IRS 'targeted' groups with 'Occupy' and 'Progressive' in names

Originally posted by olaru12

I for one don't like to see the govt. targeting anyone for their politics, right, left or bat**** crazy!!

Either we all enjoy liberty to express ourselves; or none of us do. It's not a partisan issue; it's called freedom of speech.

The cops at 'Occupy' had other ideas though....didn't they?

edit on 24-6-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

i have too agree with you,
liberty and justice for all.....

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XPLodER

 

I'd like to hear from these groups. I'd like to hear, in their own words, the same stories of scrutiny. The same intrusive questions.

no outrage?
what makes you think that the exact same treatment was not equally shared around?

xploder

No.

If was equally shared, then there would have been immediate stories to counter the accusations that the administration was targeting conservative groups.

I cry foul, good sir. Foul!

Originally posted by Diisenchanted
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Don't you think it is a little ironic that none of these progressive or occupy groups have come forward and claimed unfair targeting? Me I would personally like to see a copy of the questions posed to these groups.

not really, IMHO when applying for exemption you are asking for a right not to pay tax on donations,
it really is what ever they want to see you give to them (IRS) as they can ask for what ever they want to satisfy their obligations to remove fraudulent charities. after all its an exemption not a right

Were they any thing like (what do you pray about)?

as far as i can find out, many awkward questions were asked and some that sounded like they had no relevance at all,
i cant give you indepth detail because i was not part of it.

I seriously doubt this article. I think they are just trying to make this scandal a none issue.

or this scandal was "manufactured" to hide the illegality of groups subverting the charity exemption for political purposes.
i didnt see anyone else complain so loudly when they were investigated for the exemption,
where there is smoke.........

Further more they targeted any group with words like freedom, constitution, and the tea party in their names. I don't know where you get your ideology but in the dictionary those words are not political.

read my profile fffrrrreeeeedddooommm........
tea party is political, they ran candidates and funding for party platforms.

If you look up on Wikipedia you will find that the gentleman who started the tea party asked both dems and repubs to join. Also the tea party is for smaller government ,

both dems and repubs were represented by occupy as well

The left is the ones that make it political. Remember they're the ones that want to shred the constitution!

i forgive you for your partisan position on this issue,
it effects Americans not an individual group of Americans

xploder

you do realise i pointed this fact out at the time?

i braved the thread and tryed to explain the exact same thing had happened to occupy,
i tryed to point out this whole thing was about BOTH sides being treated unfairly and i was shouted down.

No.

If was equally shared, then there would have been immediate stories to counter the accusations that the administration was targeting conservative groups.

I cry foul, good sir. Foul!

you must remember that at the time this was happening that the "eviction" of the occupy camps was happining,
as i understand it it took months and months to get exempt status and in the mean time our movement was crushed with violence and arrests.

its hard to compete with violence for attention.

we had bigger problems than the IRS,
xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER


we had bigger problems than the IRS,
xploder

On this, we agree.


But until I see dozens of progressive groups come out with documentation showing the same hostile disregard that the conservative groups suffered under, I must again cry foul.

Originally posted by neo96
And I am still wating for the answer of how a 'group' of people 'jobless' which means they have no income. living in tents get targeted.

Oh just because the Daily kos says so.

You are aware that there were those who "camped" and those that had day jobs, right? Just because the media focused on the whole "camps" and tents aspect doesn't mean that they were all jobless and homeless just because the media said so. Though for the record, I will say that having the homeless population flocking to the Occupy protests as it occurred in nearly every city should not have been a surprise as they were providing shelter, food, and more at the sites. You bet the homeless were going to start moving in and that is probably what eventually led to the representation of them being proliferate with the homeless unemployed. A few of my accounting professors were actually active in Occupy in my locality and although they did not spend the ngiht, they went to every march, oddly enough.

I find this part of "Occupy" to be the most interesting to be honest:
www.occupythesec.org...

