Congressman Issa: "Carney Is A Paid Liar"

[piezoe]

A different viewpoint:

Since lying on applications for 501c(4) status is rampant, see the Propublica investigation, the IRS may have had second thoughts about some of the approvals it had granted, and decided to start cracking down, starting with the most recent applications.

From what I've learned from the Propublica investigation, 100% of the applications from the organizations now claiming to have been "targeted," should be turned down as non-qualifying for 501c(4) status. They are all, 100% of them!, blatantly, and primarily, political organizations. This disqualifies them under published IRS guidelines. The obvious reason the IRS was asking questions was because these organizations lied on their applications about the extent of their political activities and about the extent of their social welfare activities. These organizations would be properly categorized as 527 organizations, but that would require that they disclose their donors.

Note that someone in each organization signed each application attesting that it was truthful. There are penalties under the law for intentionally lying, in writing, to the IRS! Once the IRS was on to them, these organizations may have recognized that they could be in some serious trouble.

We are now seeing a counteroffensive carried out in the public eye, intended to mislead the public and turn public sentiment in favor of the wayward, and lying, applicants for 501c(4) status. It's a brilliant tactic, considering how reviled the IRS is.

We also know, again from the Propublica investigation, that the IRS broke its own rules by releasing a few applications before they had been approved. Their policy is that applications are not in the public domain until after approval.

In addition to waging a counteroffensive in the public eye, these same, claiming-to-be-agrieved organizations have banned together to sue the IRS! But here they are on shaky ground, because if they do get into court they are in grave danger of the truth coming out. And then it is even conceivable that a few of the operatives that signed those applications could see jail time. It is my guess, therefore, that this business won't see the inside of a courtroom.

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from piezoe:

A different viewpoint:

Since lying on applications for 501c(4) status is rampant, see the Propublica investigation, the IRS may have had second thoughts about some of the approvals it had granted, and decided to start cracking down, starting with the most recent applications.

From what I've learned from the Propublica investigation, 100% of the applications from the organizations now claiming to have been "targeted," should be turned down as non-qualifying for 501c(4) status. They are all, 100% of them!, blatantly, and primarily, political organizations. This disqualifies them under published IRS guidelines. The obvious reason the IRS was asking questions was because these organizations lied on their applications about the extent of their political activities and about the extent of their social welfare activities. These organizations would be properly categorized as 527 organizations, but that would require that they disclose their donors.

Note that someone in each organization signed each application attesting that it was truthful. There are penalties under the law for intentionally lying, in writing, to the IRS! Once the IRS was on to them, these organizations may have recognized that they could be in some serious trouble.

We are now seeing a counteroffensive carried out in the public eye, intended to mislead the public and turn public sentiment in favor of the wayward, and lying, applicants for 501c(4) status. It's a brilliant tactic, considering how reviled the IRS is.

We also know, again from the Propublica investigation, that the IRS broke its own rules by releasing a few applications before they had been approved. Their policy is that applications are not in the public domain until after approval.

In addition to waging a counteroffensive in the public eye, these same, claiming-to-be-agrieved organizations have banned together to sue the IRS! But here they are on shaky ground, because if they do get into court they are in grave danger of the truth coming out. And then it is even conceivable that a few of the operatives that signed those applications could see jail time. It is my guess, therefore, that this business won't see the inside of a courtroom.

Are you smoking crack! What?!?!?

1. The IRS already ADMITTED to wrong doing via targeting conservative groups. They admitted that!

2. I've never met a single American who likes the IRS, yet all of a sudden, liberal loons are IRS apologists. You can't make this shit up!:eek:

 

[wjk]

Quote from piezoe:

A different viewpoint:

Since lying on applications for 501c(4) status is rampant, see the Propublica investigation, the IRS may have had second thoughts about some of the approvals it had granted, and decided to start cracking down, starting with the most recent applications.

