IRS Selectively Targeting

[Ed W]

pancakes?  The IRS is being sued for seizing the medical records of one million people!

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/15/irs-sued-for-improperly-seizing-the-medical-records-of-10-million-americans/

[guido911]

Nnnooooo....I  am  typing  slowly  so  you  can  understand   .... 


The RWRE is getting their panties in a wad over 4 killed in Benghazi - which is perfectly fine with me - as long as we revisit the past history and get all twisted up over the previous failures, too.  If Obama deserves impeachment, Bush deserved it 8 times as much!  I think war crime trials may be in order all around!

I'll hunt around and see where the RWRE Busheviks said a video led to those attacks, and screamed that "what difference does it make", etc. Nice straw man you have there.

[Conan71]

Interesting, one must find more about this incident in the foreign press.  It's not playing so well in our lame stream.

"Mistakes were made, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan motivation," he wrote. "We are—and will continue to be—dedicated to reviewing all applications for tax-exempt status in an impartial manner." (IRS head Steven Miller in an op-ed otherwise credited in this story)

Except, of course, when it comes to the Barack H Obama Foundation.

Let's go back to May 8, 2011, right in the thick of the IRS targeting activity. The NY Post writes a revealing piece how the Barack H Obama Foundation, run by Obama's half-brother Malik:

"President Obama's half-brother runs an off-the-books American charity that claims to support poor Kenyans—but it lies about its federal status and no one knows how it spends its money."

and

"Malik started his charity the year his brother ran for president. The foundation claims to be a tax-exempt, federally recognized nonprofit. It is not. Nor are there any filings of its expenditures, which the IRS requires of larger charities. Alton Ray Baysden, a former State Department employee at whose Virginia home the charity was founded in 2008, admitted the organization has not even applied for tax-exempt status",

Because of this, the National Legal and Policy Center, a Washington, DC, watchdog group, made a formal complaint to the IRS and US Post Office that prior week in the beginning of May 2011.

The result? This sunlight on the foundation means that the The Barack H Foundation hurriedly applied for and received tax exempt status in anunprecedented 30 days. The letter of their approval is currently available on the foundations' website, which is signed by.... Lois Lerner. On top of it, the status was made retroactive to December 2008.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55193

Is this just a fascinating coincidence that Malik Obama could get an application approved in 30 days as well as getting it approved retroactive by two years?  I'm quite certain if any of us had pulled such a shenanigan, we'd be sitting in El Reno or Leavenworth awaiting trial for mail fraud and tax evasion.

[patric]

I'll hunt around and see where the RWRE Busheviks said a video led to those attacks, and screamed that "what difference does it make", etc. Nice straw man you have there.

Tuesday killing's of U.S. Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens is the result of "President Obama's failure to lead and his failed foreign policy of appeasement and apology," U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe said Wednesday.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Inhofe_Libya_ambassadors_death_a_result_of_Obamas_failure/20120912_335_0_tuesda686626

[heironymouspasparagus]

I'll hunt around and see where the RWRE Busheviks said a video led to those attacks, and screamed that "what difference does it make", etc. Nice straw man you have there.

Reality, guido....reality!!

Where is your - or the RWRE "Somewhat Righteous Indignation" over the killing of 30 and wounding of many more when it happened so many times in the previous regime?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Interesting, one must find more about this incident in the foreign press.  It's not playing so well in our lame stream.

Is this just a fascinating coincidence that Malik Obama could get an application approved in 30 days as well as getting it approved retroactive by two years?  I'm quite certain if any of us had pulled such a shenanigan, we'd be sitting in El Reno or Leavenworth awaiting trial for mail fraud and tax evasion.

Just another reason why there should be no tax exempt organizations....

[Gaspar]

Just another reason why there should be no tax exempt organizations....

LOL!  Why blame the tax code?  Why not blame the politicians who use it as an instrument of force.

If the teacher gives little Johnny too many cookies and he gets fat, it's not the cookie's fault.

[heironymouspasparagus]

LOL!  Why blame the tax code?  Why not blame the politicians who use it as an instrument of force.

If the teacher gives little Johnny too many cookies and he gets fat, it's not the cookie's fault.

The tax code IS the problem in this case.  Why are there 27 types of tax exempt organizations??  And why would "Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents" need tax exempt status?  Or Social and Recreation Clubs?  Or one of my favorites - Cemetery Companies? 

1, 2 and 3...ok.  Get rid of the rest of them.  They are just political patronage payback stuff.

Or if they aren't gonna do that, then make #28 for Civil and Personal Rights Preservation Organizations.  That way the NRA can get tax exempt status!   They do a lot more toward social good in this country than a lot of those.   Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations - yeah...rich little college boys playing their way through school!!

[Gaspar]

The tax code IS the problem in this case.  Why are there 27 types of tax exempt organizations??  And why would "Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents" need tax exempt status?  Or Social and Recreation Clubs?  Or one of my favorites - Cemetery Companies? 

1, 2 and 3...ok.  Get rid of the rest of them.  They are just political patronage payback stuff.

Or if they aren't gonna do that, then make #28 for Civil and Personal Rights Preservation Organizations.  That way the NRA can get tax exempt status!   They do a lot more toward social good in this country than a lot of those.   Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations - yeah...rich little college boys playing their way through school!!

You're right.  There should me a more fair method of taxation!

[Conan71]

The tax code IS the problem in this case.  Why are there 27 types of tax exempt organizations??  And why would "Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents" need tax exempt status?  Or Social and Recreation Clubs?  Or one of my favorites - Cemetery Companies? 

1, 2 and 3...ok.  Get rid of the rest of them.  They are just political patronage payback stuff.

