[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Coop,
Do you REALLY think this came from some low level scrubs at the IRS ?
They went after 298 groups, you think just a few people were involved with that many investigations ?
This was an enemies list, plain and simple.
They stalled the Tea Party from their tax exempt status, to slow down their ability to get out the vote for the 2012 elections. The Waco Tea Party applied for tax exempt status in June 2010, and only NOW got accepted.
Pure coincidence eh ?[/quote]
The other thing, Max, is that if these groups were using their tax-exempt status to get out the vote and actively participate in candidate’s campaigns then it was a violation of the terms of their tax exemption. Tax-exempt groups cannot primarily or actively engage in political campaigns, nor can they lobby Congress.
So the reality is that if these groups had a discernible impact on the outcome of the election they were more than likely having that impact in violation of the terms of their tax-exempt status to begin with.
I for one am kind of glad that the IRS was doing this. The net effect of this whole controversy could be that the IRS FINALLY looks into how it hands out tax exemptions to super PACs and what the parameters for enjoying tax exemptions are. Those are changes to the way campaigns are run that should be vigorously investigated and undertaken, and perhaps in the long run, or maybe even in the short run, this little scandal will jumpstart that process.[/quote]
If the goal of the IRS was to investigate tax exempt organizations to make sure they were following the rules, they would have looked at BOTH Liberal and Conservative groups.
Your argument sounds like my ex-girlfriend, “what’s yours is mine, what’s mine is mine.”[/quote]
I agree. But only one of those two groups continually and publicly rails against taxation in virtually all of its forms. One of those groups is far more likely to circumvent the taxation process as a result. That is simply another angle to this thing that people seem to forget. It’s not necessarily right or just, but perhaps all the anti-tax rhetoric from the Tea Party provoked some extra attention pointed in their direction.[/quote]
Do you know how many Democrats find ways to avoid taxes ? Especially here in Cali, the Hollywood and Tech industries get tax breaks all the time.
[/quote]
Well, of course EVERYONE tries to avoid paying taxes wherever and whenever possible. My point is that of the two general groups, liberals and conservatives, the Tea Party aspect of American conservatism is by far the most vocally anti-taxation of them all. So it’s entirely possible that the IRS employees in question targeted them, in part, because they essentially made themselves easier targets than others due to their vocal anti-tax rhetoric. [/quote]
OR, they were trying to obstruct the Tea Party seeing how successful they were in 2010 ?
Coop, you are talking about the cover story, that is not the REAL story.
This was meant to disrupt the Tea Party with their election strategy. [/quote]
How was this disrupting their election strategy? The targeted groups, by virtue of their tax-exempt status, were not or would not have been allowed to participate in partisan campaigning of any sort. And if the groups seeking tax-exempt status WERE doing so, then the IRS was right in what they did. They just should have given the same attention to other groups as well.
I am not defending the idea of targeted investigations, only the idea of investigations as whole. I cannot point out any more clearly that if these Tea Party groups were involved in active campaigning against Democratic candidates, then they were in violation of their tax-exempt status anyways, so their complaints about these investigations are essentially moot. The IRS would have been entirely correct in investigating them.