Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This was a stupid low level decision. What they should have done is make a list of the top 1,000 fortunes, income and largest corporations and send the auditors to have fun with them.
I fail to see where I indicated the specific name ident was justified, however, I suspect if you were able to look at which Orgs were reviewed, it would wind up many more Right groups than Left, simply because many more Right groups applied for the tax exempt status. The IRS objective has not changed for decades, the method was flawed. How about you take your own "intellectually honest" advice and maybe add to the mix, "apply some reason"?
I'll type slowly Bob.....
t-h-e-y
a-d-m-i-t-t-e-d
t-o
t-a-r-g-e-t-i-n-g
c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e
g-r-o-u-p-s
Well Bob, I have to wonder how Reuters, AP, ABC, CBS, etc. all seem to have facts that establish that IRS supervisors knew the practice of targeting organizations with phrases like Tea Party, and Patriot in their names was occurring as far back as 2011, but yet you don't seem to think that the Government has the same facts. Sure, there should be a full investigation, but it has already been established that this practice of targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny has occurred, that IRS leadership knew about it, and that one time IRS Commissioner Shulman told Congress something to the contrary. Not sure what else you want to establish before you think this warrants additional action.
bob's a centrist....he will not place blame....nor does he EVER post things unless he has all the facts, regardless if they show lefties in a bad light or not. He is always intellectually honest.
I don't think Obama ordered the audits at all. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it. This may come to as a surprise to you, but every action by every employee in the federal government doesn't come to the attention of the POTUS.
Reagan said he had no idea that arms were being illegally sold to Iran to fund the Central American Contras. Bush said he had no idea a CIA agent was outed. I am sure you believed them at the time.
Of course the president didn't order them, any more than Bush ordered the audits during his administration.
I do find it rather amusing that the guy in charge at the time was yet another Bush holdover.
bob's a centrist....he will not place blame....nor does he EVER post things unless he has all the facts, regardless if they show lefties in a bad light or not. He is always intellectually honest.
And even scarier, when I tie my shoe laces I wind up with 2 loops. Gasp, the whole lace gets tied, imagine that?
Part of the IRS' very legitimate agenda is to ensure that organizations with tax-exempt status are fulfilling the requirements and obligations of being a tax-exempt organization.
The IRS has been investigating numerous tax-exempt organizations quite thoroughly for the past several years because of new legislation tightening up requirements for tax-exempt status.
This, exactly.
The sudden increase in these types of groups requesting tax-exempt status was bound to cause someone in that agency to take a look at them.
I suspect the reaction would have been the same no matter who was president.
So we know that the IRS lied about this happening at all. We then know they lied about it being something that only low level officials were aware of. Then they say that this was something that only dealt with the Cincinnati office.
The Washington Post is now reporting that was also a lie.
IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups
Internal Revenue Service officials in Washington and at least two other offices were involved with investigating conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, making clear that the effort reached well beyond the branch in Cincinnati that was initially blamed, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.
Question 3 asks for the identity and credentials of any person who spoke at a Tea Party event hosted by the Richmond Tea Party. It seems now that the IRS is keeping track of your political activity. Give that some thought. Through bully tactics, and the threat of a felony conviction should your information be protected, the IRS is demanding that Tea Party organizers reveal the identity of those who spoke at events AND give details of what they said. How is this not tyranny?
3) Provide the following information for all the events and programs you have conducted and participated since October 22, 2010 to now. Please answer the following for each event.
3b - Copies of handouts you provided to the audience, participants and the public.
3d. - If speeches or forums were conducted in the event or program, provide detailed contents of the speeches or forums, names of the speakers or panels, and their credentials.
...and
5. List each past or present board member, officer, key employee and members of
their families who:
a) Has served on the board of another organization.
b) Was, is or plans to be a candidate for public office. Indicate the nature of
each candidacy.
c) Has previously conducted similar activities for another entity.
d) Has previously submitted an application for tax exempt status.
8. Please provide the following regarding your merchandise sales:
a) A vendor list. Indicate if the vendor is a related party.
b) A list of items sold.
c) Your cost for each item.
d) The selling price of each item.
26. Provide details regarding your relationship with Justin Bink-Thornas (sic).
34. Has your organization engaged in any activities with the news media? If so,
please describe those activities in further detail and, if available, provide copies of
articles printed or transcripts of items aired because of that activity. News media
activity may include the following:
a) Newspaper advertisements
b) Press releases
c) Interviews with news media
d) Letters to the editor
Of course the president didn't order them, any more than Bush ordered the audits during his administration.
I do find it rather amusing that the guy in charge at the time was yet another Bush holdover.
Perhaps old habits do die hard.
I find it amusing that you give Obama a pass from any responsibility, (as facts seem to indicate you should) but cannot resist the urge to somehow assign a degree of blame to Bush. Funny how that works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gasp, the whole lace gets tied, imagine that? 
Actual IRS Letter With Questions Asked Of TEA Party Groups
