The IRS targeting of tea party members

[NotfooledbyW]

@elucidator

I mean, how would such a conspiracy even work? Who could initiate it, who has the clout to tell the IRS what to do? And how do you keep it secret? Has Obama got a secret list of total loyalists who can be trusted, or is he borrowing one from the Illuminati.

And how far does it get before security is breached? Every office in America has at least one rightard weirdo, someone who’d rat out his Mom for a clear shot at Megyn Kelly! How the fuck would you keep him from finding out?

What about the memos? Detailing the scheme, how to go about it. Somebody has them, yes? If it happened in a bureaucracy, there’s at least one memo! Nobody called Fox News, says “One hundred grand, and its yours, Sean!”

Somebody wants me to believe that if you put this half-ass plan in front of Obama he’d go for it? “Yeah, sure, what could possibly go wrong! And this has the extra advantage of stopping the Tea Party from wrecking the Republican Party, what’s not to love? …”

And if it wasn’t him that was so fucking stupid as to think this would work, well, then who was it? Who could call the IRS and bark and make shit happen. Fuckin’ Cheney is gone, man…

And the three Tea Party victims of IRS jackboots who testified before Issa were from like Alabama Arkansas and California. As if Obama cared about winning Ark an Ala, and Cal was gonna turn red for this weeping TeaBagger if they got tax exempt status before November.

[adaher]

@elucidator

I predict this scandal will spread like mildfire.

Awesome.

The reason it perked my ears up though is that an abortion alternative organization focused mainly on adoption was harassed by the IRS. It made me start wondering if the administration has an ideological bug up their ass about adoption.

Given that the IRS got almost no money out of the audits, and given that the Democratic Congress made the credit less generous(it used to be refundable, now it’s not), it does make me think they aren’t big fans of adoption.

[Magiver]

@elucidator

I mean, how would such a conspiracy even work? Who could initiate it, who has the clout to tell the IRS what to do? And how do you keep it secret? Has Obama got a secret list of total loyalists who can be trusted, or is he borrowing one from the Illuminati.

If there was only a crazy wackjob hired by the President who would publicly stab tables with a steak knife while going over a list of his enemies. Not the kind of person you want around if the President wins a 2nd term.

So lets go to the instant replay and see what’s transpired so far. A high ranking official in the IRS deliberately sets up the release of their transgression to the public. It’s then admitted publicly that they did indeed target groups based on political affiliation.

Kinda hard not to ask questions when a government agency admits to political shenanigans so Congress sets up hearings. For some strange reason the higher-ups decide to plead the 5th and withhold information from Congress. Kinda odd that a non-conspiracy would require such behavior.

[adaher]

I’m not even sure it qualifies as a conspiracy. Nor do I think orders were necessary. The IRS’ union donates primarily to Democrats and IRS higher ups were often big donors to Obama’s campaign. Meanwhile, the Republicans want to cut government employment and especially the IRS. Then you’ve got an environment where Senators have urged the IRS to look into these groups, and the President himself publicly questions the legality of these groups.

You don’t need a conspiracy. The IRS probably just thought it had license. They didn’t know that the same people who urged them to do exactly what they did would throw them under the bus if they actually did it.

[Shodan]

Correction: if they got caught actually doing it.

Regards,
Shodan

[Blacksmith]

Just finished reading the thread.

The contents should have astonished me, or something. Instead, they just made me tired.

[elucidator]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/06/09/2126151/irs-staff-undermine-gop-claims-that-washington-directed-targeting-of-conservative-groups-top-democrat-says/

From our good friends at ThinkProgress:

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) — the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee — pledged to release transcripts of interviews with Internal Revenue Service (IRS) officials that Republicans insist demonstrate that the agency’s targeting of conservative groups applying for 501(c)(4) status was directed by the Obama administration.

Cummings made the remarks on CNN’s State of the Union, a week after Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) appeared on the program and insinuated that the White House directed IRS agents to single out tea party and patriot groups for additional scrutiny. Issa has refused to provide evidence that substantiate that claim…

Cummings insisted that the interviews will prove that “the White House was not involved in this,” pointing out that the Cincinnati IRS manager of the screening group, a career veteran at the agency who identified himself as Republican, told investigators that Washington did not direct the targeting. “I do not believe that the screening of these cases had anything to do other than consistency and identifying issues that needed to have further development,” the individual told investigators according to portion of the transcripts released by the Democratic staff on the House Oversight Committee…

It appears friend Adaher is ahead of the curve on this one, already bailing out on the conspiracy by the Obama Admin. to screw their political enemies. No, no, its the liberal dominance of the IRS, as proven by their possession by a Union (gasp!), which fostered this dark conspiracy. So direction from the White House was unnecessary!

