[talaniman]

That's your spin and you are entitled to it. I disagree. No spin, no hollering, no paranoia.

[talaniman]

yeah I see where they buy into the lies the left says about conservatives.

I think they can see and judge conservatives words and actions for themselves. What you think we are just sheeple that fall in line mindlessly?

Keep thinking you are smarter than everyone else.

[speechlesstx]

I think they can see and judge conservatives words and actions for themselves. What you think we are just sheeple that fall in line mindlessly?

Keep thinking you are smarter than everyone else.

Based on the fact that Obama thinks he's smarter than everyone else and he apparently can do no wrong in the eyes of his worshipers in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, coupled with the Dems strategy of keeping people dependent on the government, I'd say there's a high likelihood that a significant percentage of Democrats are sheeples that fall in line mindlessly.

[speechlesstx]

P.S. Philadelphia Eagle Evan Mathis has an appropriate message for the IRS.

[talaniman]

The only overwhelming evidence so far is the right wing noise, which is always silent when its repubs doing the dirt.

[smoothy]

IRS Stalled Conservatives While Giving Liberals a Pass on Tax Exemptions


Wednesday, May 15, 2013 10:50 AM




By: Sandy Fitzgerald

Evidence is mounting that the Internal Revenue Service gave far better treatment to left-wing groups than those on the right, with data showing the agency approved dozens of liberal and progressive organizations as tax-exempt while leaving conservative groups hanging.

No tea party applications were approved in a 27-month period beginning February 2010. But numerous applications from liberal and progressive groups were given tax-exempt status during the same period, USA Today reported.

Some of those approved:

•Bus for Progress, New Jersey nonprofit organization whose mission is to support "progressive politicians with the courage to serve the people's interests and make tough choices." The group, which uses a red, white and blue bus to "drive the progressive change," was approved as a social-welfare group in April 2011.
•Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment, approved in September 2011. The group says it fights against corporate welfare and toward increasing the minimum wage.
•Progress Florida, which lobbies the Sunshine State's legislature to expand Medicaid under the provisions of Obamacare, and was approved in January 2011.
The groups, like the tea party organizations, sought tax reductions as social-welfare groups.

The details come at the same time that it was revealed that the IRS expedited tax-exempt status for a charity run by President Barack Obama's half brother, despite numerous questions about how it is run. The application from the Barack H. Obama Foundation was even backdated, The Daily Caller reports.

Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas, said the IRS actions show how the Obama administration puts politics ahead of anything else. Last year, Flores filed a complaint after the IRS asked the Waco Tea Party for information that he said was "overreaching and impossible to comply with."

The IRS wanted transcripts of radio interviews, copies of social-media posts, and details on "close relationships" with political candidates as part of the process, claimed Flores, who says that when he asked questions, the agency failed to answer adequately.

"They did more than sidestep the issue," Flores said. "They flipped me the finger."

Lois Lerner, the IRS official responsible for granting tax-exemption status, has admitted the agency was mistaken to subject tea party groups to additional scrutiny and has apologized. But she denies rejecting groups based on ideology, and said some progressive groups also were selected for further scrutiny.

One such group is Action for a Progressive Future, which took 18 months to get approval, USA Today reported. Co-founder Jeff Cohen said he didn't mind answering intrusive questions, so long as they were fair.

"From my perspective, if the IRS can hold up legitimate tea-party applications today and get away with it, then who knows if progressive groups will be held up and specially scrutinized in a few years. It's utterly unacceptable, if that's what happened," he said.

IRS records, obtained by The Daily Caller, show Lerner signed papers granting tax-exempt status to the foundation run by Obama's half brother Abongo "Roy" Malik Obama.

She signed off on the organization's tax status in June 2011 -- right in the middle of the 27-month hiatus for tea-party groups -- and granted it retroactive status within a month of filing.

Action for a Progressive Future has faced legal issues over the past few years.

In the month before the foundation was granted tax-exempt status, the National Legal and Policy Center filed a complaint with the IRS, asking why the group was allowed to solicit tax-deductible contributions when it had not applied for a determination.

That's when Lerner gave it the retroactive exemption back to December 2008.

"The Obama Foundation raised money on its web page by falsely claiming to be tax
deductible. This bogus charity run by Malik had not even applied and yet subsequently got retroactive tax-deductible status," complained Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center. He called the attempt to raise money "common law fraud and potentially even federal mail fraud."

