We need a select committee for both, since the administration continues to stonewall. I really don’t understand Boehner’s reticence in this. They don’t have to make the mistake of impeaching before the election, as the Republicans did in 1998, but they could certainly lay the groundwork for it next year, and an issue in Senate races.
Oh, and speaking of stonewalling, is it 2013, or forty years earlier?
We’d soon find out why, for apparently the first time ever, America’s tax-collection agency, seemingly aided by the Federal Election Commission, suppressed the legitimate political activities of grassroots organizations opposed to the re-election of the president.
Maybe we’d even find out why “grassroots organizations opposed to the re-election of the president” would ask the IRS to certify them as primarily non-political. Or how delays in processing those applications would suppress their legitimate political activities.
Yes, BJ, that’s the impoertant point here.
Genius.
I don’t know if you’re honestly asking questions that have been answered many times because you’re stupid or if you’re hoping that repeating a lie will make some people believe it’s true.
The organizations were applying for 501(c)(4) designation because they have to register with the IRS in order to fundraise and spend money. Money is the mother’s milk of politics and without IRS authorization, they can’t raise money without risking jail time. They applied for 501(c)(4) designation because it does allow for political activity, unlike 501(c)(3) which is reserved for churches, charities and other non-political organizations. The facts are that 100% of the “progressive” organizations were approved and a significant percentage of conservative organizations were delayed, denied and harassed. That sort of political discrimination by the IRS is blatantly illegal but it would require the massively corrupt AG Holder to prosecute anyone.
I used to wonder if Holder had some serious dirt on Obama that he used to keep his job. He has something far better – he is the chief obstructor of justice in the Obama administration. No one at the IRS will be prosecuted under his watch. Obama’s parting act when he finally leaves office will be to issue a blanket pardon for Holder so no subsequent administration can prosecute him.
The organizations were applying for 501(c)(4) designation because they have to register with the IRS in order to fundraise and spend money.
That is false. They don’t need 501(c)(4) to fundraise, they only need it if they want to keep their donors secret.
Money is the mother’s milk of politics
If they’re primarily about politics they should be 527s, not 501c4s.
They applied for 501(c)(4) designation because it does allow for political activity
“A 501(c)(4) organization may directly or indirectly support or oppose a candidate for public office as long as such activities are not a substantial amount of its activities.” Doesn’t it make sense to question a Tea Party group about whether they’re going to make opposing Obama and other Democrats “a substantial amount of its activities”? Wasn’t the Tea Party created to support some candidates and oppose others?
The facts are that 100% of the “progressive” organizations were approved and a significant percentage of conservative organizations were delayed, denied and harassed.
That’s false too — 100% of Tea Party groups that have received decisions have been approved. The only group the IRS has turned down was a progressive one.
they only need it if they want to keep their donors secret.
Yes, and it’s a lot harder to raise money for an organization that is involved in politics if the donors can’t remain secret.
If they’re primarily about politics they should be 527s, not 501c4s.
They weren’t primarily about politics, but 501(c)4s are allowed to engage in politics. You know, like Moveon.org Civil Action?
it’s a lot harder to raise money for an organization that is involved in politics if the donors can’t remain secret.
That must explain why Obama for America had so much trouble raising money.
They weren’t primarily about politics
So they were primarily about wearing period costumes? You can’t be serious. You’re simultaneously arguing that the Tea Party was targeted over politics, and that the Tea Party wasn’t primarily about politics. Pick one.
You’re simultaneously arguing that the Tea Party was targeted over politics, and that the Tea Party wasn’t primarily about politics
What a pathetic and illogical attempt at deflection. The Tea Party is not groups with “Tea Party” in their name attempting to get 501(c)4 status.
100% of Tea Party groups that have received decisions have been approved.
LOL, my the qualifiers you have there. Unfortunately for you, the issue isn’t decisions, but rather the 27 months that went by between decisions.
Jim, in a court of law, they ask people to “tell the truth, the whole truth…”. What you wrote is called a misleading half-truth. For laymen, it’s just called a lie.
Well, Jim, your comments here are non-political, right? It wouldn’t interfere with your speech at all if our host were to put a two month delay on all your posts, would it?……
The groups in question were free to speak all they wanted.
They weren’t free to raise the money they needed to get their message out, as the left was.
Yes, they were. They could either file as a 527 or self-declare as a 501c4. Nobody stopped them from raising and spending as much money as they wanted.
Btw, the notion that the GOP lost in 2012 because their supporters didn’t spend enough money is ridiculous on its face.
“Btw, the notion that the GOP lost in 2012 because their supporters didn’t spend enough money is ridiculous on its face.”
Regardless of why the GOP lost it doesn’t make what the Obama administration did any less wrong. You keep using this defense.
“Boehner’s reticence in this” is easy. The Democrats have so politicized the select committee/Special prosecutor system that he is reluctant to lose productive members of Congress to the Hate machine. Who would want to be the next Ken Starr? We lost an intelligent, honest and respected (on both sides) man, and the Democrats still turned Pornstar into an “Elder Statesman”…….
What are Tea Party groups primarily about?
They are about promoting limited government, and the Constitution.
Was that a trick question?
Be kind Mr. Simberg, and see it from Jim’s perspective. Every large Leftist movement for at least a hundred years has turned out to be Astroturf run by and for the Democrats. Having poisoned the well, he cannot see any possible honest mass movement on the Republican side (They are The Bad Guys!)…….
And how do you limit government if not through politics?
What is Moveon.org primarily about?
I’d say they’re primarily about politics. I wouldn’t give them 501c4 status, any more than I’d give it to Priorities USA or Crossroads GPS. It would be ridiculous for MoveOn to complain about having to answer a lot of questions before being granted 501c4 status.
But they do have that status. That is the current field of play and the Obama administration was using federal employees and agencies to prevent the loyal opposition from enjoying those same benefits.
It is great that you don’t think Moveon shouldn’t be tax exempt but what does that have to do with what the IRS was doing?
Actually, the burning question is: Just how far up his rectum does Baghdad Jim have the Mailed Fist of the State? It’s always been in deep, but increasingly it seems like something for the Guinness Book of World Records.