HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » IRS Sent Same Letter to D...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue May 14, 2013, 09:16 PM

IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row

Source: Bloomberg

The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.

One of those groups, Emerge America, saw its tax-exempt status denied, forcing it to disclose its donors and pay some taxes. None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected.

Progress Texas, another of the organizations, faced the same lines of questioning as the Tea Party groups from the same IRS office that issued letters to the Republican-friendly applicants. A third group, Clean Elections Texas, which supports public funding of campaigns, also received IRS inquiries.

In a statement late yesterday, the tax agency said it had pooled together the politically active nonpartisan applicants -- including a “minority” that were identified because of their names.



Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html

26 replies, 4656 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 26 replies Author Time Post
Reply IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row (Original post)
kpete May 2013 OP
okaawhatever May 2013 #1
Andy823 May 2013 #5
John2 May 2013 #10
okaawhatever May 2013 #11
John2 May 2013 #12
okaawhatever May 2013 #25
Cha May 2013 #2
Hekate May 2013 #3
watoos May 2013 #15
sheshe2 May 2013 #4
erpowers May 2013 #6
elleng May 2013 #7
1StrongBlackMan May 2013 #8
HoosierRadical May 2013 #16
DallasNE May 2013 #20
1StrongBlackMan May 2013 #26
nashville_brook May 2013 #19
Dawson Leery May 2013 #9
Zen Democrat May 2013 #13
Javaman May 2013 #14
Bluenorthwest May 2013 #17
DallasNE May 2013 #18
lark May 2013 #21
sofa king May 2013 #22
idwiyo May 2013 #23
Wash. state Desk Jet May 2013 #24

Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 09:25 PM

1. It will be curious to see how much traction this story gets. It would also be interesting to

see if there was political motive, if it didn't come from the gop. Both irs officials Lerner and Shulman, were gop appointees. The tea party is a thorn in the side of the gop. They just can't separate themselves lest they lose due to third party voting like with Perot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #1)

Tue May 14, 2013, 10:06 PM

5. I wonder the same thing

The GOP would be trying to kill two birds with one stone here. Take down the tea party groups, and if nothing else comes of it, start a "scandal" and blame it all on president Obama.

What gets me is that I don't see the GOP calling out this Shulman guy who was in charge. Plus I have not heard of him making any statement. The acting boss now, Miller, has made a statement, so why don't we hear from the republicans who were supposed to be in charge of things?

Just more right wing BS coming from a party divided that can't do anything but make trouble for the president and try and keep any good news about the economy, the deficit, etc. out of the picture while they "create" all these BS scandals!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #1)

Wed May 15, 2013, 02:28 AM

10. So that is new to me if what you say

 

Last edited Wed May 15, 2013, 03:22 AM - Edit history (1)

is correct. The part about Lerner is. She is the one that made the apology right? O.K. she is. So someone who worked in the Justice Department during the Reagan Era and got appointed to the IRS during the Bush Administration made the apology. How many times have the IRS made an apology to a specific group? So she told this to the news media and they carried the ball for her willingly without giving information she was appointed during the Bush Administration. This is an example of what I'm talking about the Press. And if the Obama Administration wrongfully fire someone below her or pressure it, They will be pointing the fingers again at the Administration, meaning the media and the Republicans. The President shouldn't do anything and let Lerner do the firing of their employees, so they can file their complaints at her. But the Media wants to engage with the Republicans in conspiracy theories about how corrupt the Obama Administration is. They are carrying the water again for the GOP. Just listen to Chris Matthews who keeps calling the President to get involved and fire people.

Chris Matthews is very disappointing first on pushing the Republican agenda on CPI, calling for compromise. The same Matthews that tore the President down after the first Debate and came down criticizing a protester as thuggish, by reacting to a Fox News setup doing protests against the Michigan Governor. It turned out the protester was innocent, and Matthews owes him an apology for assuming the worse. Matthews is at it again, as if he is the Right wing's
Bark dog when they pull his leash. The same person telling the President to put his supporters in line (the Left) and cave in to the Right for the good of the Country. I wonder what he was doing in the lead up to that Iraq War?

