| Author | Message | ||
     Notpurples2 |
Someone please clarify. The Tea Party, a political party, is trying to file for as charity organization instead of as a political party? Shouldn't the IRS look into that? Do other political parties receive tax exemption as charitable organizations? Is the Tea "Party" not claiming to be a political party now? I thought they had actual Tea Party candidates and elected politicians. Just looking for a clearer picture. It seems most reports are saying that the IRS is blocking the Tea Party's attempts for tax exemption, but political parties aren't tax exempt. Are they? | ||
| Fb1 |
Notpurple, there are plenty of news reports on the 'net, both from the left and the right, that explain in detail who these targeted groups are and what their individual mission statements are. Grab your favorite search engine and let us know what you find out.  Perhaps begin your journey by searching "IRS True the Vote"... | ||
| Sifo |
Someone please clarify. http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Politic al-Organizations I'm just curious. Would you be willing to share where you go to get your news? | ||
| Fb1 |
There is also much to be learned on this issue here... http://www.therightscoop.com/ ...and here... http://legalinsurrection.com/ | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Sifo, that was the impression I got reading this last page of this thread and doing a quick search of "Tea Party Tax" Is the Tea Party even a party or just a whole bunch of "political organizations"? In the video 501c was mentioned, which is charity. 526 is for political organizations. There is a difference, right? (Message edited by notpurpleS2 on May 17, 2013) | ||
| Sifo |
Notpurples2, I feel I was a bit dismissive in my previous answer. I apologize for that. Your question really does have me wondering where you get you new from though, starting with your use of the phrase "The Tea Party" as if it was the equivalent of the Republican or Democrat political party. It isn't. It doesn't even exist as such (at least it didn't just a couple of years back), but has been used by many groups of a similar ideology (as well as some groups of dissimilar ideology, using it dishonestly). Never mind all that though, this isn't about just "The Tea Party". It's about the IRS treating similar political groups differently based on their political ideology, using the phrase "tea party" (lower case), or "patriot" as a means of identifying the target group. I think you were getting at why does a group with a political agenda get tax exempt status though. That has to do with the laws having poor definitions of what a political group is. This was brought up in the hearings today. The problem is that the more you try to define a political group, the more the law will be skirted with fine details and loop holes. The point here isn't the definition of what a political party is. The point is that the IRS should not get into targeting one ideology while giving a pass to another ideology. At that point, you have a very clear violation of any reasonable intent of IRS law. I really do wonder where you get your news however. I might suggest, for your own benefit, it might be worth considering, at least, additional sources. | ||
| Sifo |
Looks like you replied while I was typing the above... | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Thank you Sifo. I wasn't trying to lump the "Tea Party" in with Republicans, far from it. I honestly thought they were more of an organized alternative party, like The Green or Libertarian Party. I agree that targeting one side of the political spectrum or one "party" in particular is wrong. Unless there is a particular group that is often breaking the rules. For example, if the IRS was finding that numerous groups using "tea party" in their name were breaking the rules or not filing correctly, then I can understand that becoming a red flag. IF that's the case. From what I can find, I'm at work so I can't spend too much time searching, the filings in question are 501c4 which are groups that can lobby but must be primarily charitable organizations focused on social welfare. I admit I don't know a lot about any tea party groups, but I didn't think they were social welfare groups. They seem to be more politically focused. (Message edited by notpurples2 on May 17, 2013) | ||
| Sifo |
My point wasn't to differentiate The Tea Party from the Republican party, but to differentiate them from the Republican and Democrat parties. The Rs & Ds are organized political parties, as are the Greens and Libertarian parties, and many more. I've learned that there is no official "Tea Party" from a local Tea Party group who call themselves West Suburban Patriots. They have made it clear many times that they welcome people from all political parties. They do have a political ideology though. I'm on their mailing list. Here's part of a recent email from them...
Far worse example have been brought up in the hearings. Again, the point here isn't that a group like WSP are politically focused. It's that they are being treated differently by the IRS as very similar groups with at different political ideology. The gray area is written into the law. The government must however, make sure that the law is applied equally, regardless of ideology. This is a first amendment issue. | ||
| Reindog |
notpurples2, Thank you for asking relevant and insightful questions. Tom Reiner. | ||
| Macbuell |
I heard a story about a company that was having trouble getting their 501(c)4 and had a conservative sounding name so they shut down the company and started a new company called "greenhouse solutions" and they got approved for their 501(c)4 status in just a few weeks. The big question I have ... if this is so innocent, how come it didn't happen to any liberal groups. Also, why did is start happening in 2010, right when TEA Party groups were growing in popularity and their message was resonating with people who were upset about Health Care being forced through without public support? | ||
| Sifo |
BTW, having my name on a mailing list for West Suburban Patriots which has been thoroughly run through the wringer, I have to admit that I'm feeling less than comfortable about what they may happen to be looking at me for, coincidentally of course. I certainly think I'll be looking over my shoulder for the next three or so years. | ||
| Sifo |
One more point to ponder, Steven Miller today basically blamed this all on the IRS being an incredibly horribly run government bureaucracy. How should we be feeling about health care at this point? Not only is it being implemented as a part of the IRS, but that is literally being done by one of the people who are right in the middle of this scandal! Looking at this in the best possible light is damn frightening. | ||
| Fb1 |
(Message edited by fb1 on May 18, 2013) | ||
| Fb1 |
Damn. 
