Thread: IRS says "SORRY"

IRS sorry for scrutinizing Tea Party groups
3 hrs ago

A year ago, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman told Congress that his agency wasn't targeting tax-exempt organizations for their political views.

Except it did.

Now another IRS official has apologized for giving conservative groups with "Tea Party" and "patriot" in their names extra scrutiny, including improperly asking for lists of donors.

Lois Lerner insisted IRS higher-ups were not aware of the practice initiated by low-level employees in Cincinnati, and an IRS statement said "they were in no way due to any political or partisan rationale," without explaining what other motivation there could have been.

http://now.msn.com/irs-apologizes-fo...?ocid=ansnowex

IRS Apologizes For Targeting Conservative Groups In 2012 Election
Posted: 05/10/2013

WASHINGTON -- The head of the Internal Revenue Service's exempt organizations division apologized on Friday for the inappropriate targeting of conservative groups during the 2012 election. The apology by Lois Lerner, first reported by the Associated Press, revealed that groups with the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status had received greater scrutiny.

Many of the groups targeted in 2012 claimed the increased scrutiny was politically motivated, pointing to an IRS questionnaire that asked for full disclosure of nearly all materials held or created by the groups, including all web postings and tweets, relationships with candidates and officeholders, and, in some instances, lists of donors.

"That was wrong. That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive, and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a Washington conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.

To deal with a massive uptick in filings for 501(c)(4) social welfare status in the last few years, the IRS had centralized its review of those seeking such tax-exempt status in a Cincinnati office.

On a conference call with reporters later on Friday, Lerner explained that the inappropriate screening of conservative groups occurred after employees reviewing applications found that a number asserted that they would partake in some amount of political activity and were missing key information, including applications from some groups using "tea party" or "patriot" in their names.

According to Lerner, the employees then inappropriately designated for closer review groups using the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their names. Those groups constituted approximately 75 of the 300 organizations that received the extensive questionnaire sent out from the Cincinnati office.

"What they were doing, they were short-cutting," Lerner said. "They saw applications with these names. Every time they looked at those applications, or for a significant number of them, they said, 'Oh, we need further information,' so they short-cutted and said, 'If we see those names, we probably need further information,' and put them in that bucket," Lerner said.

Lerner said that her office took action after seeing media reports about conservative groups complaining that they were being politically targeted with demands for greater disclosure.

"That was when we went down and took a look," Lerner said. "We said we need to know the details, we need to know the facts. It was after I knew what the facts were, I notified my bosses and we put the changes in place."

Of the full 300 groups that received the extended questionnaire, 130 have been approved for tax-exempt status and another 150 are still under review, according to Lerner.

She would not put a timeline on when her office determined that conservative groups were targeted or when she told top IRS officials about those inappropriate actions. She did state that they "did not know about this at the time that they were testifying" before a congressional committee examining the potential targeting of conservative groups.

In March 2012, IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told a congressional panel, "There's absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people" applying for tax-exempt status.

A statement released by the IRS hours after Lerner's apology stated, "Mistakes were made initially, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan rationale. We fixed the situation last year and have made significant progress in moving the centralized cases through our system."

But conservative groups and Republican lawmakers are calling for further action, including hearings, firings and further explanations about who in the IRS, the Treasury Department and the White House knew about the targeting.

Tea Party Patriots national coordinator Jenny Beth Martin dismissed the IRS apology in a statement: "We reject a simple apology that does nothing to alleviate the danger of this happening again. Only immediate and public actions on the part of the IRS and the president will suffice. We demand the immediate resignation of all complicit in this activity and insist Congress investigate."

Lerner said in the conference call that she would not comment on whether the IRS had taken or would take any disciplinary action.

Toby Marie Walker, president of the Waco Tea Party, one of the groups that complained they were targeted in 2012, told The Huffington Post, "I don't believe for a minute this was low-level, and I never received an apology so I don't feel apologized to."

"If they apologize, they ought to apologize to the groups first and foremost that they put through the stress and the amount of money and time that we had to put into defending something when we did not do anything wrong," Walker said.

