43 thoughts on “Protest The IRS

    1. Jim

      That isn’t the IRS, it’s the Senate. Funny to watch GOP Senators who rushed to Romney’s defense last year suddenly become so uncomfortable with tax minimization.

      1. Bilwick

        Yeah, that’s the important point here, Jim.

        This was on Instapundit today. Even Jim should enjoy this, because there are plenty of photos of government offices for him to salivate over. Get out your lube, and enjoy, BJ.

      2. wodun

        Romney was not doing what Apple is doing. Why all the lies about Romney and his taxes? Obama and his disciples have made some crazy allegations. Seems strange that Obama and the Democrats have focused so much on tax conspiracy theories at the same time they were targeting donors and activists for political persecution by the IRS.

        It is like the return to the Jim Crow days. The more things change the more Democrats stay the same.

  1. Mike Walsh

    FWIW: the very day that Catholic Church groups all over the country staged protests against the restrictions that were to be imposed by Obamacare, the media broke the (several week-old) Trayvon Martin story. Keep your eyes open for a diversion.

    1. Larry J

      Sadly, the weather in Oklahoma provided all the diversion they need. As of now, the death toll is 51 including at least 20 children. Any incident of mass death is ratings gold for the news media.

  2. Godzilla

    The two pillars in any state are defense and taxes. I find it little surprising that the IRS would investigate people who defend as a principle that they shouldn’t be paying taxes. Much like many countries need to actively persecute organizations which have agendas against the Constitution of the land or the like. Not that this excuses some of the egregious behavior the IRS supposedly had while conducting these audits however.

    1. Bilwick

      “I find it little surprising that the IRS would investigate people who defend as a principle that they shouldn’t be paying taxes.” Really? That’s what they’re saying? Not just “lower my taxes” or “don’t raise my taxes”–or my position: “Send me a bill on how much it costs to protect my life and proety, and otherwise leave me the hell alone”–but “no taxes at all”? All these workaday folks in the Tea Party are Rothbardian anarchists?

      I think I saw a Japanese movie like this: “Godzilla, King of the Straw Men.”

  3. Jim

    Has anyone asked the Tea Party groups in question why they were applying for 501c4 status in the first place? Why did they care?

    1. Gregg

      Spoken like a true fascist thug statist…..

      It’s none of the government’s goddam business…nor is it yours. All the government gets to do, under present law, is confirm that they are non-profit.

    2. Leland

      Because the TEA Party has to function under the current tax regime like everyone else. To do this, they need to file as entity with the IRS, and since they are not a for-profit business; then they file as a 501(c)4.

      I agree with Gregg, it should be none of our business. But it will take a bit more time to explain to people how our everyday lives don’t need to be part of the governments business. In the meantime, we will be asked to submit our prayers, tweets, and facebook photos to the government for approval per the Obama Administration.

      1. Jim

        To do this, they need to file as entity with the IRS

        No, registering with the IRS is completely optional. If they meet the 501c4 requirements they can just self-declare.

        our everyday lives don’t need to be part of the governments business

        Which is why it’s odd that Tea Party groups would go out of their way to make themselves the government’s business.

        1. Leland

          Does self-declaration mean the IRS cannot audit the organization, or do you not understand the scandal?

          1. Jim

            The IRS can audit a self-declared 501c4, e.g. if they get a report that the group is violating 501c4 rules, but only a tiny percentage of 501c4s are ever audited, and the scandal isn’t about audits. It’s about organizations that voluntarily chose to have the IRS certify their status, and the way the IRS office in handling certification requests treated some groups. Maybe the groups in question didn’t realize that certification is optional; they could have saved themselves a lot of hassle by skipping the whole experience.

          2. a reader

            “She was askin’ for it by dressing like a slut!”

            Yes, it’s too much to ask for equality under the law when you dress like a slut or have “Tea Party” in your name.

          3. Leland

            Damn Jim, you’ve gone beyond lying to being just a dumb hack.

            1) IRS admitted to targetting TEA Party groups.
            2) IG reported that the IRS targetted TEA Party groups.
            3) In April 2012, IRS sent 1,300 letters telling them to respond to “on-line questionnaire that asks for information concerning your organization’s activities as a self-declared section 501 c (4), (5) or (6) organization.”

            All this information has been in the news for almost 2 weeks now, and now you think we are going to believe your lies about it?