I'm also not surprised in the slightest that they were put under the same lens as the Tea Party. Both Occupy and the Tea Party had some distinct similarities in targets such as the Federal Reserve and taxation. Occupy also included the student loan issues (later to be found as being affected by the Libor Scandal), corporate corruption, mortgage frauds/foreclosures, and "revolving door" issues within regulatory agencies. So not a great surprise at all that Occupy literally got the reception that it did within the media and the government.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by XPLodER


we had bigger problems than the IRS,
xploder

On this, we agree.


But until I see dozens of progressive groups come out with documentation showing the same hostile disregard that the conservative groups suffered under, I must again cry foul.

while i can only give you anecdotal accounts of what i heard,
i cannot confirm anything as i was not part of the group that underwent the exemption requests.

i can tell you that along side the IRS occupy had international intelligence agencies spying on them and local and federal police,
AND
that leaders were target for assassination, i have read the reports leaked online and can confirm the feds took it seriously.

in light of this the IRS scandal was a sideline issue at that point in time.

the occupy protesters were the target of NSA spying as well as federal crack downs.

i never saw anyone other than occupy beaten with battons.

as a side note occupy got its exemption, even with all the attension from the feds ect.

xploder

I agree with beezzer on this.

I think this is a White House trick plain and simple.

The IRS testimonies so far have been riddled with lie after lie.

The Left is SOOOO brainfrosted by this and all they can come up with is this "news"

We have seen posts in other threads that confirm many Left Wing outfits got quick-like "approvals" and retroactive status.

This is just another attempt to dupe the public and make the Lefties feel better

After all, they love to cry. The FACT that Conservative groups got swindled makes the left feel "Left Out"

They are attempting to somehow "equalize" the damage.

I say it's all BeeEss

Originally posted by xuenchen
I agree with beezzer on this.

I think this is a White House trick plain and simple.

The IRS testimonies so far have been riddled with lie after lie.

The Left is SOOOO brainfrosted by this and all they can come up with is this "news"

We have seen posts in other threads that confirm many Left Wing outfits got quick-like "approvals" and retroactive status.

This is just another attempt to dupe the public and make the Lefties feel better

After all, they love to cry. The FACT that Conservative groups got swindled makes the left feel "Left Out:

They are attempting to somehow "equalize" the damage.

I say it's all BeeEss

i feel sorry you think this is left VS right,
it is right VS wrong

welcome to the thread

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


I think it's very obvious that the Left thinks it is LvR.

Good point anyway.

reply to post by XPLodER


It is a right vs wrong.

I would be as equally appalled by a conservative government targeting liberal groups, as has been shown and discussed in the past.

It is wrong to target political opponents. It is wrong when conservatives use the office to target political opponents.

It is wrong when liberal administrations use the office to target political opponents.

To defend an administration by showing that "both" "ides" were targeted without valid proof on one side is creating a polar environment.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XPLodER

 

It is a right vs wrong.

I would be as equally appalled by a conservative government targeting liberal groups, as has been shown and discussed in the past.

It is wrong to target political opponents. It is wrong when conservatives use the office to target political opponents.

It is wrong when liberal administrations use the office to target political opponents.

agreed

To defend an administration by showing that "both" "ides" were targeted without valid proof on one side is creating a polar environment.

i am not defending anyone,
i am trying to point out that this outrage at being targeted removed scrutiny from charities that were set up specifically to shield donars from having to declare their political donations.

the real scandal is that groups both left and right have sought to apply for exemption on the grounds of charity,
only to funnel the money towards electioneering.

this means litigate charities who actually help people have less to work with.

like i said this is not left VS right,
this is right VS wrong

the outrage over targeting HID the problem.

im not trying to say that two wrongs make it alright,
i am trying to say that this has distracted from the real problem of subverting charity.

xploder

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by XPLodER


we had bigger problems than the IRS,
xploder

On this, we agree.


But until I see dozens of progressive groups come out with documentation showing the same hostile disregard that the conservative groups suffered under, I must again cry foul.

The ONLY reason Conservative groups were being targeted was because of George Soros and his Progressive groups and Money.

Its been proven already.

