It sucks to be Darrell Issa today

[darrmad]

http://pullingtotheleft.wordpress.co...ll-issa-today/

Poor Darrell Issa. Now there’s proof that the IRS was also targeting liberal groups.

Issa’s jihad to prove that Obama himself was down in his sinister underground lair, rubbing his hands together and plotting a nefarious plan to make ******** wait a little longer for the tax-exempt status to be approved, has now gone up in a puff of smoke.

[n david]

First, I take offense to the unedited term "********." It's offensive and should be removed.

Second, this was blown out of the water by National Review, among other news orgs, and its publishing a document obtained from the IRS which showed that these progressive applications were treated differently than the tea party applications.

A November 2010 version of the list obtained by National Review Online, however, suggests that while the list did contain the word “progressive,” screeners were in fact instructed to treat “progressive” groups differently from “tea party” groups. Whereas screeners were merely alerted that a designation of 501(c)(3) status “may not be appropriate” for applications containing the word ”progressive” – 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from conducting any political activities – they were told to send those of tea-party groups off IRS higher-ups for further scrutiny.

That means the applications of progressive groups could be approved on the spot by line agents, while those of tea-party groups could not. Furthermore, the November 2010 list noted that tea-party cases were “currently being coordinated with EOT,” which stands for Exempt Organizations Technical, a group of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. Those of progressive groups were not.

The article states that the way the IRS treated the tea party cases - different than progressive applications:

This is why in the initial apology by Lois Lerner, the IRS official who oversaw tax-exempt groups, which kicked off the whole IRS targeting conservative scandal, only mentioned “inappropriately” targeting conservative groups and only mentioned Tea Party, Patriot and 9/12 groups.

The IRS original statement about the targeting:

The Internal Revenue Service is apologizing for inappropriately flagging conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.

Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt groups, said organizations that included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their applications for tax-exempt status were singled out for additional reviews.

In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.

“That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review,” Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.

“The IRS would like to apologize for that,” she added.

SOURCE LINK


Human Events has this to say:

The 14 new IRS documents do mention the term “progressive,” but only in describing applications for the coveted 501 c(3) status, which confers tax deductibility on donations. The documents where the term “progressive” appears (or wasn’t redacted) instruct agents that c(3) status is not appropriate for groups that conduct overtly political activity. Unlike 501 c(4) groups — nearly all of those involved in the Tea Party targeting scandal — 501 c(3) groups are not permitted to engage in political advocacy at all.

SOURCE LINK

Seeing the actual document (linked above), along with reading several other news orgs, I say it DOESN'T "suck" to be Darrell Issa today. In fact, this only proves even more that the IRS acted politically to target and withhold approval of only tea party groups during the heat of the 2012 election.

[odooley6985]

Originally Posted by n david

First, I take offense to the unedited term "********." It's offensive and should be removed.

Second, this was blown out of the water by National Review, among other news orgs, and its publishing a document obtained from the IRS which showed that these progressive applications were treated differently than the tea party applications.



The article states that the way the IRS treated the tea party cases - different than progressive applications:



The IRS original statement about the targeting:

SOURCE LINK


Human Events has this to say:

SOURCE LINK

Seeing the actual document (linked above), along with reading several other news orgs, I say it DOESN'T "suck" to be Darrell Issa today. In fact, this only proves even more that the IRS acted politically to target and withhold approval of only tea party groups during the heat of the 2012 election.

[n david]

Originally Posted by odooley6985

FIFY

[n david]

It sucks to be Darrmad today...

SOURCE LINK

IRS auditor reaffirms that conservatives, not liberals, were targeted

The IRS‘ auditor told Congress this week that it stands by its determination that conservative groups were uniquely singled out for special scrutiny by the tax agency, rebutting Democrats’ contention that liberal groups also were targeted.

The Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration (TIGTA) sent a letter Wednesday to congressional Democrats telling them that while several liberal groups may have gotten extra scrutiny, the IRS didn’t necessarily target those — but it did do so for conservative groups.

“TIGTA concluded that inappropriate criteria were used to identify potential political cases for extra scrutiny — specifically, the criteria listed in our audit report. From our audit work, we did not find evidence that the criteria you identified, labeled “Progressives,” were used by the IRS to select potential political cases during the 2010 to 2012 timeframe we audited,” Inspector General J. Russell George said.

SOURCE LINK

Treasury: IRS targeted 292 Tea Party groups, just 6 progressive groups

Refuting Democratic suggestions that progressive groups were also swept up in the IRS probe of the tax status of Tea Party organizations, the Treasury Department's inspector general has revealed that just six progressive groups were targeted compared to 292 conservative groups.

In a letter to congressional Democrats, the inspector general also said that 100 percent of Tea Party groups seeking special tax status were put under IRS review, while only 30 percent of the progressive groups felt the same pressure.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by darrmad

http://pullingtotheleft.wordpress.co...ll-issa-today/

Poor Darrell Issa. Now there’s proof that the IRS was also targeting liberal groups.

Issa’s jihad to prove that Obama himself was down in his sinister underground lair, rubbing his hands together and plotting a nefarious plan to make ******** wait a little longer for the tax-exempt status to be approved, has now gone up in a puff of smoke.

Darrmad and others. If you don't understand PM me

And please use the POST REPORTING TOOL if you have a problem with it so we can be made aware of it

[Esaias]

Anyone who cannot see that this administration has already lost all semblance of legitimacy is beyond hope. Hearing about 'the latest scandal' is sort-of like having a dog that, ever since you brought it home, has every single day peed on your bed, pooped in your loafers, chewed up your favorite bathrobe, plus has already bitten each of your kids, killed all the cats you had, destroyed all your furniture, and attacked every neighbor. At some point, your wife calling you at work to report 'the dog just (fill in the blank)' loses its 'shock value' and quite simply you just don't care about any specifics of the latest wrongdoing, you just know the dog has to go.

[Dordrecht]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Anyone who cannot see that this administration has already lost all semblance of legitimacy is beyond hope. Hearing about 'the latest scandal' is sort-of like having a dog that, ever since you brought it home, has every single day peed on your bed, pooped in your loafers, chewed up your favorite bathrobe, plus has already bitten each of your kids, killed all the cats you had, destroyed all your furniture, and attacked every neighbor. At some point, your wife calling you at work to report 'the dog just (fill in the blank)' loses its 'shock value' and quite simply you just don't care about any specifics of the latest wrongdoing, you just know the dog has to go.