Eric Wilson, president of Kentucky 9/12, another conservative group that contended it was targeted by the IRS, said in a statement, "While we should feel vindicated for our principled stance against the government's use of the IRS as a weapon against liberty groups, we also feel there are many still unanswered questions," including "who was requesting this information, why, and for what purpose.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) issued a statement calling on the White House "to conduct a transparent, government-wide review aimed at assuring the American people that these thuggish practices are not underway at the IRS or elsewhere in the administration against anyone, regardless of their political views."

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel at the conservative American Center for Law and Justice, claimed victory after Lerner apologized. Sekulow had provided legal counsel to conservative groups that complained about extensive questioning when they applied for tax-exempt status.

"We knew from the very start that this intimidation tactic was coordinated and focused directly on specific organizations," Sekulow said in a statement. "This admission by the IRS represents a significant victory for free speech and freedom of association. There was never any doubt that these organizations complied with the law and applied for tax exempt status for their activities as Americans have done for decades. And for the many tax-exempt groups we represent, this is an important day -- and underscores the need to stand up and defend your constitutional freedoms."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3254180.html

The corruption of the Obama Regime is matched only by its shamelessness.

In writing about the IRS Tea Party Snooping Scandal, Ace’s CDR M asks a question about the official response which could also apply to administration’s response to the Benghazi talking points: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/339851.php

Does anyone in position of authority know anything in this administration?


—-

*And the Benghazi talking points doctoring. http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/05/11...bout-benghazi/


---

Once again, conservatives should not let up on this issue until we know who sanctioned the targeted investigations – and who crafted the crazy things they asked Tea Party groups.

Basically, the excuse the Obama team is offering is that, oh, we’re not corrupt, we’re just incompetent. http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/1...-party-groups/


The Obama Regime goes to their reliable strategem: IRS Scandal : http://freebeacon.com/carney-blames-...audit-scandal/


And, perhaps realizing they can’t blame Bush for everything, they have decided the Benghazi scandal is Romney’s fault. http://weaselzippers.us/2013/05/10/h...ghazi-scandal/

comments

I am actually stunned that this has taken so long to come to light. Living just outside of Cincinnati, I have been hearing about this for almost a year. That no one “higher up” came forward immediately to fix this “error” speaks volumes. That they actually said with a straight face that this wasn’t political just shows how adept they are at lying. That everyone is just shrugging their shoulders and saying “of course it was political, what do you expect?” is a testament to how hopeless/helpless people feel. What can we do? Nothing, since those in charge control the judges. Who cares? Not the half that put this administration in control, they all think this is great! And the rest of us? We are just republican conspiracy asses who will exaggerate ANYTHING to try to hurt this president. We must change that talking point before anything else will matter.

...

In the closing days of Obama´s first term his Mid-East Policy was unravelling. Now in the one hundred days of his second term, not only the Middle East continues to unravel but his domestic policies are unravelling. Jimmy Carter is beginning to look like a genius along side of Obama, and we know what a failure he was. I guess that makes Obama a super failure. If he survives impeachment he´ll leave office severly wounded. As more is being revealed, Democrats should take a hit in the next couple of elections. Hillary is toast. The Dems will have to look hard to find a new face who will be as virgin as Snow White. If the Republicans can´t make hay in 2014, and capture the White House in 2016; it will be time to start a new party.

Federal oversight group says claim that senior IRS officials were unaware of extra tea party scrutiny -- isn’t entirely accurate

By Doug Powers • May 11, 2013 05:15 PM

Yesterday Michelle wrote about the IRS admitting to giving extra scrutiny to conservative groups (specifically ones that were self-described as “tea party” or “patriot” organizations) seeking tax exempt status in 2011 and 2012. Lois Lerner, head of the IRS division that oversees tax exempt groups, apologized and said the practice was initiated by “lower level workers” in Cincinnati and was not motivated by political bias (pause for laughter). Lerner also told the AP that at the time no high level IRS officials knew this was going on. http://news.cincinnati.com/viewart/2...rvative-groups

Somebody might want to ask her that question again: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/irs-a...a-party-groups

A federal watchdog’s upcoming report says senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups in 2011.
[...]
The Associated Press obtained part of the draft report.

That report says the head of the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups learned that groups were being targeted in June 2011. It does not say whether Shulman was notified.

