Issa pulls Race Card - makes false claims Cummings was labeling him racist

[The Rabbi]

lol....nothing you say is ever the truth

He is 100% accurate. Just because you're ill informed doesn't make everyone else wrong.

no he isnt.

I am. You are ill informed. And stupid. And all three have been proven countless times here.

 

[paperview]

Correct.

And the problem is there are many on the partisan right, such as Issa, attempting to contrive a controversy with the lie that the Obama Administration authorized the scrutiny of TPM applicants, and is now involved in a ‘conspiracy’ to ‘cover up’ that authorization.

These hearings are a fiasco because they’re nothing more than a partisan witch hunt, having nothing to do with ‘finding the truth,’ and everything with ‘getting rid of Obama.’

That was made clear (as if we didn't see it before) when Issa did not want Lerner to give her testimony unless it was with Lights Camera Action! She offered to talk without immunity -- but sans the camera's, to the full committee, and with a written deposition which would be a matter of public record --

he didn't want that. That tells us it wasn't about getting to the truth. And dammit, I want to know the truth. If there were crimes committed at the IRS, I want to know it.

But no, It's all about the Dog, Pony, and cameras in his "cut the mic" kangaroo court.

You never answered the question as to what difference it would make if she gave her testimony privately, which was recorded, or publicly.
Probably because it is easier to repeat this particular lie.

Why won't Issa answer that question?

It's not about finding out what happened. It's about using her as a show trial punching board for Fox Newsers to get a boner over as he bully's and berates her in public.

We've seen how he operates.

 

[Truthseeker420]

But that isnt' what happened. What did happen was that Democrats put pressure on the IRS to rein in conservative groups.
Why do you have not a problem with that?

lol....nothing you say is ever the truth

He is 100% accurate. Just because you're ill informed doesn't make everyone else wrong.

How is he 100% accurate, Do you have any proof "Democrats put pressure on the IRS to rein in conservative groups" ?

 

[Plasmaball]

He is 100% accurate. Just because you're ill informed doesn't make everyone else wrong.

no he isnt.

I am. You are ill informed. And stupid. And all three have been proven countless times here.

nope.

 

[paperview]

The above article link really gives a good explanation for some of what went down in this whole IRS mess...

<snip>
While the 501(c)4 existed for years in this hybrid state, it appears that for most of its history, few organizations exploited the designation’s political potential. That all changed in the lead up to, and aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizen‘s United ruling.

By the time of the ruling, many major political players, including Karl Rove, had formed 501(c)4 organizations, and 501(c)4 groups were beginning to take over a role that 527&#8242;s (such as 2004&#8242;s Swift Vets and POWs for Truth) had played in previous elections. Citizens United firmly established that any legislative attempts to regulate donations to 501(c)4&#8242;s—either by imposing limits OR forcing the publishing of donor information—were violations of First Amendment rights.

Critics of the decision continue to point out that it in essence endorsed using 501(c)4&#8242;s as quasi-political organizations to circumvent federal and state election regulations. Groups who would have originally filled for 527 status could now opt instead for the freedom of 501(c)4&#8242;s. Of course, in order to do so, those groups would have to “massage” their applications to ensure that it did not appear that they were a fundamentally “political” group.

The following chart, included in the IRS audit, demonstrates that in the wake of Citizens United, there was a marked increase (~40% a year) in the number of 501(c)4 applications being submitted to the IRS.

Let me note that this period—2010 to 2012—also saw the maturation of the Tea Party.

And research into Tea Party communities shows that the accepted wisdom was that new Tea Party chapters should immediately file as 501(c)4 organizations.

Ironically, of the three organization tax designations in question—501(c)3, 501(c)4, and 527—only 501(c)4 allows for a group to self-declare their status without first filing with the IRS. The advantage to filing is official recognition, which is only necessary if an outsider challenges the group’s 501(c)4 status. Otherwise, for all intents and purposes, the only thing required to operate as a 501(c)4 is to say that you‘re a 501(c)4.

501(c)4 vs 501(c)3 vs 527

 

[The T]

I have no problem, left or right, with the IRS scrutinizing the applications of political groups who try and use the nonprofit tax-exempt status of what has been categorized as a Social Welfare org - when their purpose is primarily political.

that goes for Occupy, Green groups or Tea Party - no matter. If they are trying to scam the system, they need to be scrutinized.

