Conservative groups in the US really were targeted by the IRS

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Breotan**

This from the Associated Press:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/irs-apologizes-targeting-conservative-groups

**Frazzled**

oh yea.

**djones520**

I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

**whembly**

djones520 wrote:
I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

I concur...

**Dreadclaw69**

djones520 wrote:
I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

It seems a little strange to say that right leaning groups were targetted, but there was no political motivation for doing so. Maybe they're hoping to head off an investigation or lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing what, if any, oversight there was concerning the activity of these "low level guys". I'm sure that at some stage their job entails interacting with more senior staff, passing files for permission, checking etc.

Should we be worried about systemic flaws in the IRS that allow vindictive staff to target those with whom they disagree?

**Valion**

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhocking.

**Grey Templar**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
djones520 wrote:
I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

It seems a little strange to say that right leaning groups were targetted, but there was no political motivation for doing so. Maybe they're hoping to head off an investigation or lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing what, if any, oversight there was concerning the activity of these "low level guys". I'm sure that at some stage their job entails interacting with more senior staff, passing files for permission, checking etc.

Should we be worried about systemic flaws in the IRS that allow vindictive staff to target those with whom they disagree?

I think you misunderstood his post. He wasn't disagreeing with you. He was saying he thinks it was politically motivated, but that he thinks it was lower down on the IRS food chain.

**whembly**

Grey Templar wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
djones520 wrote:
I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

It seems a little strange to say that right leaning groups were targetted, but there was no political motivation for doing so. Maybe they're hoping to head off an investigation or lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing what, if any, oversight there was concerning the activity of these "low level guys". I'm sure that at some stage their job entails interacting with more senior staff, passing files for permission, checking etc.

Should we be worried about systemic flaws in the IRS that allow vindictive staff to target those with whom they disagree?

I think you misunderstood his post. He wasn't disagreeing with you. He was saying he thinks it was politically motivated, but that he thinks it was lower down on the IRS food chain.

That's how I took it too.

Also... just a question here: Had this happen when Bush was president... what would happen?

**Dreadclaw69**

Grey Templar wrote:
I think you misunderstood his post. He wasn't disagreeing with you. He was saying he thinks it was politically motivated, but that he thinks it was lower down on the IRS food chain.

Apologies if I was unclear. I meant that I do believe it was politically motivated, but that junior staff could carry out such actions without anyone above them knowing may show systemic flaws in the IRS

**Breotan**

There have been allegations of this happening for many years now, usually under Democrat administrations. This is the first I've heard of it actually happening. Still, after that "Joe the plumber" incident, I'm surprised there aren't more stories like this.

**Frazzled**

whembly wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
djones520 wrote:
I'll buy that it was initiated by lower level guys, but I won't buy that it wasn't politically motivated.

It seems a little strange to say that right leaning groups were targetted, but there was no political motivation for doing so. Maybe they're hoping to head off an investigation or lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing what, if any, oversight there was concerning the activity of these "low level guys". I'm sure that at some stage their job entails interacting with more senior staff, passing files for permission, checking etc.

Should we be worried about systemic flaws in the IRS that allow vindictive staff to target those with whom they disagree?

I think you misunderstood his post. He wasn't disagreeing with you. He was saying he thinks it was politically motivated, but that he thinks it was lower down on the IRS food chain.

That's how I took it too.

Also... just a question here: Had this happen when Bush was president... what would happen?

Independet counsel. What did you know and when did you know it Mr. IRS Secretary?

**dogma**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:

It seems a little strange to say that right leaning groups were targetted, but there was no political motivation for doing so. Maybe they're hoping to head off an investigation or lawsuit. I'd be interested in hearing what, if any, oversight there was concerning the activity of these "low level guys". I'm sure that at some stage their job entails interacting with more senior staff, passing files for permission, checking etc.

Should we be worried about systemic flaws in the IRS that allow vindictive staff to target those with whom they disagree?

I don't doubt the presence of political bias, but there has also been a good deal of talk about cracking down on the use of 501(c)(4)* organizations as de facto 527s.

*Labor Unions, most Tea Party groups, Super PACs
**Political campaigns, PACs

**Dreadclaw69**

dogma wrote:
I don't doubt the presence of political bias, but there has also been a good deal of talk about cracking down on the use of 501(c)(4)* organizations as de facto 527s.

*Labor Unions, most Tea Party groups, Super PACs
**Political campaigns, PACs

If these organisations are operating outside the scope of what is permitted then there should be a crackdown, but one that is done fairly and without prejudice. On face value that is not what these IRS employees have done.

**dogma**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:

If these organisations are operating outside the scope of what is permitted then there should be a crackdown, but one that is done fairly and without prejudice. On face value that is not what these IRS employees have done.

What is permitted under 501(c)(4) is largely left up to the IRS, hence the centralization of the review process.

As to the fairness of the process by which applications are selected for review: that would depend entirely on the list of suspect terms that was developed, why the 225 applications unrelated to the Tea Party were selected, and the treatment of the 75 Tea Party groups relative to the other 225.