Sneaky devils! There is no evidence of a conspiracy because there was no conspiracy, and that’s why you can’t find any evidence of the actual conspiracy, because it was secret even from those people most deeply involved in the conspiracy!

Oh, and Macgiver? About this:

…For some strange reason the higher-ups decide to plead the 5th…

A higher up. Singular. One. If you want to inflate her, maybe you can say she weighs 400 pounds. But you can’t really make her plural.

[Magiver]

@elucidator

Oh, and Macgiver? About this:
A higher up. Singular. One. If you want to inflate her, maybe you can say she weighs 400 pounds. But you can’t really make her plural.

Well halucidator, if the IRS isn’t answerable to Congress then where does that put the American people who are subjected to the whims of the IRS? I realize they’re probably too busy making Star Trek videos and line dancing but at some point they should be held to account for their behavior.

[elucidator]

From liberal hobnails crunching their way across the Constitution down to the Macarena? So its come to this, has it? Thanks for the chuckles.

[adaher]

Time for another round of reform weakening the IRS.

[JohnT]

Four years later, the Inspector General put paid to conservative tears about this “unfair targeting”.

A new report from the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration sheds a revelatory light on the 2013 controversy that led many to accuse the IRS under the Obama administration of targeting conservative non-profit groups for increased scrutiny.

ADVERTISING

The IRS singled out progressive groups seeking tax exempt status, too, according to the new report, and did so based on their names or implied political beliefs.

In 2013, an inspector general’s report forced the resignation of IRS Commissioner Steven Miller and Lois Lerner, who oversaw the IRS division for tax exempt groups, over accusations they had targeted conservative groups applying for tax exempt status.

A new report from the same inspector general office, completed on Sept. 28 and released publicly Thursday, found that the IRS flagged phrases associated with both progressive and conservative groups for further review.

…

For example, one 2012 BOLO listing (short for “Be on the Look Out,” which alerted IRS officials to scrutinize applicants further) included in the 2017 report characterized the occupy movement’s “Current Political Issues” as “Political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the constitution, $ocial economic reform/movement.”

“It was included on the BOLO listing after news articles surfaced stating that Occupy organizations were starting to file for I.R.C. § 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status,” the report explains.

The top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee at the time of the 2013 report, Rep. Sandy Levin (D-MI), said in a statement Thursday that the new inspector general report “validates” his assertions in 2013 “that there was no political motivation in the IRS’s processing of tax-exempt applications.”

“Republicans completely politicized an investigation into this issue,” Levin’s statement continued. “They claimed a May 2013 TIGTA report, which it’s now shown was wholly incomplete, to supported their allegations that the IRS Tax-Exempt and Government Entities Division, then led by Lois Lerner, targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups for heightened scrutiny based solely on their political views.”

[adaher]

Okay, so if they didn’t do anything, why did this whole thing start with Lois Lerner announcing that they did something?

[jayjay]

@adaher

Okay, so if they didn’t do anything, why did this whole thing start with Lois Lerner announcing that they did something?

There’s a difference between “they didn’t do anything” and “they didn’t do anything WRONG”. And Dems have been telling you people this for four years now.

[adaher]

Lois Lerner admitted the IRS did wrong when she first revealed the story.

[running_coach]

@adaher

Lois Lerner admitted the IRS did wrong when she first revealed the story.

Exact quote?

[Snarky_Kong]

Lots of people admit to wrongdoing they had no part in because they think it means they’ll get off easier if they do.

That there was no ‘there’ there was obvious to anyone that was paying attention and didn’t have an agenda for the entire time. Just another gross symptom of right wing media in this country.

[DrDeth]

@adaher

Lois Lerner admitted the IRS did wrong when she first revealed the story.

Not quite.

*Lois G. Lerner, the IRS official who oversees tax-exempt groups, said the “absolutely inappropriate” actions by “front-line people” were not driven by partisan motives.

Rather, Lerner said, they were a misguided effort to come up with an efficient means of dealing with a flood of applications from organizations seeking tax-exempt status between 2010 and 2012.*

IRS admits targeting conservatives for tax scrutiny in 2012 election

[adaher]

Okay, so the issue isn’t that they weren’t wrong, it’s that they were wrong to everyone.

[running_coach]

@adaher

Okay, so the issue isn’t that they weren’t wrong, it’s that they were wrong to everyone.

Which makes the whole “targeting conservative groups” a lie.

[DrDeth]

@adaher

Okay, so the issue isn’t that they weren’t wrong, it’s that they were wrong to everyone.

More or less. They were inundated and had personnel cut backs, so since Political groups can’t be Non-profit, they targeted any whose name appeared political.