Bonus points: According to this story in The Hill, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...geting-in-2011 not only is Lerner’s claim that no higher-ups at the IRS knew about the extra scrutiny being given to conservative groups incorrect, but that at least one of those senior officials who knew about the practice was… Lerner: http://benefitslink.com/pr/detail.ph...5#.UY64vUnD8eE

The report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is slated to be released next week — the AP obtained a draft copy of the report.

According to that draft, the head of the IRS division that overseas tax-exempt groups became aware that conservative groups were being targeted for scrutiny in June, 2011. The report does not say whether Douglas Shulman, IRS commissioner at the time, was aware of it.

Also: http://news.cincinnati.com/viewart/2...rvative-groups

In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.

According to Jay Carney, if anything, this might be Bush’s fault. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ee_722149.html


Double bonus points: IRS official Lerner: “I’m not good at math.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...p_ref=business


It’s all starting to make sense now.


Update: Jewish groups too? http://twitchy.com/2013/05/11/whoa-d...ial-attention/


The New York Times must have declared the story dead, because they’ve buried it. http://twitchy.com/2013/05/11/nyt-bu...-hunt-in-2012/


Update II: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ways...rty-patriot-or

The House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight has thrown down an investigative gauntlet to the Internal Revenue Service, demanding that the agency hand over by next Wednesday every communication in its records that includes the words “tea party,” “patriot” or “conservative.”

The committee is also demanding of the IRS that by next Wednesday it provide the committee with the names and titles of all individuals who were involved in targeting conservative non-profit groups for more intensive review of their applications for non-profit status

**Written by Doug Powers

George Will was on a roll today, getting first at the essence of the Benghazi scandal and now about the IRS/Tea Party scandal: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/12/ge...-think-we-are/

All hell would have broken loose had IRS under W targeted “progressive” groups (video ) http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/05/12...qlTTcjlbci3q5z

“The Tea Party people have known about this and were working on this,” [George] will [said Sunday’s broadcast of ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos"] “But they said — it was just some odd underlings out in Cincinnati who did this and there was no political motive whatever involved. Now the question is, how stupid do they think we are? Just imagine, Donna Brazile, if the George W. Bush administration had an IRS underling, he’s out in Cincinnati, of course, saying we’re going to target groups with the word ‘progressive’ in their title. We’d have all hell breaking loose.”

http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/05/12...essive-groups/

As I recall, there was much paranoia on the left about “FISA,” a Bush program to monitor the foreign financial transactions of terrorist group. The left spent the Bush Admin in a state of advanced paranoia that Dick Cheney was listening in on their pizza orders.

...

No, really. Former Obama adviser David Plouffe took to Twitter to spin the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups. And boy, did he step in it.



Well, they were ‘flourishing’: David Plouffe excuses IRS targeting of conservative groups
Posted at 9:06 am on May 13, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

David Plouffe @davidplouffe

What IRS did dumb and wrong.
Impt to note GOP groups flourished last 2 elections, overwhelming Ds.
And they will use this to raise more $.

7:05 PM - 12 May 2013

Important to note that they totally asked for it. By being successful fundraisers.

Then came the immediate backpedaling attempt. Call him out for his ludicrous tweet? You are a conspiracy theorist, natch.

David Plouffe @davidplouffe

Conspiracy theorists out in full force tonight. IRS actions seem indefensible. That rightly is where focus should be. 1/2

9:23 PM - 12 May 2013

David Plouffe @davidplouffe

My previous point was that coverage in more narrow space of political impact should capture reality of what transpired last 2 elec. 2/2

9:31 PM - 12 May 2013

Basically, politics trumps morals. As usual, for Democrats.

Hair @SHannitysHair

Shorter @davidplouffe: The IRS was wrong for targeting Tea Party groups.
But, someone had to stop them from raising so much money.

5:51 AM - 13 May 2013

Sunny @sunnyright

Why would Plouffe cast himself into the arena with a tweet like that?
Not like anyone was bugging him for his opinion AND he sounds stupid.

7:35 PM - 12 May 2013

Rory Cooper @rorycooper

The whole @davidplouffe argument seems to be 'What the IRS did was bad, but...'
There should be no 'but'.