The point is, why should anybody trust the Republicans or the corporate media on anything? The Republican Party tried to mussel the Tea Party during the 2012 Elections. Now the person appointed during the Bush Administration suddenly issues an apology but how convenient for her, everything is blamed on Obama because these groups,( not political) are called conservative groups. It is also a very good cover to be called Apolitical. A person APolitical in the Republican Party would be a rare phenom or an alien from Mars at best.












Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #10)

Wed May 15, 2013, 02:37 AM

11. Yes, but that was a long time ago. I've only seen it reported once that she was a bush appointee.

She is a democrat, or was, and an attorney in other parts of the govt. I think doj maybe. I think the reason she was appointed was that they created a new division or something to that effect to oversee non-profit compliance. I tried to find the article agan, but there are so many new ones I can't sort through them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okaawhatever (Reply #11)

Wed May 15, 2013, 06:54 AM

12. From the information

 

that I've gathered, she was with the DOJ beginning in 1981. That would be under the Reagan Administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #12)

Wed May 15, 2013, 09:27 PM

25. Don't know, but I thought she was civil service. I thought the reason she was even

appointed by Bush was because they were heading up a new dept. Don't know. Now the acting commissioner just quit. The whole thing stinks because this investigation started over a year ago and the old commissioner Shuler or Shuman was questioned by the IG and then resigned in November. Hmmm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 09:40 PM

2. OUTRAGE! POUTRAGE!! Impeach!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 09:48 PM

3. Tea Partiers et al. are poutraged because they think IRS laws do not apply to them

We get that. What beats me is the fact-free hysteria in the media and among other people who should know better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #3)

Wed May 15, 2013, 09:08 AM

15. Uh, why should the media know better?

The media is corporate-controlled, including msnbc, the tower dwellers control the narrative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 10:06 PM

4. Kicked and Recommending!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 10:57 PM

6. In the Real

In the real world the fact that Democratic groups where given at least similar treatment as Tea Party groups would end this so-called scandal. However, I doubt this new information will slow down the talk of a scandal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 11:13 PM

7. Needs a KICK!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue May 14, 2013, 11:17 PM

8. Too many "Democrats" ...

are wetting their pants behind this, based on the first word out there from the "liberal media." Nothing new there ...

And others, are calling this a pre-emptive defensive shot to protect Citizen's United. But on my way home, I started to wonder whether rove/the gop over-played their hand?

Think about it ... The inspector general called on the IRS to establish clear, non-ideological rules regarding who to sat leastcrutinize. The clear (at least to me) intent of the IRS was to figure out a way to deal with the sudden glut of 501(c)(4)s born after C/U.

What's to stop the IRS, in a clear and transparent fashion, from declaring "We are focusing on rooting out sham 501(c)(4) organizations and here is the list of groups we received application from and the list of previously certified groups ... that we will scrutinize. And we're starting with 'Crossroads'."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #8)

Wed May 15, 2013, 10:02 AM

16. I thought the groups were applying for 501 (c) 3 status?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HoosierRadical (Reply #16)

Wed May 15, 2013, 12:22 PM

20. No

The issue is disclosure and whether these tax exempt groups should be considered Super-PAC's or 501(c)(4) groups. Both are tax exempt but only the Super-PAC's are required to list their large donors names.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #20)

Wed May 15, 2013, 09:29 PM

26. I think ...

Disclosure is important because as you state, Super-Pacs must disclose; whereas 501(c)(4)s do not. But that misses the larger point, 501(c)(4)s cannot "primarily engage" in political activity ... that's what the tea-party groups do, and what the IRS was looking to determine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #8)

Wed May 15, 2013, 12:15 PM

19. totally agree. also, there's no constitutional right to being tax exempt and donor opaque

i think there's something fishy about this. not sure if it's the GOP "over playing its hand" or the Obama administration bending over too far and creating another Shirley Sherrod situation.

