The Only Scandal Regarding the IRS is How EVERY Tea Party Group Obtained 501(C)(4) Status

[ProSense]

The Only Scandal Regarding the IRS is How EVERY Tea Party Group Obtained 501(C)(4) Status

by markthshark

I wish I could properly convey how freakin' sick and tired I am listening to both cable news and broadcast news force feed us the Republican line of bullshit du jour. It's either a case of institutionalized duplicitousness, corporate coercion -- or -- pure, unadulterated laziness. I mean, out of the hundreds of so-called 'journalists' out there in mendacious media land, would it have killed one of them to actually read the May 14th draft report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration?

Facts matter Dammit! And media reports regarding the IRS 'scandal' are sorely void of them. I'm taking about real facts. Not tea party 'facts'. Not conservative dogmatic 'truthiness'. Not partisan spin. Honest, verifiable facts!


First, the facts we know

Some of the flagged groups did have their tax-exempt status delayed or did face some additional scrutiny, but not a single group has been denied tax-exempt status.

A May 14 draft report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that none of the 296 questionable applicants had been denied, “For the 296 potential political cases we reviewed, as of December 17, 2012, 108 applications had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied, and 160 cases were open from 206 to 1,138 calendar days (some crossing two election cycles).” (p. 14)

In fact, the only known 501(c)(4) applicant to recently have its status denied happens to be a progressive group: the Maine chapter of Emerge America, which trains Democratic women to run for office. Although the group did no electoral work, and didn’t participate in independent expenditure campaign activity either, its partisan nature disqualified it from being categorized as working for the “common good.”

According to the IG's report roughly 31% of applications (91 out of 296) reviewed did not have...

"... indications of significant political campaign intervention."

So, a little more than 2/3rds of applications flagged for processing by specialists were indeed politically-oriented.

Normally, the aforementioned category would disqualify applicants for 501(C)(4) status. But the sheer volume of applicants during and after the 2008 presidential election along with the polarization of the political process in general combined to inhibit the agency's screening ability, allowing those groups to obtain the highly-sought-after 501(C)(4) tax-exempt status. Yes, it's an excuse. It was a bureaucratic failure with "bureaucratic" being the operative term.

But, it wasn't Barack Obama's army of liberal zombies.

But all told, a critical look at some of the activities of those tea party applicants currently under review by IREHR or those already designated as 501(C)(4) reveals the potential for a threat to democratic governance in general.

From the IREHR website: The Tea Party and the IRS “Scandal” The Actual Facts of the Case

Here are the not-so-known facts of a few of those cases:

- more -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/19/1210132/-The-Only-Scandal-Regarding-the-IRS-is-How-EVERY-Tea-Party-Group-Obtained-501-C-4-Status

The Tea Party and the IRS “Scandal” The Actual Facts of the Case
http://www.irehr.org/issue-areas/tea-party-nationalism/tea-party-news-and-analysis/item/482-tea-party-irs-scandal

Nate Silver's Statistical Analysis - Sends IRS Critiques To "The Fainting Couch"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022866334

On edit, maybe Robert Reich was right (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022863454). After all, the head of the IRS was a Bush appointee.

[librechik]

1. Damn Right!

sick of drowning in this BS!

[MannyGoldstein]

2. As I keep saying - this is a fully-fake scandal

At least what's being called an "outrageous" scandal is not a scandal, and certainly not "outrageous".

The real question is who's behind conjuring this into a fake scandal.

[ProSense]

5. My guess,

"The real question is who's behind conjuring this into a fake scandal."

...Republicans: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022861536

[MannyGoldstein]

6. The Democrats were unbelievably ready to power-capitulate on this.

It was announced to the world through bizarre circumstances (a planted question), Holder immediately announced an criminal investigation, and Miller was ShirleySherroded in a day or two.

This is a little too weird. Something else is up - I suspect that Democrats are behind this one.

[ProSense]

7. I think

The Democrats were unbelievably ready to power-capitulate on this.

It was announced to the world through bizarre circumstances (a planted question), Holder immediately announced an criminal investigation, and Miller was ShirleySherroded in a day or two.

This is a little too weird. Something else is up - I suspect that Democrats are behind this one.

...this is severe wishful thinking that doesn't even make sense.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. The whole situation doesn't make sense

So a cause that doesn't make sense is appropriate.

BTW, my cynicism is based on what I've seen happen over time, and certainly not what I *want* to happen. At least I hope that's true.

[ProSense]

9. Right,

"The whole situation doesn't make sense"

...but you acknowledge that there is no scandal, and then you introduce a scenario in which Democrats take an incident that's not a scandal and create the conditions that make it appear to be a scandal to embroil their own party.

[Skittles]

15. I AGREE

a whole lot of bullshit flying in all directions with that ridiculous "scandal"

[Rex]

3. Tell that to dfk.

I have no doubt this thread will be ignored by the anti-IRS brigade.

[rucky]

4. Wait 'til these groups start endorsing candidates.

It will be a shocking story posted here and go nowhere in the mainstream. I said it before: This story will drive you bonkers for the next 18 months.

[ProSense]

10. Case in point:

"Wait 'til these groups start endorsing candidates. It will be a shocking story posted here and go nowhere in the mainstream."

...

Virginia GOP Nominee Believes Gays Are ‘Very Sick’ And Democrats Are Worse Than The KKK
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/05/19/2033691/virginia-gop-nominee-believes-gays-are-very-sick-and-democrats-are-worse-than-the-kkk/

[ShadowLiberal]

11. Correction 'How EVERY Political Group Obtained 501(C)(4) Status'

No political groups should be allowed to make a 501(C)(4) group that's sole purpose is to run political ads and effect election outcomes.

Effecting election outcomes either way is NOT 'social welfare' like 501(C)(4) groups met for. The law even says 501(C)(4) groups can't be political groups. The whole 'rules' that as long as 51% of their money isn't advocating an actual candidate is just ridiculous.

All of these groups make a mockery of 501(C)(4) status, and could potentially have some very negative consequences for Real 501(C)(4) charity groups in the future when the government finally cracks down on them.

[ProSense]

13. Well,

"Correction 'How EVERY Political Group Obtained 501(C)(4) Status'"

...Republicans seem to believe tea baggers are being unfairly persecuted.

Clearly, the facts are not on their side: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022866334

[DonCoquixote]

16. and many obtained the 3 one

like true the vote, which got the bloody 501 3.

[JDPriestly]

12. This is good news. I'm very happy to know that there was no targetting based on

political views.

Now, how do we correct the misinformation?

[ProSense]

14. Maybe

"Now, how do we correct the misinformation?"

...the media will let the facts be known.

That's sarcasm.