9:49 PM - 12 May 2013

National Journal’s Ron Fournier followed up with Plouffe via Twitter.

David Plouffe@davidplouffe

What IRS did dumb and wrong.
Impt to note GOP groups flourished last 2 elections, overwhelming Ds.
And they will use this to raise more $.

Ron Fournier @ron_fournier

.@davidplouffe serious questions: Why is that important to note?
Is it justification for the action you called wrong?
If not, why note?
7:27 PM - 12 May 2013

More from Fournier’s article: http://www.nationaljournal.com/polit...tives-20130512

I asked Plouffe to respond via Twitter, email or my cell phone. He responded within an hour. Here is his unedited email:

“In terms of impact. Reading much of the coverage layperson would get sense premeditated attempt to effectively silence political opponents. I do think not as a justification but as an evaluation of any impact it is important to note that it would not appear their aims or fundraising were affected. So indefensible behavior by IRS clearly the story. As people are doing analysis it’s a secondary point.”

Oh, well. Stupid laypeople and stuff. Or something.

Twitter users understand more than Smarter Than You Plouffe thinks that they do.

David Freddoso @freddoso

Plouffe didn't "justify,"
he just explained why Team Obama
would clearly want the IRS to do this.
So which is worse?

http://www.nationaljournal.com/polit...tives-20130512 …
10:09 PM - 12 May 2013

Logan Dobson @LoganDobson

sure, laws were violated,
but, see, it would tend to help my political party,
and we're the good guys,
I assure you

http://www.nationaljournal.com/polit...tives-20130512 …
10:12 PM - 12 May 2013

Joe Walsh @WalshFreedom

According to David Plouffe:
Because so many patriots support conservative groups
the IRS is justified in targeting them.

9:42 PM - 12 May 2013

Chris Hayes' Bike @JimmyPrinceton

Best part of Plouffe's IRSplaining:
the GOP you've been told is going extinct
is suddenly "flourishing"

- https://twitter.com/davidplouffe/sta...34823476723713 …

10:16 PM - 12 May 2013

Heh ??? Good Point :

bradcundiff @bradcundiff

Shorter Pfieffer / Plouffe:
"None of this on IRS was political
and even if it was
it was Boosh."

6:00 AM - 13 May 2013

Jim Treacher @jtLOL

@davidplouffe @jamestaranto
So you're not excusing what the IRS is doing.
You're just reminding us why it's okay.

6:26 AM - 13 May 2013

Jason B. Whitman @JasonBWhitman

Shorter @davidplouffe :
@gop groups raised a lot of money last cycle
so who cares if the IRS assaulted their right to free speech.

10:01 PM - 12 May 2013

Jay Caruso @jaycaruso

Using @davidplouffe’s logic,
bank robbers should be excused
because the banks have way more money
than the robbers do.
10:03 PM - 12 May 2013

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/well-t...vative-groups/

It gets worse: IRS leaked conservative groups’ confidential documents to ProPublica
Posted at 11:06 pm on May 13, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

John Podhoretz @jpodhoretz
Ah. IRS released confidential info on 12 groups to ProPublica last year.
Conservative groups. Natch.
http://www.propublica.org/article/ir...fidential-docs …

5:26 PM - 13 May 2013

IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs...
By Justin Elliott @elliottjustin

The IRS’s Cincinnati office last year sent ProPublica the unapproved applications for several conservative groups

The latest IRS scandal is getting worse — and the official watchdog’s report hasn’t even been released yet. Today we learned that the same IRS office that admitted to targeting Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny also released confidential documents from several conservative groups to “independent” (that is, liberal) news organization ProPublica.

Will @Will6cx

ProPublica admits IRS sent them confidential applications from conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status
http://soa.li/eR7slQM

9:18 PM - 13 May 2013

Confidential information from groups like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS made it into the hands of ProPublica late last year, and now ProPublica reports that the IRS’ Cincinnati office was the source of the documents. “No unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to ProPublica,” the site reports, while data from nine conservative groups was leaked. The independent investigative journalists at ProPublica went ahead and reported on Crossroads’ confidential application, somehow forgetting to investigate just how they came by confidential documents in the first place — until now. http://www.propublica.org/article/wh...t-told-the-irs

George Scoville @stackiii

Why didn't @ProPublica report on IRS leaking them confidential tax docs?
Because they're funded by lefty foundations:
http://bit.ly/14iGXlr 9:11 PM

13 May 2013

Jonathan Blake @blakeffm

Ironically, the only nonprofit that the IRS exposed as frauds is @ProPublica.