Either way, you can bet that the three left-leaning orgs mentioned here aren't the only ones.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 12:10 AM

9. Thanks to the Georgetown Pundits, the GOP controls the narrative again.

Any organization applying for 501(c)4 status needs to be investigated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawson Leery (Reply #9)

Wed May 15, 2013, 08:06 AM

13. They are desperately seeking a narrative. Right now the fangs are out but they haven't found anythin

Right now the fangs are out but they haven't found anything to really stick their teeth into. You'd think it would be the AP phone records, but the Washington Republicans support that one. They must all be very confused since Benghazi blew up in their faces and the IRS "scandal" is weak.

This perfect storm is going to be a fizzle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 08:42 AM

14. I love this. LOL

so many in the media were trying to set this up as a completely partisan attack. And lo and behold, the IRS targeted both sides. LOL

I really wonder how much of this part of the story will actually see the light of day. the tea party halfwits argument has been blunted but like all things fox news and the rest of the water carrying media, I'm sure will conveniently ignore this new revelation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #14)

Wed May 15, 2013, 10:23 AM

17. Did the IRS target Centrists? There are not two sides, there are Three Ways....

OP cites progressive groups being inspected. Some of the people right in this thread claiming that those groups are 'ours' spew venom and long diatribes against progressives, they type it like this: "progressives" and equate them to the Tea Party all the time:
"I consider ...the majority of "Progressives" that I have problems with (and strangely it's mostly on this Board, rather than in real life) is they present as a cross between the teaparty, in their intractableness, uncompromisingness, and their thinking they speak for everyone; and the Ron Paul Libertarians, in their running from the liberal label, their genuiene passion, and their unwillingness/inability to recognize that wihile their goal/philosophy sounds good, it is unworkable in real life, absent some major social shifts."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022084689#post105

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 12:13 PM

18. This Puts Things In A Whole New Light

This clearly removes the charge of partisanship in who was targeted. It also shows even more illogic in some of the rules. For instance, the San Francisco liberal group was denied tax exempt status because the focused only on women's issues and not the "community as a whole".

While some of the groups had some handlebars that were quite easy to grab, like "Tea Party" in their name, it was still wrong for the IRS to cut corners and grab those handlebars. In different settings handlebars also get grabbed and that is wrong as well -- like singling out people because of the color of their skin for extra scrutiny, driving while black, etc. (As least I am consistent and that is more than you can say about the right wing).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 01:20 PM

21. Much noise about something small.

Wonder why MSM isn't putting out the entire story? It certainly isn't because they are liberal leaning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 01:35 PM

22. "disclose its donors" is the most important part.

Consider the following:

1) Right now, conservative organizations are among the most prolific producers of domestic terrorists. That is why the Republican Party had to steer entirely clear of the domestic terrorism issue in 2012.

2) The IRS has a sister-service, also under direct control of the Secretary of the Treasury, also with investigative duties, and also deeply interested in arch-conservative groups, but for completely different reasons.

3) There is strong evidence that this practice predates President Obama's administration. The Bush Administration also used the IRS to target hundreds of groups--liberal groups. It would appear that, just like in the 2012 investigations, charges were not pursued pursued in most cases after a certain amount of information was transferred between the feds and the groups--notably membership and donor lists.

4) While this proves nothing, it might be really interesting to overlay the locations of the groups targeted in 2004 and 2012 on a map of the locations visited by the Presidential candidates in those years.

I won't have time to even try 4) up there for days, so if someone wishes to prove me horribly wrong, as I often am, please have at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 05:11 PM

23. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed May 15, 2013, 05:50 PM

24. Since when is it surprising the IRS is full of dirty tricks ?

The 47% statement by Mittens comes to mind.The tea party was a thorn in Romney's side. I imagine there are plenty of right wing minded employees of the federal government. I find it odd Rove is out in front with this. If there is to be a investigation of IRS dirty tricks,than the tea party issues are nothing more than scratching the surface of wrongful doings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread