Evidence: Barack Obama / IRS Attack on Conservatives Involvement

Projection? No. Truth. With a micro manager like hisloserness, he knows this went on and approved.

 

You don't? Why not?

Never mind that there was a good reason for Cutter to be there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Cutter

In 2010, Cutter was named Assistant to the President for Special Projects, charged with managing communications and outreach strategy for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Doh!

 

what a joke, there's no evidence of that

 

Sure there is, you just have to open your eyes. Do you really believe that some random office people violated the law at the jeopardy of their jobs and freedom to harrass real American groups that are in opposition to MaO'Bama either personally or ideologically without their superiors know that was what they were doing? Do you believe that? Only at the willing suspense of disbelief.

 

show me the evidence

 

Hmmm he claimed no involvement in it and was leaving in a matter of weeks any so what is your point about him?

So is your previous statement

inoperable now that you admit there was wrondoing?

I'm looking to find out who was behind it and have them face the consequences be that merely a firing for violating the regulations of jail if it was criminal.

Why are you so intent on wishing it to go away?

If you haven't figured that out yet I can't help you. Try watching the hearings and interviews with people who were subjected to this abuse.

You are then ignorant of the matter for the motivations have been clearly spelled out.

Yes they created a list to target groups with conservative view points and then abused their power to delay and deny their applications through 2 election cycles.

It's STILL going on.

 

#1, As the IRS has noted, no prior approval is needed to claim 501(c)4 status. And donations to 501(c)4 groups are not tax-deductible anyway. So there was no serious handicap to those groups. The only issue was the threat of having that status denied and thus having to reveal the names of donors.

#2, while the IRS admits to using Tea Party groups as a shortcut for deciding who to review in detail, the numbers show the tiny scale of the problem.

296 total applications referred for review.
205 deemed by the IG to be legitimate.
91 deemed "questionable."
Of those 91, just 17 involved Tea Party groups.

So while what the IRS did was wrong, it doesn't appear to have seriously hampered the targeted organizations in any way, other than the cost and hassle of trying to comply with overly broad questions. It certainly did not prevent them from participating in the electoral process or attracting donors.

Wrong, yes. Effective as a suppressing tactic, no. And thus the sort of thing a corrupt White House would try to use to shut down opponents, no.

 

You seemed to have missed congressional testimony yesterday. They absolutely harmed these groups.

These groups lost grants.

These groups had their confidential information about members leaked by the IRS to opposing groups. That information was then used to harass, boycott, and physically attack these people in the private lives and during their private business.

What the IRS did was have these people tyrannized.

 

Yes, I haven't caught up on yesterday's testimony yet. Pardon me while I use the Lougle.

He was applying for 501(c)3 status, not 501(c)4. I am not aware of allegations that improper targeting affected 501(c)3 applications. Those groups *always* get severe scrutiny, because they're seeking traditional tax-exempt status and are not allowed to engage in political activity.

Well, so far all we have is a claim that this happened. We do not yet have actual evidence.

If it happened, it was wrong -- and easily the worst offense alleged so far.

But again, let's see the evidence -- and then see who the evidence points to.

 

If Obama is found to be involved, would you call for him to step down? just an honest question.

 

It would depend on the extent of involvement. If a president uses the IRS to harass political opponents, I think that's an impeachable offense.

 

If Obama was involved and has not stepped up by now to say he was, yes I would agree that he should step down.

 

My point was action was taken because this was deemed as inappropriate action by Obama.

Wrongdoing does not mean the Govt is corrupt or inoperable.

I don't care if it goes away. As long as Republicans keep harping on these insignificant issues, it makes 2014 more advantageous for Democrats. People are sick of your guys scandal-gates. They want to see real action which is why Congress has the lowest approval rating ever. You are just hoping there was some higher up that approved this for political reasons. It's already been shown in an independent investigation that there is no evidence that this was politically driven or some conspiracy from the White House.

I'm sorry, but Tea Partiers giving hearings about Govt abuse? Excuse me if I don't really find them very credible. Especially over tax exemption issues, lol.

They have been spelled out by the RW, they have not been proven by any stretch of the imagination

They had more than conservative groups with conservative views, something you like to dismiss because it invalidates your point

Yea, they are beating a deadhorse. Just like every other "scandal" they've wasted tax dollars on.