            You stupid hack, Jim, this was part of Lois Lerner’s FY 2012 WorkPlan: “In a typical compliance check, we contact an individual organization by letter when we discover an apparent error on a return. We also use compliance check questionnaires to study specific parts of the tax-exempt community or specific cross-sector practices. We request completion of the questionnaires by organizations matching the profile we want to learn about.

            Hey Hack, there’s more:

            § 501(c)(4),(5) & (6) “Self Declarers”
            In FY 2012, EO developed a project focusing on § 501(c)(4),(5) & (6) organizations. These entities, which include social welfare organizations; labor, agricultural and horticultural groups; and trade associations, can declare themselves tax-exempt without seeking a determination from the IRS. EO wants to learn more about whether such organizations have classified themselves correctly and are complying with applicable rules.
            In FY 2013, EO will send a questionnaire to organizations that “self-declared” by filing Form 990 for tax year 2010 or 2011. As in the Group Rulings questionnaire, recipients will be asked to complete the questionnaire online and submit it electronically. EO will analyze the responses and determine next steps.”

            Tell us again, Jim; this was the TEA Party doing it to themselves. A Reader is exactly on Jim’s characterization.

          4. Bart

            Can you even imagine the conniptions guys like Jim would be going through if the tables were reversed, and this behavior had been directed toward liberal groups under a Republican administration?

          5. wodun

            Jim, what did you pray about this morning? Please provide the membership list of your church. We also need access to your personal FB page. Please print out all of your emails for the past 3 years. Submit this information to us within the next seven days or your request for status will be denied and remember that if you leave anything out, it will be considered perjury and you will be prosecuted.

            Also, bear in mind that any information provided to us, the IRS, will be made available to the public Democrat activist groups and OFA upon request.

          6. Gregg

            A Reader wrote:

            ““She was askin’ for it by dressing like a slut!”

            Yes, it’s too much to ask for equality under the law when you dress like a slut or have “Tea Party” in your name.”

            Indeed it seems that our beloved Jim got his talking points directly from Journolist. And it is predicted as well:

            “Pay attention to the emerging fringe narrative of the speech regulators: the Tea Party deserved it. You’ll learn much about the people who want to further restrict your political freedoms.”

            J. Christian Adams, PJmedia article of May 22 entitled

            “IRS Abuse, the Guide”

          7. Jim

            IRS admitted to targetting TEA Party groups.

            It admitted to targeting Tea Party groups who applied for 501c4 certification. I haven’t seen any evidence that it targeted self-declared Tea Party groups.

            She was askin’ for it by dressing like a slut!

            I’m not saying that Tea Party groups deserved special scrutiny. I’m genuinely curious as to why they, and everyone else who applies for 501c4 status, doesn’t just self-declare.

            and this behavior had been directed toward liberal groups under a Republican administration

            There were in fact efforts under the Bush administration to strip liberal churches, the NAACP, and Greenpeace of their tax exemptions. I don’t recall those stories getting one tenth the attention that this matter has.

            In fact, from what I’ve read the only group to have its 501c4 status denied for excessive political activity in recent years was Emerge America, a progressive group. And that was under Obama.

          8. Leland

            I haven’t seen any evidence that it targeted self-declared Tea Party groups.

            That’s because you’re an idiot.

          9. Jim

            So you have a link to an article that discusses the targeting of self-declared Tea Party groups? Or are you just name-calling?

          10. wodun

            Jim, are you alleging that the TP groups were acting in conspiracy to increase the work load of the IRS? To what end? What are the motives for that?

            Is this going to be like Democrats sayin 9/11 was an inside job and that Iraq was about AQ?

          11. Leland

            So you have a link to an article that discusses the targeting of self-declared Tea Party groups?

            The IG report has been discussed in the news for several weeks now. If you need a link, try Google. If you can’t figure out how to use Google, try Bing. That you think your ignorance means it doesn’t exist is rational for calling you an idiot.

      2. Gregg

        Let me be clear (to use an Obamaism):

        It’s more than “shouldn’t be the government’s business” it absolutely *IS NOT* the government’s business, and most certainly *IS NOT* the IRS’s business why some people want to create a non-profit.

    3. Karl Hallowell

      Has anyone asked the Tea Party groups in question why they were applying for 501c4 status in the first place? Why did they care?

      The IRS did. Apparently they didn’t actually care, but were using the questions to obstruct creation of the groups.