From Legal Insurrection:
Damn. | ||
| 46champ |
I have always wondered what can happen to a person after one of there congressional inquires. Do they find you guilty and you get canned, go to jail, loose your government retirement, get a big fine, loose your citizenship. Anyone got a clue. | ||
| Fb1 |
The big question I have ... if this is so innocent, how come it didn't happen to any liberal groups. Interesting, isn't it? The IRS officials questioned so far insist it's all a coincidence. Nothing to see here, comrade, move along. Also, why did is start happening in 2010, right when TEA Party groups were growing in popularity and their message was resonating with people who were upset about Health Care being forced through without public support? Some of the political pundits I've studied since this broke last Friday have painted a pretty clear picture that the dems absolutely could not afford a repeat of the 2010 midterms in 2012, and conclude (correctly, IMO) that the IRS targeting and harassment was part of a "systemwide" campaign to drag 0bama across the finish line last November. It ties nicely with the suspicion that the Benghazi coverup was all about keeping the damage to 0's presidential run to a minimum, to the point of lying - repeatedly - to the American people and to the world. Can you imagine how evil a person would have to be to stand before the parents of the fallen SEALs and tell them not to worry, we're gonna find and prosecute the people that made that awful video that got your sons murdered (while we listened and watched in real time and did absolutely NOTHING)? These people are rotten to their core. | ||
| Two_seasons |
Eternity is a long time! And hell isn't called the "lake of fire" because it soothes! Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. | ||
| Two_seasons |
Frank Marshall Davis Mentor to BHO. American Spectator article from last October... http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/12/dreams-fr om-frank-marshall-dav/ It's a short 6 page read, but gives some insight on what the citizens (and non) of America have for their President | ||
| Cityxslicker |
lawyers, tax collectors, and politicians; what has changed in 2000 years ? | ||
| Kenm123t |
City the right folks will be up on the tree this time !  | ||
| Oldog |
Saw this Saturday PM. Miserable Bastards. This man and his family deserve to be here if he wants and On our Dime, Mr President You are with out honor .... This guy gives us bin laden and "WE" deny him sanctuary I have no further comment heres the article http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/05/16/pakistani- doctor-who-helped-get-bin-laden-was-denied-asylum- in-us-report/?test=latestnews | ||
| Two_seasons |
taken from instapundit.com... "In the Obama era, the question isn’t whether you’re paranoid. It’s whether you’re paranoid enough". | ||
| Sifo |
I think we may have misunderstood why getting OBL was a "difficult" decision for BO. He was probably just conflicted on if he wanted it done. He shames our nation. | ||
| Fb1 |
Frank Marshall Davis Mentor to BHO. American Spectator article from last October... http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/12/dreams-fr om-frank-marshall-dav/ It's a short 6 page read, but gives some insight on what the citizens (and non) of America have for their President Two Seasons, thanks for the link. That's an excellent, well-researched, well-written piece on FMD:
Indeed. I've asked this question repeatedly since BH0 was elected: What do we REALLY know about this man? He's done a masterful job of hiding his past JUST enough to get past most of the American public's radar, helped immensely in this task by his huge publicity staff, I mean Pravda, I mean the mainstream media. We know enough to know he's not who he presents himself to be, and yet... ...and yet, he's still the president, and Congress seems powerless to stop him. They hound him, to be sure, yet onward he marches, on OUR nickel, fulfilling his promise to fundamentally transform America. Thanks again for the link. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Dismiss it ? pft - they thoroughly endorse, contribute and idolize it. Pure Communist Cult of Personality - they are at the spicket for the freshest of Kool Aid. And as an adamant speaker against ObamaCare from day one, I have been told on several accounts in after action interview followups that I am persona non grata.... because I have read the bill, and I early equated this bastard to a Communist; without any apologies for doing so. (political ideology is not a protected EEOC sector - plus I am white - so they gonna play the race card every time I speak out against this guy) The crosses we bare. | ||
| Kenm123t |
City tell them your a from Transylvania and you are genetically predisposed to work the night shifts. They love Trannies lol a protected minority when they ask which way your converting to say your not sure but working on it with your therapist. Oh and how is that covered under Obama care find a cool psychologist you can run it up for years. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
the new DSM 5 is out, I am sure they have a diagnosis for a Sweet Transgendered Transsexual from Transyvlannia with political angst issues.... and now for something completely different | ||
| Aesquire |
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014241278873240 82604578489171510582616.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDL ETopOpinion The "asterisk President". Since we now have legal proof that Obama was, in at least one state, not legally running, his victory over Hilary is fraud. ( Both had fake names on the petition to run in the Primary, Hilary has enough even with HER fraud to legally run. Obama did not. ) If he is illegally a Candidate, then his election too, is a fraud. Now, there is no way even a Republican dominated Justice Dept. would try and oust this fraud, since it would take impeachment to even bring him up on the charges of voter fraud, and, like every OTHER thing in Barry's life, it's not his responsibility. So, even mentioning that Obama is a fraud, and not eligible to be President, is useless, and worse than useless, after the election. So if you want him removed from power in a legal non-violent way, you'll have to do a few things. First, make sure your Representatives know you will stand behind them if they move for impeachment. ( promise them vast sums of money, that usually works best to indicate support ) Second, you'll have to actually vote several more R's into the Senate, so that an Impeachment could actually happen, unlike with Slick Willie. Harry Reid won't even bring budgets from the House up for a vote. He's never going to allow even discussion on an impeachment. | ||
| Aesquire |
Just for giggles. Seriously, people will think you are crazy. Just because a PDF multilayer file is not proof of anything, and this one is an obvious fake, doesn't mean the Prez. was born in Kenya, or Washington, or anywhere but where he claims he was. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/obama_ built_this_forgery.html |