9:10 PM - 13 May 2013

Michael Goldfarb @thegoldfarb

Katzenberg-funded, 501c3 ProPublica was the preferred outlet for IRS leaks against conservative groups

http://www.propublica.org/article/ir...fidential-docs …

7:36 PM - 13 May 2013

Michael Goldfarb @thegoldfarb

Actually outrageous: Katzenberg can deduct $ given to ProPublica,
the partisan 501c3 the IRS was leaking to re non-deductible right-wing

c4s8:03 PM - 13 May 2013

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/it-get...to-propublica/

comments

Katzenberg is Obama’s biggest individual donor and a bundler for the Obama campaign.

..

They won't even talk to the heavy hitters in this outrage, like all other Obama admin cover ups. You would think they would be running out of whitewash at the Whitehouse by now. Good bye to some pour low level smucks just following orders, wink wink. Some left wing group will pick them up for taking one for the team.

..

ProPublica must have gotten word that they'll be called out in the investigation report that's soon to be released. No other reason why they would admit to this.

I wonder how many other leftist "news" outlets received similar "confidential" info?

..

This plays right into how the left stole the last election by dirty tricks, fraud, and most likely worse. All these things are coming to light and it means the end for these leftist morons.


Hogwash: President Liar Pants claims he heard about IRS targeting conservatives ‘from news’
Posted at 1:33 pm on May 13, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

The Associated Press ✔ @AP
BREAKING: Obama says he learned of IRS focus on conservative groups when news reports broke Friday.

10:55 AM - 13 May 2013

Hogwash, indeed. As Twitchy reported, President Obama was in full stompy foot disgrace mode during his joint presser with U.K. Prime Minister Cameron today. He shamefully called the Benghazi talking points investigation a “sideshow.” http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/thats-...ts-a-sideshow/

He was also questioned about the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups.

Sunny @sunnyright

First question from AP at press conference w/ Obama and PM Cameron:
When did you learn about IRS and did WH lie about Benghazi?

10:54 AM - 13 May 2013

Brett LoGiurato @BrettLoGiurato

The AP's Julie Pace gets the question at the Obama presser, asking about IRS and Benghazi.

10:52 AM - 13 May 2013

Zeke Miller ✔ @ZekeJMiller

Obama: “I don’t want to comment prematurely…”
says if allegations are true “then that’s outrageous”

10:54 AM - 13 May 2013

Huh. He doesn’t want to say they “acted stupidly”? Um. They have admitted to doing it, President Liar Pants. http://twitchy.com/2013/05/10/ap-irs...ty-or-patriot/

L K @OrwellForce

Friday: IRS apologizes for targeting conservatives.
Monday: Obama says "if" they targeted conservatives, that's bad.


Does Obama think the #IRS just made up that they targeted conservatives?

11:13 AM - 13 May 2013

Sunny @sunnyright

So Obama didn't learn about what his own IRS was doing for more than two years until Friday.

10:54 AM - 13 May 2013

Indeed. Unlike the New York Times, who is madly spinning for the Obama administration and the IRS, http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/thats-...e-to-seize-on/ Ms. Pace did her job. And did it well.

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/13/hogwas...ves-from-news/

Matthew Yglesias can’t put his finger on what the IRS did wrong

Posted at 6:14 am on May 14, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

Matt Yglesias ✔ @mattyglesias

What is the IRS is supposed to do with these c4 applications?
Clearly not what they did.
But is the only answer to rubber stamp everything?

7:56 PM - 13 May 2013

Liberal Slate writer Matthew Yglesias knows the IRS did something wrong in targeting conservative 501(c)(4) groups and leaking their confidential information to liberal journalists, but he can’t quite figure out what.

Tax administration is hard!

He asks if the only alternative to selectively targeting conservative organizations is to “rubber stamp everything.”