    1. Leland

      Geez Ken, the White House just circled the wagons this afternoon with the Journolist folks. The new talking points will be out tomorrow, and Jim will have “fresh” BS to spread around. Until then “Squirrel” is all he can do.

      1. Thales

        This is the game-plan that Klein and Marshall received yesterday at the White House: Lerner is the scapegoat.

        Both of them are calling for Lerner to be fired to manufacture consensus that Lerner needs to be fired so that Obama can fire Lerner and that will be the end of the scandal, so they hope.

        1. Leland

          I think Lerner should be fired for her actions today, but the “Audacity of Hope” is going to realize that the investigation will only be starting then.

          What her Exempt Organization did appears to violate the law; so there is a lawsuit to discuss. And then somebody authorized Lois Lerner’s workplan. It was a project, who all knew about the project and let it proceed?

    2. Bilwick

      Beat me to it, ken. Jim has been noticeably scarce around here as the story gained momentum, and I have been wondering if Talking Points Memo has been down so that “Scriptbot Jim” (as someone here called him) has been left without a script. Then I started reading about the 501C4s and figured, “Okay, the Hive has re-grouped, and this is the current party line on the IRS scandal. Any day now, Jim should be showing up yelling, “501C4–SQUIRREL!” And sure enough, he does!

  4. mattm

    Has anyone asked the Tea Party groups in question why they were applying for 501c4 status in the first place? Why did they care?

    Why no. No one at the IRS asked the tea party groups why they were applying for 501c4 status. That just silly.

    The IRS was too busy trying to cut it overwhelming workload by asking the following question and getting thousands of pages of extraneous documents to review in order to streamline their approval process.

    //washingtonexaminer.com/congressman-irs-asked-pro-life-group-about-the-content-of-their-prayers/article/2529924
    //hotair.com/archives/2013/05/10/10-crazy-things-the-irs-asked-tea-party-groups/
    //www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=50963
    //www.startribune.com/nation/208465771.html
    //gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/weirdest-irs-questions-tea-party-views-donors-etymology-123547841.html

    Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers. Because that has a direct bearing on granting your approval

    Please identify all your volunteers. So we know who they are and where they live.

    Provide the following information for all the programs you have conducted… detailed descriptions, copies of handouts, names and credentials of the organizers… the text of speeches, the names of speakers and their credentials. Because that has a direct bearing on granting your approval.

    Provide copies of your current webpages and other webpages such as social networking sites, blog sites, all Facebook posts for the organization, all comments from fans posted on Facebook. Because that has a direct bearing on granting your approval.

    Has your organization engaged in any activities with the news media? Describe those activities in detail and provide copies of articles, transcripts, letters to the editors, op-ed pieces. Because that has a direct bearing on your approval.

    Do you directly or indirectly communicate with members of legislative bodies. If so provide copies of the written communications and the contents of other forms of communications. Because that has a direct bearing on your approval.

    Christian Voices for Life was asked whether it provided “education on both sides of the issues” in its programs. Because all 401(C)s have to provide both sides of an issue.

    The IRS also said Christian Voices for Life application would be approved if board members promised in writing that the group would not protest outside Planned Parenthood. Just because.

    Provide a list of all issues that are important to your organization. Indicate your position regarding each issue. Because your position on the issues have a direct bearing on your approval.

    Please explain in detail the derivation of your organization’s name. Which is weird.

    Provide details regarding your relationship with Justin Binik-Thomas. Which is rather specific.

    Provide the names of the donors, contributors, and grantors. Because if we approve your application we will make the application and the information you submit available for public inspections.

    Do your issue related advocacy communications compare to the positions of candidates or slates of candidates on these issues with your positions? Provide copies of these communications. Because your position and what candidate share your view have a direct bearing on your approval.

    List each past or present board member, officer, key employee and members of their family who, was, is or plans to be a candidate for public office. Because if they try and get elected it will have direct bearing on your approval.

      1. Karl Hallowell

        I don’t know that I’d consider a colonoscopy by the IRS less intrusive. I’m sure they’d come up with something to enhance the experience.

  5. Ed Minchau

    The photos I saw of the event, while apparently widespread, drew fairly small crowds in each location. This is markedly different than the tea party events of a few years ago.

    1. Larry J

      A few possible reasons:

      1. Event was called on short notice.
      2. Most of us work for a living so it’s hard to do things on a workday.
      3. Possible fear of IRS retribution.

Comments are closed.