While the IRS targeting of conservative groups was still heating up in 2012, a Soros-funded journalism nonprofit was helping fan the flames. The Pulitzer-Prize-winning ProPublica released two stories targeting conservative nonprofits including Crossroads GPS, Americans for Prosperity and the Republican Jewish Coalition. ProPublica was founded by prominent Democratic contributor and has direct connections to some of the nation’s top news organizations from The New York Times to ABC News. ProPublica was also the organization that received leaked IRS tax forms of conservative groups.

Soros-Funded News Operation Helped Build IRS Case Against Tea Party

This is the nugget that MANY are not willing to see.

The IRS did not only pick on conservative groups. It also flagged liberal groups, using word searches for “progressive” in their names, though fewer. Data just released of 175 approved applications reveals that about 122 were conservative and 48 liberal or simply publicly involved, with six indeterminate. Right-wing or conservative groups, however, were responsible for more than 80 percent of the roughly $260 million spent by 501(c)(4)s on the 2012 election cycle.

The real IRS scandal


Clearly the"Conservative" Scrutiny was proportionally lopsided. All of this because Money manipulates the outcomes of Presidential Elections.

And then this......

The IRS’ targeting of conservative groups has fallen out of public view, at least momentarily, as the NSA and PRISM data-collection scandals have burst onto the scene.

But, behind the scenes, the left is catching its breath and regrouping, having come up with what it says is an explanation for at least 157 visits to the White House by former IRS Director Douglas Shulman between 2010 and 2012.

By comparison, Shulman’s predecessor Mark Everson visited the White House only one time in four years during the George W. Bush administration, according to the Daily Caller.

322 IRS Visits to White House

For ANYONE to believe those visits to the White House was only due to Obamacare is laughable.

This isn't a left/right Problem. This is a Government out of control Problem. This is a manipulation problem from those who have the money to manipulate politics in general.


I am waiting to see where the Koch Brothers Money/Organizations falls into all of this too......

Look at the hardcore conservatives squirm.

Why do you have such trouble listening to facts that our outside your belief system?!?

Originally posted by sonnny1

But, behind the scenes, the left is catching its breath and regrouping, having come up with what it says is an explanation for at least 157 visits to the White House by former IRS Director Douglas Shulman between 2010 and 2012.

By comparison, Shulman’s predecessor Mark Everson visited the White House only one time in four years during the George W. Bush administration, according to the Daily Caller.
322 IRS Visits to White House

For ANYONE to believe those visits to the White House was only due to Obamacare is laughable.

Does the number of visits to the white house mean anything??

It would only take one visit to set up the alledged targeting.

"Hey target my opponents" -Obama

Maybe a second meeting of "Hey we messed them over big time." (of course they were only audited)-IRS

That's 2 meetings. Please explain why the number of meetings matters at all, and signifies anything.

Originally posted by Ghost375

Originally posted by sonnny1

But, behind the scenes, the left is catching its breath and regrouping, having come up with what it says is an explanation for at least 157 visits to the White House by former IRS Director Douglas Shulman between 2010 and 2012.

By comparison, Shulman’s predecessor Mark Everson visited the White House only one time in four years during the George W. Bush administration, according to the Daily Caller.
322 IRS Visits to White House

For ANYONE to believe those visits to the White House was only due to Obamacare is laughable.

Does the number of visits to the white house mean anything??

It would only take one visit to set up the alledged targeting.

"Hey target my opponents" -Obama

Maybe a second meeting of "Hey we messed them over big time." (of course they were only audited)-IRS

That's 2 meetings. Please explain why the number of meetings matters at all, and signifies anything.

edit on 25-6-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-6-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)

Ghost....... you CHERRY PICKED the whole post.

But Really, I'm not surprised.

"Modus operandi"





Lets see, you obviously didn't read this and didn't want to comment on this either.

This isn't a left/right Problem. This is a Government out of control Problem. This is a manipulation problem from those who have the money to manipulate politics in general.

Now, lets get into what you asked about.

With your reasoning, it would ONLY take ONE visit to talk about Obamacare, wouldn't it.

Seeing they don't have phones or Computers (Skype) (Messenger) (Email) in the White House,and not wanting anyone knowing what was talked about when this Government keeps tabs on everyone, the ONLY reasonable mode of getting any point or information across, without being spied on is done by.......