Because giving equal scrutiny to liberal and conservative groups clearly is not an option.

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/14/matthe...irs-did-wrong/


Bette Midler praises IRS for targeting conservative groups: ‘I LOVE THE IRS!!!’

Posted at 5:55 am on May 14, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

Bette Midler ✔ @BetteMidler

I LOVE THE IRS!!! HOW CAN A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION BE CALLED A NON-PROFIT THAT PROMOTES GENERAL WELFARE??

9:12 PM - 13 May 2013 from Manhattan, NY, United States

The Internal Revenue Service has apologized for targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names.

An inspector general’s report scheduled to be released later this week reportedly says the IRS also targeted groups that criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution.

And if that weren’t bad enough, the IRS reportedly released conservative groups’ confidential information to the “independent” (that is, liberal) news organization ProPublica.

But Bette Midler sees no reason for concern. No reason at all.

She took to Twitter last night to announce (in all caps) that she thinks what the IRS did is just great, because in her view political organizations are not legitimate 501(c)(4)s.

And if a conservative administration targeted liberal 501(c)(4) organizations like Organizing for Action, that would be just fine, right Bette?

http://twitchy.com/2013/05/14/bette-...-love-the-irs/

sent to me by a Liberal Friend

Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11:32 AM CDT
When the IRS targeted liberals

Under George W. Bush, it went after the NAACP, Greenpeace and even a liberal church
By Alex Seitz-Wald



While few are defending the Internal Revenue Service for targeting some 300 conservative groups, there are two critical pieces of context missing from the conventional wisdom on the “scandal.” First, at least from what we know so far, the groups were not targeted in a political vendetta — but rather were executing a makeshift enforcement test (an ugly one, mind you) for IRS employees tasked with separating political groups not allowed to claim tax-exempt status, from bona fide social welfare organizations. Employees are given almost zero official guidance on how to do that, so they went after Tea Party groups because those seemed like they might be political. Keep in mind, the commissioner of the IRS at the time was a Bush appointee.

The second is that while this is the first time this kind of thing has become a national scandal, it’s not the first time such activity has occurred.

“I wish there was more GOP interest when I raised the same issue during the Bush administration, where they audited a progressive church in my district in what look liked a very selective way,” California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff said on MSNBC Monday. “I found only one Republican, [North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones], that would join me in calling for an investigation during the Bush administration. I’m glad now that the GOP has found interest in this issue and it ought to be a bipartisan concern.”

The well-known church, All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena, became a bit of a cause célèbre on the left after the IRS threatened to revoke the church’s tax-exempt status over an anti-Iraq War sermon the Sunday before the 2004 election. “Jesus [would say], ‘Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine,’” rector George Regas said from the dais.

The church, which said progressive activism was in its “DNA,” hired a powerful Washington lawyer and enlisted the help of Schiff, who met with the commissioner of the IRS twice and called for a Government Accountability Office investigation, saying the IRS audit violated the First Amendment and was unduly targeting a political opponent of the Bush administration. “My client is very concerned that the close coordination undertaken by the IRS allowed partisan political concerns to direct the course of the All Saints examination,” church attorney Marcus Owens, who is widely considered one of the country’s leading experts on this area of the law, said at the time. In 2007, the IRS closed the case, decreeing that the church violated rules preventing political intervention, but it did not revoke its nonprofit status.


And while All Saints came under the gun, conservative churches across the country were helping to mobilize voters for Bush with little oversight. In 2006, citing the precedent of All Saints, “a group of religious leaders accused the Internal Revenue Service yesterday of playing politics by ignoring its complaint that two large churches in Ohio are engaging in what it says are political activities, in violation of the tax code,” the New York Times reported at the time. The churches essentially campaigned for a Republican gubernatorial candidate, they alleged, and even flew him on one of their planes.

Meanwhile, Citizens for Ethics in Washington filed two ethics complaints against a church in Minnesota. “You know we can’t publicly endorse as a church and would not for any candidate, but I can tell you personally that I’m going to vote for Michele Bachmann,” pastor Mac Hammond of the Living Word Christian Center in Minnesota said in 2006 before welcoming her to the church. The IRS opened an audit into the church, but it went nowhere after the church appealed the audit on a technicality.