The Obama Foundation was set up ostensibly to help poor children in Kenya, where Roy Obama lives.

However, the Caller says, it has not registered in Virginia, where it is said to be based.

Lerner, a registered Democrat, has been slammed for the IRS handling of conservative
Groups, but her colleagues defend her, saying she acts "apolitically."

Larry Noble, FEC general counsel from 1987 to 2000, told The Daily Beast that Lerner "is really one of the more apolitical people I've met."

"That doesn't mean she doesn't have political views, but she really focuses on the job and what the rules are. She doesn't have an agenda."

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/irs-...o_code=13804-1

[talaniman]

Bloomberg News already debunked that claim with a list of left leaning groups being denied.

[smoothy]

The only overwhelming evidence so far is the right wing noise, which is always silent when its repubs doing the dirt.

Aren't your ears sore from putting yout thumbs in them while wiggling your fingers chanting "lalallala I can't hear you" over and over?

[Wondergirl]

Internal Revenue Service agents have been struggling to do their jobs–which have been made essentially impossible by an incorrect interpretation of the law that the IRS made in 1959. It was then that the IRS changed the language of the law without any authority to do so. Here is how the tax law was written in its latest update in 1954 on 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. The 501(c)(4) designation was to apply only to: “Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.”

But a 1959 interpretation guideline written by the IRS says that: ”To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare…”

The real IRS scandal: Reinterpreting the law | NBC News

[smoothy]

Internal Revenue Service agents have been struggling to do their jobs–which have been made essentially impossible by an incorrect interpretation of the law that the IRS made in 1959. It was then that the IRS changed the language of the law without any authority to do so. Here is how the tax law was written in its latest update in 1954 on 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. The 501(c)(4) designation was to apply only to: “Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.”

But a 1959 interpretation guideline written by the IRS says that: ”To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare…”

The real IRS scandal: Reinterpreting the law | NBC News

Funny how they weren't applying that to the Left leaning organisations... but only to the Right leaning ones.

Particularly Obamas half brother that ran one illegally for two years... applied and not only got it in 30 days... but they back-dated it to two year priour of there would have been criminal charges...

IT still isn't legally registered as it needs to be with the state of Virginia where it operates from.

[Wondergirl]

Funny how they weren't applying that to the Left leaning organisations......but only to the Right leaning ones.

What have the righties done with that interpretation since 1959?

[talaniman]

Left leaning groups WERE denied, and made to pay taxes. The Tparty was not. Their beef was in not being denied but made to wait for the process to work.

[talaniman]

What have the righties done with that interpretation since 1959?

Nothing! Do nothing you get nothing!

[smoothy]

What have the righties done with that interpretation since 1959?

Richard Nixon was impeached for far less than what happened here... it was previously linked somewhere... but read article 2 of the impeachment.

If someone deserved to go to jail and be impeached then... THEN obviously people need to go to jail and be impeached now too.

[Wondergirl]

Nothing! Do nothing you get nothing!

From that article I cited --... the tax code must be enforced with the word “exclusively” so that no political organizations would ever be able to get 501(c)(4) status.

[smoothy]

Nothing! Do nothing you get nothing!

Nixon got impeached over this... Obama should be too... He's no freakin Messiah even though you might have a temple to him in a spare closet.

[Wondergirl]

Richard Nixon was impeached for far less than what happened here.....it was previously linked somewhere...but read article 2 of the impeachment.

If someone deserved to go to jail and be impeached then....THEN obviously people need to go to jail and be impeached now too.

But Obama didn't orchestrate it -- and it has been done over and over again through the years since 1959.

[Wondergirl]

Nixon got impeached over this

He was impeached over an IRS scandal?

[smoothy]

But Obama didn't orchestrate it -- and it has been done over and over again through the years since 1959.

Got any proof he didn't.


Groups of followers that don't work together don't spontaniously think of doing the same things at the same time without orchestration.

The same rules they apply to Organized crime apply here too... and should have the RICO act applied.

[smoothy]

He was impeached over an IRS scandal?

Reach Article 2... its part of it... top of the article. #1 in fact.

Watergate Articles Of Impeachment

Article 2

Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.

This conduct has included one or more of the following:
1.He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

2.He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.

3.He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.

4.He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavoured to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.

5.In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Adopted 28-10 by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.