 

A Liberal would actually hold Barack Obama responsible? Perhaps there is hope.

So you don't think that inviting Susan Cutter to be in multiple meetings with the head of the IRS does not make the IRS political?

The question is, who weaponized the IRS against conservatives? We know it was not the Cincinnati office... so who was it?

 

You do realize the IRS headquarters is in Washington, DC right? So when the employee says, it came from Washington, it doesn't mean anyone from the Obama administration was on the other end of the phone as much as you'd like there to be. Probably their boss who works on the 14th floor in a cubicle that has a boss, that has a boss, that then reports to the head of the IRS, which then meets with Obama's admin. The investigation already came out and they found absolutely nothing political. You are just dreaming.

How dumb do you think they are? Do you think if they were planning some massive conspiracy they would just meet up in the White House where every time they go in, it is reported for everyone to know. It's not like some secret that Cutter was their with the IRS head. Shes the assistant of special projects including working on Obamacare, which the IRS is planning for also. Not really shocking evidence. Just more desperation on the right.

 

Yes they are.
Types of Organizations Exempt under Section 501(c)(4)
Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(4) provides for the exemption of two very different types of organizations with their own distinct qualification requirements. They are:
Social welfare organizations: Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare, and
Local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of designated person(s) in a particular municipality, and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...f-Organizations-Exempt-under-Section-501(c)(4)

The testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee came as IRS spokesman Bruce Friedland said Tuesday that 236 tax-exempt 501(c)(4) applications pending before the agency remain unresolved after more than 200 days.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...4d6b0e-cd2f-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html

 

Or if he is aware that it is being conducted and does nothing to stop then he is complicit and that I think would also be an impeachable offense. Nixon face impeachment for thinking about it.

 

No. The organization itself is tax-exempt; but donations to it are not tax-deductible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization#501.28c.29.284.29

Contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations are usually not deductible as charitable contributions for U.S. federal income tax,

 

It means it wasn't just two rogue agents in Denver as has been claimed.

 

As I said, it would depend on the details of his involvement. "Knew about but did nothing" is too broad a category. For instance, if he knew it had happened but was being investigated internally and so did nothing until the investigation was complete, that's not impeachable.

If he knew it was an ongoing thing and didn't take steps to halt it, that may or may not be impeachable depending on why he didn't take those steps. It would certainly be politically destructive, however.

If he told his subordinates to let it continue, flat-out impeachable.

If he ordered it, flat-out impeachable.

 

I wish more "Progressives" had this attitude on the subject.

 

That's correct. And since donations made to a 501(c(4) are NOT tax deductible for those making the donation, that is why their names are not required to be disclosed.

 

And if they can't get their tax exemptions and have to pay taxes that hampers their efforts vis-a-vis groups that do get their tax exempt status, no matter which one or how you look at it denying or unnecessarily delaying the targeted groups had the effect of limiting their ablitly to promote their causes, free speech.

 

It wasn't for Nixon. But yes if the President knew about this and did nothing he would be complicit in it and should be impeached.

Only if there was a sting going on which we have no evidence that was the case here and no reason for it. If he was told about it and DIDN'T call for an investigation then again he would be complicit.

And then there is the question as to why, like Bush in the Plame affair, Obama has not come out publicly and instructed everyone involved to cooperate fully and for all requested documents to be turned over immediately to Congress and investigators.

 

No, because you are confusing the situation. Those two rogue agents are accused of creating a list. The "list" is what was deemed unacceptable. The rest of it was just the IRS doing it's job. The IRS has explained everything those employees said. One employee said Washington, D.C. requested 7 copies. So instantly Fox News and the conservatives have created a "link to Washington". The IRS explains that an attorney who work at the IRS headquarters in DC, who is responsible for determining what is legal or not regarding these tax exemption requests was requesting certain examples of questionable requests.

Their job was to target political groups. So if they request some examples of Tea Party groups, that's not illegal... that's their job. The link you cannot find is a political link, that they did this to benefit the Democrats. And you have a fine line between them doing their job versus them intentionally sabotaging the system to benefit the Dems. You have not found that link. But your desperation to find it, is amusing to watch!