (March, 2008) when it consisted of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 2 Independents (Sanders and Liebermann). If there has been wrong doing, I dont see how Obama is implicated . unless the only Obama appointee--the chief counsel--gave incorrect (and unlawful) advice to IRS workers? (It would still be a huge stretch to pin that on the president ) Or, are some trying to make the case that members of the Obama administration actually ordered the IRS to do this and a few civil servants at the IRS agreed to break the law by complying? (But, what would motivate them? The president cant fire them for non-compliance or anything else.) Maybe they just thought some of the Tea Party groups appeared sketchy (A valid concern, which should have been handled in a careful and measured way that did not undermine the credibility and integrity of the IRS.)
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Conservatives have a history of astro turf tactics, so it wouldn't be outside of realm of possibility that "Tea Party" groups would be used to funnel dollars from political interests into campaigns in some way.
Remember, 501c status cannot be political in any way, a organization can do education and advocacy, but they cannot campaign. Tea Party groups are undoubtedly political.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)At least according to the IRS.
Thus, an organization exempt under IRC 501(c)(4) may engage in political campaign activities if those activities are not the organization's primary activity
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicm95.pdf
elleng
(130,128 posts)See Lawrence O'Donnell show for a full explanation.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)Or his guests with their 30 second soundbites. Tax law in this area is very blurry and each case rises or falls on its individual circumstances.
elleng
(130,128 posts)the individual circumstances particularly relate to the nature of the work of the entity seeking IRS approval. There were no 30 second soundbites, as he spent a good 10 minutes explaining the origins and developing history of the relevant sections of the tax code, so that those interested could be able to evaluate.
As I have no interest in returning to law school, I appreciated his well-presented discussion.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)Nothing could be more boring.
elleng
(130,128 posts)avoid tax! Imagine this: LOVED 'Procedure!' Due Process, I guess.
Honeyporter735
(40 posts)and asked them a lot of strange questions about their beliefs about Israel.
blm
(112,920 posts).
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)RussBLib
(8,984 posts)Tax-free groups are NOT supposed to lobby politically, yet many churches do and the IRS has done nothing.
The whole 501(c)4 program is a sham. You are supposed to be involved in "social welfare" and yet politics is ALL many of these groups are engaged in, including Karl Rove's groups.
A serious review of the (c)4 groups SHOULD be conducted, but no, no groups should be singled out for extra scrutiny. They ALL should be scrutinized and many of their charters revoked.