Or if they aren't gonna do that, then make #28 for Civil and Personal Rights Preservation Organizations.  That way the NRA can get tax exempt status!   They do a lot more toward social good in this country than a lot of those.   Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations - yeah...rich little college boys playing their way through school!!

Don't forget labor unions.

The issue I have with many "non-profits" is the organization shows no profit or plows it back into property or its works but often times there's someone at the top who has become incredibly wealthy as a result of tax-free contributions.  Morris Dees of the SPLC comes to mind as one of those.  Or how about Fred Phelps of Westboro Church.  Both disgusting individuals who are taking advantage of the tax code.  I realize they are taxed on their personal earnings or income from the NPO.  Westboro Baptist likely blurs the lines between "church and state" when they protest military funerals.  Churches with predominantly minority congregations who bus people to the polls or mention someone they should vote for during Sunday announcements certainly are crossing the line but it's not enforced.  Why would that be? Mainly because in poorer people and minorities primarily vote Democrat?

[Ed W]

Churches with predominantly minority congregations who bus people to the polls or mention someone they should vote for during Sunday announcements certainly are crossing the line but it's not enforced.  Why would that be? Mainly because in poorer people and minorities primarily vote Democrat?

I attended a church service just after Bill Clinton defeated Bush The First back in '92. The preacher said, "Well, the election is over, and our guy lost." Now, prior to the election, he'd never endorsed a candidate from the pulpit - and that's as it should be.  Still, he was an example of the not overly subtle endorsement of conservative candidates here in Oklahoma.   

[heironymouspasparagus]

Don't forget labor unions.

The issue I have with many "non-profits" is the organization shows no profit or plows it back into property or its works but often times there's someone at the top who has become incredibly wealthy as a result of tax-free contributions.  Morris Dees of the SPLC comes to mind as one of those.  Or how about Fred Phelps of Westboro Church.  Both disgusting individuals who are taking advantage of the tax code.  I realize they are taxed on their personal earnings or income from the NPO.  Westboro Baptist likely blurs the lines between "church and state" when they protest military funerals.  Churches with predominantly minority congregations who bus people to the polls or mention someone they should vote for during Sunday announcements certainly are crossing the line but it's not enforced.  Why would that be? Mainly because in poorer people and minorities primarily vote Democrat?

That's why I said get rid of everything past #3.  501(c)3.


You touch on the Westboro - how a non-profit is used as a political organization - THAT is exactly the issue here.  The IRS set these 75 aside PLUS another 225 for further review.  NONE of which were denied status after that "further review".  So where is the issue here?  Well, there really is none.  But the RWRE....well, you know how they are....that's why you are recovering, isn't it?  From the hijacked Republican party....

[Conan71]

That's why I said get rid of everything past #3.  501(c)3.


You touch on the Westboro - how a non-profit is used as a political organization - THAT is exactly the issue here.  The IRS set these 75 aside PLUS another 225 for further review.  NONE of which were denied status after that "further review".  So where is the issue here?  Well, there really is none.  But the RWRE....well, you know how they are....that's why you are recovering, isn't it?  From the hijacked Republican party....

The issue is, these organizations with obvious conservative ties in their names were made to sit and spin while progressive organizations were processed much quicker. It's been admitted that the IRS agents were deliberately delaying the applications due to the conservative nature of the groups.

As an aside, we could probably gain on our deficit issues by putting a much tighter noose on what qualifies as an NPO as well as cutting a lot of government bloat, like the IRS.  Of course if we went to a consumption-based tax system like the Fair Tax, non-profit status would likely become pretty irrelevant for many NPO's.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The issue is, these organizations with obvious conservative ties in their names were made to sit and spin while progressive organizations were processed much quicker. It's been admitted that the IRS agents were deliberately delaying the applications due to the conservative nature of the groups.

As an aside, we could probably gain on our deficit issues by putting a much tighter noose on what qualifies as an NPO as well as cutting a lot of government bloat, like the IRS.  Of course if we went to a consumption-based tax system like the Fair Tax, non-profit status would likely become pretty irrelevant for many NPO's.

One office - said to be Cinncinnatti.  Probably either 1 or 2 people.  And 75 out of a total 300 set aside.  And those people - whether 1 or 2 or 20 should be eliminated.

Couple of questions that I have are what were the other 225 that were set aside?  And how many apps went through during the same time frame and what was the make up of those groups?  Specifically, how many teas went through at that office while 75 others were being reviewed?

And probably the biggest question I have is if it is more than 1 or 2 people doing this, why?  IOW, why does it take so many people to look at a relatively small number of this type of application?  Too many employees, with too much time on their hands, since they are getting into this kind of trouble!

[Conan71]

One office - said to be Cinncinnatti.  Probably either 1 or 2 people.  And 75 out of a total 300 set aside.  And those people - whether 1 or 2 or 20 should be eliminated.

Couple of questions that I have are what were the other 225 that were set aside?  And how many apps went through during the same time frame and what was the make up of those groups?  Specifically, how many teas went through at that office while 75 others were being reviewed?

And probably the biggest question I have is if it is more than 1 or 2 people doing this, why?  IOW, why does it take so many people to look at a relatively small number of this type of application?  Too many employees, with too much time on their hands, since they are getting into this kind of trouble!

If you are paying attention to how this is playing out, it is much bigger than just two agents.  Again, see my post above about the president's half-brother's foundation getting it's application approved in record time as well as retroactive for the two prior years when he was illegally soliciting and accepting contributions while claiming to be an NPO. 

That is unless you only get your news from MSNBC or the lamestream.