I agree that including words like "Tea Party" and "Patriot" in a list of suspect terms is foolish, but the fact that such a list is needed has as much to do with the weakness of the 501(c)(4) category of non-profits as it does with unfair bias on the part of the relevant IRS employees. In essence, that particular element of the tax code gives IRS employees wide leeway in exercising their judgment, and so invites the the inclusion of irrelevant criteria on the part those engaged in the review process.

**Ouze**

whembly wrote:
Also... just a question here: Had this happen when Bush was president... what would happen?

Did you miss the element of the article that indicates a Bush appointee was in charge when this happened?

Anyway, it's interesting how the the IRS digging deep for violations of tax exempt status in weird places; especially with no shortage of low-hanging fruit with all the religious organizations that openly endorsed candidates last election initially hoping to challenge it in court. Wait, not interesting, craven.

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
whembly wrote:
Also... just a question here: Had this happen when Bush was president... what would happen?

Did you miss the element of the article that indicates a Bush appointee was in charge when this happened?

Nope... saw that too... still asking the same question though.

Anyway, it's interesting how the the IRS digging deep for violations of tax exempt status in weird places; especially with no shortage of low-hanging fruit with all the religious organizations that openly endorsed candidates last election initially hoping to challenge it in court. Wait, not interesting, craven.

Yep... and also dogma has the right of it previously.... I really think it's a weird situation.

**sebster**

whembly wrote:
Also... just a question here: Had this happen when Bush was president... what would happen?

Well, given what happened with the clear out of people at the Attorney General's office when they wouldn't focus their investigations on Democrats only... we know exactly what happens when it gets found out - nothing. Nothing happened, there was some noise on the fringes and that was basically it.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not making light of this. If you ask me, a whole load of IRS people need to get their asses fired over this. Not just the lower level staff who did it, but the higher ups who presided over a culture where this kind of thing came to be seen as acceptable.

The point is not to let this end up just another Democrat/Republican "your is worse than my side" bs. The US has a massive problem with how government authority is used by both sides to score political victories, and its something the voting public shouldn't tolerate from either side.

**Breotan**

It's all fun and games till somebody targets the jews...

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/irs-punished-conservative-non-profits-perhaps-also-pro-israel-groups/2013/05/11/

**Valion**

And more from Politico...

IRS officials knew of Tea Party targeting

Senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew employees were singling out conservative groups for extra scrutiny as early as 2011, according to a watchdog agency’s report set to be released next week, POLITICO has confirmed from a congressional source.

The disclosure that senior officials knew agents were flagging applications containing the words “patriot” or “tea party” contradicts public statements by former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. He repeatedly denied that his agency was targeting conservative groups when asked by Congress last year.

“There’s absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people” who apply for tax-exempt status, Shulman told a House Ways and Means subcommittee in March 2012.

The Internal Revenue Service is in the process of confirming when its leadership was informed, according an IRS statement released Saturday.

“IRS senior leadership was not aware of this level of specific details at the time of the March 2012 hearing. The timeline does not contradict the Commissioner’s testimony. While Exempt Organizations officials knew of the situation earlier, the timeline reflects that IRS senior leadership did not have this level of detail,” the statement reads.

The revelation about senior leadership adds fuel to the agency’s admission Friday that at least 75 conservative groups were flagged for extra review because their tax documents contained the words “tea party” or “patriot.”

The disclosures are guaranteed to heighten Republican fears that the agency is targeting the administration’s political enemies and hands the GOP a fresh issue to use in attacking President Barack Obama’s administration.

House Ways and Means Oversight Committee Chairman Charles Boustany (R-La.) has already sent a letter to acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller demanding that the agency turn over all communications that contain the words “tea party” “patriot” or “conservative.” Boustany also asked Miller for the names and titles of all “individuals involved in this discrimination.”

The congressional source, who was briefed on the report, said the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that senior Washington officials were informed in 2011. The agency is not disputing the timeline included in the report.

The findings from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report were first reported by Associated Press. The report is set to be released in full next week.
The report will also confirm that the IRS asked unnecessary questions of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status from the agency, the source said, and that there were delays in processing applications for conservative applicants and other c(4) groups.

Lois Lerner, who is responsible for overseeing tax-exempt groups, told reporters Friday that low-level employees in Cincinnati flagged at least 75 groups but declined to say when the reviews took place. Lerner also said she did not remember when she informed her bosses about the employees’ actions. The report will be the first official confirmation that senior Washington IRS officials knew employees were targeting conservative groups before Shulman denied the charge to Congress.

The Associated Press said the report did not say if Shulman was directly informed about the program.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) will convene a hearing on the matter in the coming weeks. Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) will do the same. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor also said the House would investigate the matter.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking member of the Finance Committee, promised to fully investigate who was behind the IRS decision to probe conservative tax-exempt groups and compared the practice to Watergate and “the Nixon years.”

