Rep. Van Hollen to Join in Suit to Halt IRS Aid to Political Dark Money Groups

http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/25/g...dem-claim-that-irs-targeted-progressives-too/

House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp slapped down Democratic claims that progressive groups were also improperly targeted by the IRS between 2010 and 2012, stifling a growing media narrative that the IRS targeting was not partisan.

The term “progressive” appeared on a heavily redacted November 2010 ”Be On the Lookout” (BOLO) list released this week by Ways and Means Democrats. The term was used to help the IRS identify political activity that “may not be appropriate” among 501(c)(3) charities eligible for tax-deductible contributions.

However, the targeting of conservative groups largely focused on applicants for 501(c)(4) “social welfare organization” status, which shields groups from having to disclose their donors. The scrutinized “progressive” applications were not required to be sent to a special IRS unit for additional review — but tea party and conservative applications were subjected to extra scrutiny by 12 different working groups within the IRS. Tea Party groups were also marked for extra scrutiny in the same document.

Ads by Google

Nevertheless, the New York Times reported, “taken together, the documents seem to change the terms of a scandal that exploded over accusations that the I.R.S. had tried to stifle a nascent conservative political movement. Instead, the dispute now revolves around questionable sorting tactics used by I.R.S. application screeners.”

While Camp’s Ways and Means staff noted that progressive groups were also featured on an IRS’ BOLO list, alongside tea party groups, it pointed out that only tea party groups had their donors threatened, had confidential information leaked, were sent “inappropriate and intrusive” questions, and had their applications delayed for more than two years, according to currently available evidence.

Camp’s staff also noted that only tea party groups were mentioned as having been targeted in a Treasury Inspector General’s report on the IRS scandal. Nearly 100 conservative or tea party applications were given extra scrutiny, according to the IG report.

Ways and Means Democrats did not call any progressive victims of IRS targeting at the committee’s hearing on IRS victims.

“I do want to note that the minority was given the opportunity to call a witness, but did not present a witness that had been affected by taxpayer activity — by IRS activity. So, that’s why there is no minority witness at the table today,” Camp said at the June 4 Ways and Means hearing, in response to Democratic Rep. Ron Kind’s complaint that no progressive victims were present at the hearing. Camp later said at the hearing that he welcomed potential progressive victims to come forward, but that no progressive groups had done so by June 4.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/25/g...-irs-targeted-progressives-too/#ixzz2aOcVT8a6

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ef-counsel-involved-in-targeting-controversy/

Social welfare groups, known as 501 (c)(4)s, faced delays lasting months and even years as the IRS reviewed their applications during the 2010 and 2012 election cycles.
IRS inspector general Russell George released a report in May that said the agency had inappropriately targeted groups based on ideology rather than looking for politically neutral signs of campaign activity. He also found that the IRS went too far in its questioning of applicants, asking them for everything from resumes to names of donors or membership lists, which experts say the IRS cannot legally do.
Democratic and Republican lawmakers in recent months have offered competing narratives about who was to blame for the IRS’s actions. GOP lawmakers have suggested that Washington IRS officials and even the White House had a hand in the controversy, while Democrats have said the issue started with mid-level employees in the agency’s tax-exemption office in Cincinnati.
While talking about the controversy in May, White House press secretary Jay Carney referred to “the apparent conduct by our IRS officials in Cincinnati” and said “line IRS employees in Cincinnati improperly scrutinized 501 (C)(4) organizations by using words like ‘tea party,’ in quotes, and ‘patriot.’”

 

Progress is not a political word. But tea party is a red flag for politics (and ignorance).

 

I've gone from thinking piezoe was earnest but naive to thinking he is just another AK47.

If this had been Bush and the groups being harrassed were left wing groups, there would have been nonstop calls in the media for impeachment, special prosecutors, new laws, etc. There would have been non-stop comparisons to Nixon, who was lynched for stuff that was minor compared to this.

This criminal misuse of governemnt bodies to harrass and punish your enemies is right out of the Chicago playbook. There is no way a bunch of IRS drones in Cincinnati came up with this on their own.

 

I am sure glad our IRS was used to suppress that vote and the leftists here support that.

by the way the ignorance is what the left counts on...
ignorance of basic common sense. Those who support the constitution are those who are educated.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html?_r=0


Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

 

Suppress what vote, the (attempted) vote paid for by the plutocrats? Boohoo.

 

at the core... what is you philosophy... how can you believe in leftist rule at all costs without being a pawn of the plutocrats.

in the end what you stand for turns into big govt run by the party being owned by the plutocrats.

 

I have never said, nor have I ever meant to even imply, that I want bigger government for its own sake. I want effective/efficient government first, and let those conditions dictate its size.

I think most of us here would like to see "the money out of politics", a very old desire indeed.

 

monetizing the debt does not sound very efficient to me.
the Dept of Education having a civil rights office in Denver... does not sound very efficient to me.

how about you..

do you think our federal govt should being spending net more or net less.

Should tax rates go up?

 

As far as that goes I think we need to have a clear vision of our objectives, our values and ethics, a keen awareness of the best practices out there (meaning, cross cultural knowledge), and the flexibility to drop what doesn't work and adopt what does, even if discomforting.

I have a seed planted now, along the lines of "net worth caps on politicians", and I'll let my ordinary reading habits water it and see if anything comes up.