The report says, showed, I think you are once gain using your peculiar dictionary.
Not likely, as you are coming to defend **adaher **, one that is not shy on using conspiracy and racist sources. Instead of being dangerous many liberals do love to shine a light on conservatives like that one.
And you also have to be warned that he also does not mind pushing what the tea partiers say even when he reports that he knows that there is a problem with their science denialism.
I’m here to defend nothing but my principles. I’ll leave it to you pack dog liberals to attack people without cause.
Yea right. That certainly has a lot to to with IRS corruption. Try again.
Not what I was dealing with, only warning you, but suit yourself if you want to be with that crowd, I do not mind.
In any case it still says showed, not just being a part of the BOLO list. And everyone can see that you avoided that in your quote so as to allow you to look like a dolt by claiming that I was not trying.
Okay, so if they weren’t just on the BOLO list, in what way were they given unusual scrutiny? Did DC ask for their applications and delay them for a year or more?
Delaying applications, even assuming it happened, only meant those poor dears got to go on about their business any way they liked until the question was resolved. And you know what that means?
That means that Obama was making sure the Tea Partry flourished and thrived, dooming any chance of Republican credibility. Now, I’m not sure I approve such tactics…
It’s not safe for organizations to spend money they might need to pay taxes later. Which is why some just disbanded as a result of the delays.
It means that tea-party pac’s were denied tax exempt status to keep from functioning while their liberal counterparts were not. You know that as well as me or any fair thinking person.
But I commend elucidator for coming up with an original thought rather than just repeating Cummings’ talking points.
You think they disbanded because they were tax exempt but thought they might have to pay taxes later? If they were tax exempt, they would only have to “pay taxes later” if they failed to comply with the requirements* to maintain the status. Do you think organizations that fail to comply with the requirements to maintain tax exempt status should just be allowed to do so without penalty?
Remember, applying for review does not provide the tax exempt status so disbanding a tax exempt organization just because they haven’t received their verification doesn’t make much sense. Seems like a short-sighted move for an organization to make. Perhaps they were not as sure about their tax exempt status as you think they were; perhaps they even realized that they were not complying with the requirements, or perhaps they actually lost their status through non-compliance. It’s hard to know without some examples to review. If an organization said they disbanded because they didn’t understand the requirements, I would totally believe that.
No. Please contact the IRS and get a thorough explanation about what happens to an organization’s tax exempt status while they are awaiting review. Enjoy learning way more than you ever wanted to know about the benefits of applying for such a review while being assured that the review is not required.
It’s pretty easy to maintain tax exempt status: comply with the requirements* for tax exempt organizations and the status remains in effect; fail to do so and the status is lost, but can possibily be regained.
*the actual requirements, such as filing returns on time, complying with organizing documents, etc–not the ones you think must be complied with, such as applying for status review.
Problem was, these organizations didn’t have crack legal staffs, or often no legal staffs at all, and they were being asked to fill out huge questionnaires. The logical assumption is that if they couldn’t comply with the IRS requests, then they weren’t going to get tax exempt status, so they gave up. Which was the intention.
Not sure on what universe one can say that conservatives were kept from functioning while their liberal counterparts were not, when the evidence says otherwise.
Absent a sinister White House connection, the IRS can still be malevolent. Secondly, no conservative groups were denied, they just never heard back from the IRS or were given questionnaires with hundreds of unconstitutional questions.
Media Matters and the NY Times know this, thus my opinion that there’s an awful lot of bad faith around the liberal bastions of the press these days.
This stuff is just too easy to understand and I can’t imagine that the left has suddenly gone stupid.
Point of order, you and others reported that no liberal groups were stopped. The evidence is here to show who is going stupid by denying that simple evidence.
They were denied as part of the normal process, in Cincinnati. Only Tea Party applications went to DC.
Normal process vs. illegal targeting, not a hard distinction to make.
To demonstrate how graphically stupid this line of argument is, it’s comparable to insisting that there’s no racial profiling because whites get pulled over too.
No, what you are doing is stupid because a lot of context is still continue to be ignored, the majority of groups that appeared in that period were conservative, it is stupid to deny that there were no liberal groups inconvenienced in that time too, and liberal keywords where in the BOLO list.
But handled in Cincinnati under normal procedures. Tea Party groups, 100% of them, were chosen for special scrutiny by the DC counsel’s office, which as Carter Hull pointed out, was not procedure at all.
And as usual, one has to check who is being more reliable? Issa and FOX or Mediamatters?
Heck, I got a real good guess for why those filings were “kicked upstairs”: Because they were politically and legally “touchy”. They passed into the hands of higher ups and IRS legal experts precisely because they involved organizations that were clearly engaged in political action.
And what does a dedicated bureaucrat do with a touchy issue, one that might land him in trouble? He passes it along to someone else, doesn’t he?
What about that do you find even surprising, much less damning evidence of perfidy?
And why should they even care? So they disband, so what? They’ve still got their mailing lists, their contributors, and…the cherry atop the turd sundae!..martyrdom! Crushed beneath the jackboot Birkenstocks of the Obama cheka!
“Alas, the Bumfuk County Tea Party is now more, stamped out. Please give generously to the Tea Party of Bumfuk County…”
Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber. Rinse and repeat, as needed.
The flaw in that theory is that only Tea Party applications went to DC, which was discriminatory. Strike one. THen those Tea party groups received questionnaires with unconstitutional, illegal questions, and these questions came from the counsel’s office! Strike two. Finally, the Tea party groups weren’t denied, they were slow walked, delayed, and not even Congressmen calling on their behalf could get information. Strike three.
Strike four: Hofacre was just following orders. Hull was just following orders. Now we have to get Wilkins in front of Congress to find out if he was following orders, or whether it was his idea.