From what I've learned from the Propublica investigation, 100% of the applications from the organizations now claiming to have been "targeted," should be turned down as non-qualifying for 501c(4) status. They are all, 100% of them!, blatantly, and primarily, political organizations. This disqualifies them under published IRS guidelines. The obvious reason the IRS was asking questions was because these organizations lied on their applications about the extent of their political activities and about the extent of their social welfare activities. These organizations would be properly categorized as 527 organizations, but that would require that they disclose their donors.

Note that someone in each organization signed each application attesting that it was truthful. There are penalties under the law for intentionally lying, in writing, to the IRS! Once the IRS was on to them, these organizations may have recognized that they could be in some serious trouble.

We are now seeing a counteroffensive carried out in the public eye, intended to mislead the public and turn public sentiment in favor of the wayward, and lying, applicants for 501c(4) status. It's a brilliant tactic, considering how reviled the IRS is.

We also know, again from the Propublica investigation, that the IRS broke its own rules by releasing a few applications before they had been approved. Their policy is that applications are not in the public domain until after approval.

In addition to waging a counteroffensive in the public eye, these same, claiming-to-be-agrieved organizations have banned together to sue the IRS! But here they are on shaky ground, because if they do get into court they are in grave danger of the truth coming out. And then it is even conceivable that a few of the operatives that signed those applications could see jail time. It is my guess, therefore, that this business won't see the inside of a courtroom.

How many liberal groups did it (IRS) crack down on in the given time period?

 

[jem]

Quote from wjk:

How many liberal groups did it (IRS) crack down on in the given time period?

Not only are yours and leapups points solid

piezoe is following that larry idiots lead on msnbc; trying to misdirect everyone away from the issue.

If you have a problem with the way the IRS has been allowing of 501 c 4s to operate then the place to start is with congress redefining the 1913 act.

(I suggest they just nullify the whole act.)

It is unconstitutional and probably a criminal violation of civil rights laws for the IRS to apply extra scrutiny to conservative or religious groups.

 

[piezoe]

Quote from wjk:

How many liberal groups did it crack down on in the given time period?

That's the same question I have. It's such an obvious question that it only reinforces my opinion that there is far more going on here than meets the eye. Why hasn't anyone in Congress asked that question, and why don't we know the answer. The rule in law is don't ask any question if you don't already know the answer, and it helps your case. Perhaps that is why that very obvious question has not been asked. Or at least not answered so far as I am aware.

But we do know this from the Propublica investigation. And that is that, in general, there was only a handful of liberal groups in comparison with a large number of conservative groups applying. The Propublica investigation revealed that in the past there had been both liberal and conservative organizations approved for 501c(4) but many more conservative than liberal, and likely all of them submitted false data or projections of future activities to get approved. We simply don't know yet if there were any liberal groups that applied during the time period in question.

What will come out, if this ever gets into a courtroom, is what process was used to determine which groups to question. Possibly it was arbitrary, which would not be good! Or perhaps it was as I suggested, all groups applying after a certain date for which there was some hard evidence that they may be more political then they were claiming to be. I just assumed that if the IRS was going to start enforcing the guidelines for 501c(4) status they would likely start with applications that were pending approval, and work backwards.

We do know from the Propublica investigation that there was a handful of liberal political organizations improperly given 501c(4) status in the past along with a preponderance of conservative organizations that were granted the same status.

It appears that by not questioning sufficiently the past applications for 501c(4), and letting many blatantly political organizations slip under the radar, the IRS has created a real mess for itself.

We have got very little useful information so far. Mostly just political grandstanding and bash the IRS sessions. What we need are the kind of facts that come from the legal discovery process. So I am hoping that the conservative groups' suit will ultimately land in court, but I strongly believe they have no intention of letting that happen. And that is because if the applications of the "targeted" organizations remain true to the form of those already investigated by Propublica, then they will contain a number of blatant and intentional lies, and the IRS attorneys will have no difficulty proving that the applicants knew the data they provided was wrong and concealed the primary purpose of the applicant organization. They will even show that the names given for the organizations were chosen to intentionally obfuscate their real purpose.