Without a paper trail, or Obama having Nixon's old recorder handy, they can make up anything, and say they talked about anything except targeting certain groups.



I know its hard for you to swallow that This Administration or this President can do no wrong, but eventually, just like Past Presidents, you will see him for what he truly is.

Until then.......




Pick a flavor.....

reply to post by XPLodER

This will not be major news simply because it shatters the Left Right paradigm.

Government will move against anyone it views as a threat. It doesnt matter if they voted for Obama.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by XPLodER

 

This will not be major news simply because it shatters the Left Right paradigm.

Government will move against anyone it views as a threat. It doesnt matter if they voted for Obama.

correct,
the left right division only serves to keep us impotent.
i for one would stand with any american who sees this as a problem of democracy,
and if that means tea party or occupy or both
this is an issue bigger than individual ideologies

let us stand together untill true democracy is again providing for the freedoms of all.

73% of people want election financing reform,
that means we have common ground

xploder

Originally posted by neo96
And I am still wating for the answer of how a 'group' of people 'jobless' which means they have no income. living in tents get targeted.

Oh just because the Daily kos says so.

How come nobody seems to realize that "targeting" - in this case - means doing the required evaluation to see whether a group that is filing paperwork to achieve tax-free status is actually supposed to be given tax-free status, as opposed to just rubber-stamping that group's application. Groups like soup kitchens and shelters are supposed to get tax-free status. Not Super-PACs. Well, that's not true, because Crossroads GPS is a tax-free group, but that's not how it's supposed to work. And yet, that's how it works for them, since they got rubber-stamped, but other conservative and liberal PACs didn't get rubber-stamped so they're crybabying to the idiot media about it as if it's some kind of scandal. Of course, the idiot media doesn't understand anything, so it's shrieking as if that scrutiny is a tax audit - which it's not.

Looking into the kind of operation a group claims to be while considering whether to grant that group a tax-free status is NOT the same as tax auditing that group. You kids are good at getting hysterical, but not good at knowing what you're getting hysterical about.

reply to post by NorEaster

Dear NorEaster,

Good post, well thought out and eloquently expressed.

You're conclusions, and some supporting statements are as wrong as can be, but good writing anyway. You'll recall that Obama, and the highest levels of the IRS, admitted to, and apologized for, targeting conservative groups. Obama apologizing in public for something he didn't do? Not likely at all. In fact, he called it "outrageous." Now we have the Inspector General's report. It probably wasn't brought to your attention, though, so I can understand.

Moreover, the IRS broke its own rules with a deep dive into the names of the groups’ donors, among other things, says the new report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

That included whether the groups’ donors or officials have run or will run for public office; details about the conversations and discussions the groups’ members had about the issues; and other jobs the members held outside the group, including hours worked.

The IG report also says the IRS broke the rules when it demanded these groups fork over lists of names of past and future donors.

Specifically, the IG report says the IRS wrongfully asked for the dollar amount of donations and grant income for each year; the dates the groups received them; as well as the political affiliations of their speakers and candidates supported.

Moreover, the IG report says the IRS asked how the applicants used donations and grants, in violation of the rules. It also asked for a list of issues important to the applicant, its position about the issues.

Specifically, the IRS “developed and used inappropriate criteria to identify applications” with the words “Tea Party,” “Patriots” and “9/12,” or had a focus on “government spending,” “debt” or “taxes,” or said they wanted “to “make America a better place to live,” or had any statements that “criticize how the country is being run,” the report says, instead of focusing on all applications with indications of potential political campaign activities.

A nonprofit’s focus on “government spending,” “debt” or “taxes,” or wanting “to “make America a better place to live” or “criticizing how the country is being run,” fall within the education mission of tax-exempt groups under the law.

But the IG report says that, even so, the IRS case files “did not include the specific reason(s)” why the applications were targeted “for further review,” violating the IRS’s own rules ensuring officials are “impartial” and handle “tax matters in a manner that will promote public confidence.”

www.foxbusiness.com...

So, yeah, I think there was targeting. And the sudden appearance of the claim "We were fair and equal, we didn't target anybody," stretches my credulity past it's limits.

With respect,
Charles1952