And it wasn’t just churches. In 2004, the IRS went after the NAACP, auditing the nation’s oldest civil rights group after its chairman criticized President Bush for being the first sitting president since Herbert Hoover not to address the organization. “They are saying if you criticize the president we are going to take your tax exemption away from you,” then-chairman Julian Bond said. “It’s pretty obvious that the complainant was someone who doesn’t believe George Bush should be criticized, and it’s obvious of their response that the IRS believes this, too.”

In a letter to the IRS, Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel, Pete Stark and John Conyers wrote: “It is obvious that the timing of this IRS examination is nothing more than an effort to intimidate the members of the NAACP, and the communities the organization represents, in their get-out-the-vote effort nationwide.”

Then, in 2006, the Wall Street Journal broke the story of a how a little-known pressure group called Public Interest Watch — which received 97 percent of its funds from Exxon Mobile one year — managed to get the IRS to open an investigation into Greenpeace. Greenpeace had labeled Exxon Mobil the “No. 1 climate criminal.” The IRS acknowledged its audit was initiated by Public Interest Watch and threatened to revoke Greenpeace’s tax-exempt status, but closed the investigation three months later.

As the Journal reporter, Steve Stecklow, later said in an interview, “This comes against a backdrop where a number of conservative groups have been attacking nonprofits and NGOs over their tax-exempt status. There have been hearings on Capitol Hill. There have been a number of conservative groups in Washington who have been quite critical.”

Indeed, the year before that, the Senate held a hearing on nonprofits’ political activity. Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, the then-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said the IRS needed better enforcement, but also “legislative changes” to better define the lines between politics and social welfare, since they had not been updated in “a generation.” Unfortunately, neither Congress nor the IRS has defined 501(c)4′s sufficiently to this day, leaving the door open for IRS auditors to make up their own, discriminatory rules.

Those cases mostly involved 501(c)3 organizations, which live in a different section of the tax code for real charities like hospitals and schools. The rules are much stronger and better developed for (c)3′s, in part because they’ve been around longer. But with “social welfare” (c)4 groups, the kind of political activity we saw in 2010 and 2012 is so unprecedented that you get cases like Emerge America, a progressive nonprofit that trains Democratic female candidates for public office. The group has chapters across the country, but in 2011, chapters in Massachusetts, Maine and Nevada were denied 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. Leaders called the situation “bizarre” because in the five years Nevada had waited for approval, the Kentucky chapter was approved, only for the other three to be denied.

A former IRS official told the New York Times that probably meant the applications were sent to different offices, which use slightly different standards. Different offices within the same organization that are supposed to impose the exact same rules in a consistent manner have such uneven conceptions of where to draw the line at a political group, that they can approve one organization
and then deny its twin in a different state.

All of these stories suggest that while concern with the IRS posture toward conservative groups now may be merited, to fully understand the situation requires a bit of context and history.

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/when...eted_liberals/


comments

The Obama administration is, unfortunately, in this IRS debacle. The Secretary of the Treasury is a cabinet appt and who should be informed of potentially sensitive operations in agencies under his purview. Someone reports to someone who reports to someone. If a national office was set up in Cincinnati to analyze tax-exempt applications, then I would expect that reports were written.


I don't think it looks good when the President says he learns about what's going in his administration from the news. What does he have a cabinet for, after all? To keep watch and give him the heads up on these kinds of things.


I'm not in favor of this kind of story. Progressives expected this kind of harassment from Bush--which is why Obama was elected...joyfully. We would be better than that. I find it problematic that the President cannot express his views and values forcefully enough at the outset that his administration cannot make decisions based on that outlook.

..

Of course, the Republicans and Democrats are completely different. One calls itself "Incorporated", while the other calls itself "Corporation".


That pretty much sums up all of the differences. Two private corporations that control our government, along with the Federal Reserve System, which has been found by the Supreme Court to also be a private corporation. These are the 1%.

...

Yeah, except that the Democrats spent 8 years screaming about the way that Shrub shredded our civil rights only to get in power and double down on shredding our civil rights. Republicans don't have a hammerlock on hypocrisy.

Which is worse, someone else's poor behavior or repeating it?