“This, to me, is simply unbelievable. While I’m glad that the IRS has apologized for this misconduct, that is simply not enough. We need to know more,” the Utah Republican said at a conference in Washington on Saturday. “We need to know who was behind this unlawful activity, when it began, who found out about it, when they found out, and what they did or did not do to correct it.”

**Jihadin**

CYA time

**Dreadclaw69**

This is the story that keeps on giving

**Chongara**

The IRS aiming increased scrutiny at groups that constantly voice loud opinions about the evil of taxes, and even talk about how not paying taxes would actually be "Patriotic"? No. I just can't believe it. That it might be suspect that entities with members that make it really clear they'd like to get around taxes at any cost... might be... abusing tax exemption provisions?! I...I...I... just, that's so unreasonable. My world.. it's.. falling apart.... it makes no sense....

I don't understand how an organization responsible for collecting taxes, would give more attention to groups that loudly and proudly talk about how they try to avoid paying taxes. My mind is blown.

**juraigamer**

Stupid republicans doing stupid things and then letting stupid republicans believe stupid things about the stupid things so they can be angry at stupid things for stupid and wrong reasons.

Sounds like fox news to me!

**Dreadclaw69**

Chongara wrote:
The IRS aiming increased scrutiny at groups that constantly voice loud opinions about the evil of taxes, and even talk about how not paying taxes would actually be "Patriotic"? No. I just can't believe it. That it might be suspect that entities with members that make it really clear they'd like to get around taxes at any cost... might be... abusing tax exemption provisions?! I...I...I... just, that's so unreasonable. My world.. it's.. falling apart.... it makes no sense....

I don't understand how an organization responsible for collecting taxes, would give more attention to groups that loudly and proudly talk about how they try to avoid paying taxes. My mind is blown.

Yeah I mean its like all those time Immigration and Customs Enforcement attend various pro-immigration amnesty and check the papers of those declaring themselves to be in the country illegally, or deport people who publish in Time magazine that they are in the US illegally. Oh wait.....

**Ouze**

juraigamer wrote:
Sounds like fox news to me!

I think this story is pretty legitimate news. Abuse of the governments awesome, unchecked taxation power by what should be a non-political branch to satisfy political scores is just plain awful. I think a congressional investigation is wholly warranted, and I'd like to see dozens of people fired for this, perhaps even investigated under corruption statutes.

**Dreadclaw69**

Ouze wrote:
juraigamer wrote:
Sounds like fox news to me!

I think this story is pretty legitimate news. Abuse of the governments awesome, unchecked taxation power by what should be a non-political branch to satisfy political scores is just plain awful. I think a congressional investigation is wholly warranted, and I'd like to see dozens of people fired for this, perhaps even investigated under corruption statutes.

Well that and every link in this thread this has been a source other than Fox

**juraigamer**

I have a hard time telling what's real news and what's not, since I don't watch news TV and the only channel I happen across when I'm out is fox news, so I normally assume they are barking up the wrong tree.

As it stands, it looks like these groups were targeted by the IRS for attempting to get tax except status. That's it. Maybe politics, but then again our whole f-ing government has it's head up its ass when it comes to that. So no surprise.

**Dreadclaw69**

Chongara wrote:
The IRS aiming increased scrutiny at groups that constantly voice loud opinions about the evil of taxes, and even talk about how not paying taxes would actually be "Patriotic"? No. I just can't believe it. That it might be suspect that entities with members that make it really clear they'd like to get around taxes at any cost... might be... abusing tax exemption provisions?! I...I...I... just, that's so unreasonable. My world.. it's.. falling apart.... it makes no sense....

I don't understand how an organization responsible for collecting taxes, would give more attention to groups that loudly and proudly talk about how they try to avoid paying taxes. My mind is blown.

By all means investigate where there is reasonable suspicion. But when;
"IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their exemption applications"
"In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases"

"Lerner acknowledged it was wrong for the agency to target groups based on political affiliation.

"That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner she heads the [RS division that oversees tax-exempt groups] said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association."

"Many conservative groups complained during the campaign that they were being harassed by the IRS. They accused the agency of frustrating their attempts to become tax exempt by sending them lengthy, intrusive questionnaires.
The forms, which the groups have made available, sought information about group members' political activities, including details of their postings on social networking websites and about family members."

"As part of this process, agents in Cincinnati came up with a list of things to look for in an application. As part of the list, they included the words, "tea party" and "patriot," Lerner said.
"It's the line people that did it without talking to managers," Lerner told The AP. "They're IRS workers, they're revenue agents.""

I do not that that you can reasonably claim that the IRS were doing nothing more than exercising due diligence in light of the facts.

**Valion**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
I do not that that you can reasonably claim that the IRS were doing nothing more than exercising due diligence in light of the facts.

Sure you can, as long as those partisan blinders fit correctly.

**Dreadclaw69**

Valion wrote:
Sure you can, as long as those partisan blinders fit correctly.

There's none so blind as those who will not see.