 

[pspr]

It seems to me that far from political grand standing we have a very serious problem in the IRS. And this problem started right after Obama was elected and he and other Democraps suggested to the point of writing to the IRS to target Tea Party and other conservative organizations.

This isn't pie in the sky as liberals would have you believe. This is down right government agency ending targeting for political purposes. All the double talk you liberals put up can't distort the facts. POLITICAL TARGETING EXISTS IN THE IRS!

 

[jem]

You are completely misdirecting what is going on here.

If the IRS has a problem with the way 501 c 4s were operating they should have been investigating the groups they already exempted. The Demcratic pacs who spent million for Obama and the pro Romney pacs.

Targeting pro isreal and pro constitution groups was about as NAZI as the IRS could be.

Don't try and protect them with this bullshit misdirection.
They already admitted they were targeting.
Lerner took the 5th.


Did the IRS allow political action groups to operate as 501 c 4.
YES...

If they wanted to stop it... they had to stop it in a balanced non biased manner. That is what the constitution and civil rights laws demand.

Quote from piezoe:

That's the same question I have. It's such an obvious question that it only reinforces my opinion that there is far more going on here than meets the eye. Why hasn't anyone in Congress asked that question, and why don't we know the answer. The rule in law is don't ask any question if you don't already know the answer. Perhaps that is why that very obvious question has not been asked. Or at least not answered so far as I am aware.

But we do know this from the Propublica investigation. And that is that, in general, there was only a handful of liberal groups in comparison with a large number of conservative groups applying. The Propublica investigation revealed that in the past there had been both liberal and conservative organizations approved for 501c(4) but many more conservative than liberal, and likely all of them submitted false data or projections of future activities to get approved. We simply don't know yet if there were any liberal groups that applied during the time period in question.

What will come out, if this ever gets into a courtroom, is what process was used to determine which groups to question. Possibly it was arbitrary, which would not be good! Or perhaps it was as I suggested, all groups applying after a certain date for which there was some hard evidence that they may be more political then they were claiming to be. I just assumed that if the IRS was going to start enforcing the guidelines for 501c(4) status they would likely start with applications that were pending approval, and work backwards.

We do know from the Propublica investigation that there was a handful of liberal political organizations improperly given 501c(4) status in the past along with a preponderance of conservative organizations that were granted the same status.

It appears that by not questioning sufficiently the past applications for 501c(4), and letting many blatantly political organizations slip under the radar, the IRS has created a real mess for itself.

We have got very little useful information so far. Mostly just political grandstanding and bash the IRS sessions. What we need are the kind of facts that come from the legal discovery process. So I am hoping that the conservative groups' suit will ultimately land in court, but I strongly believe they have no intention of letting that happen.

 

[jem]

The very fact Democrat senators would tell the IRS to target groups shows why an IRS group can not be allowed to exist.

Our elected representatives can not be trusted with that kind of power. We have seen them abuse it over and over.

Quote from pspr:

It seems to me that far from political grand standing we have a very serious problem in the IRS. And this problem started right after Obama was elected and he and other Democraps suggested to the point of writing to the IRS to target Tea Party and other conservative organizations.

This isn't pie in the sky as liberals would have you believe. This is down right government agency ending targeting for political purposes. All the double talk you liberals put up can't distort the facts. POLITICAL TARGETING EXISTS IN THE IRS!

 

[budcampbell]

Quote from pspr:

Have a little faith that something will be done and justice will be served. Without that we might as well start organizing an armed revolt.

I agee, if they don't start rounding some of these outlaws up and hauling them into court for trial, it could get ugly.

 

[Max E.]

Turd Blossom already ripped David Plouffe to shreds for using the talking points piezoe is trying to use in this thread to shamelessly defend the IRS for this shit.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Z3eRxMEJ3vY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>