Correct.

And the problem is there are many on the partisan right, such as Issa, attempting to contrive a controversy with the lie that the Obama Administration authorized the scrutiny of TPM applicants, and is now involved in a ‘conspiracy’ to ‘cover up’ that authorization.

These hearings are a fiasco because they’re nothing more than a partisan witch hunt, having nothing to do with ‘finding the truth,’ and everything with ‘getting rid of Obama.’

Please post where Issa said the administration authorized this scrutiny.
It is clear from Lerner's emails she was under pressure to rein in conservative groups after the Supreme COurt's Citizens United ruling. Who put that pressure on her?
Recall the IRS has already apologized for singling out conservative groups. SO you cannot claim it never happened.

Yes they did apologize...

IRS apologizes for targeting tea party groups


IRS apologizes for flagging conservative political groups for extra review

The Internal Revenue Service inappropriately flagged conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday.
Organizations were singled out because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their applications for tax-exempt status, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups.
In some cases, groups were asked for their list of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.
"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 conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.
"The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added.

Now IF she and the IRS did nothing wrong? WHY on Earth would they apologize for it?

THIS is what Issa and his Committee are trying to get to the bottom of, and this showboating and claims of racism by Cummings and the left is a tactical DIVERSION away from the truth as the left ALWAYS DOES.

The OP and their premise is idiotic and a LIE from beginning to end....and COMPLICIT.

Sorry OP. You lose.

 

[paperview]

"The advantage to filing is official recognition, which is only necessary if an outsider challenges the group&#8217;s 501(c)4 status. Otherwise, for all intents and purposes, the only thing required to operate as a 501(c)4 is to say that you&#8216;re a 501(c)4.

Getting back to the IRS scandal, the broader point I&#8217;m trying to make is that, whether intentional or not, the very structure of 501(c)4, combined with the Citizens United decision, and the rise of the Tea Party, unexpectedly transformed the 501(c)4 from simply being about social welfare to being about politics. And that this was, generally speaking, a relatively rapid change.


Further, these rapid changes in the definition of what a 501(c)4 was (and was not) were accompanied by a rapid increase (for a variety of reasons) in the number of organizations filing for 501(c)4 status.


Plus, all of this change was occurring in an increasing polarized political environment, not to mention during the lead up to a presidential election, AND during ongoing cuts to government budgets and work forces.


And, here&#8217;s the kicker: An effect of the Citizens United ruling was that it inherently established that only one authority could regulate 501(c)4&#8242;s: the IRS."

501(c)4 vs 501(c)3 vs 527

 

[paperview]

1/3 of Flagged 501(c)(3)&(4) Applications were from Non-Conservative Groups

On May 30th, the site Tax Analysts published a more in-depth analysis of IRS data on tax exemption applications that were flagged for specialist &#8220;potential political&#8221; review. Martin A. Sullivan, working from a number of documents released by the IRS, estimates that approximately 1/3rd of flagged applications were submitted by either liberal or apparently politically neutral organizations.
Much of his post is taken up with an explanation of how the numbers were reached. Essentially Sullivan worked backwards from a list of approved 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) recently released by the IRS. Using data included in the TIGTA audit and outside references, Sullivan and team worked through that list to determine what political lean &#8212; if any &#8212; these organizations had.
Here are the results:

• 122 Conservative groups
  • 46 of these groups names contained BOLO terms (Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12) and were automatically flagged
• 48 non-conservative organizations
  • 11 of these group are involved in self-described &#8220;progressive&#8221; causes
  • Another 17 are formed around traditionally liberal themes (social or environmental justice, anti-corporations, outreach to dispossessed and marginalized communities.
• 6 organizations about which Tax Analysts can make no determination &#8212; they might or might not be aligned with a political cause

The Tax Analysts post contains an annotated breakdown of the 48 non-conservative groups whose applications were held for review and ultimately approved. Its clear from the list that many of these groups have a liberal agenda. For example:

• Progress Missouri Education Fund
  &#8220;A multi-issue progressive advocacy organization&#8221; focused on state and local policy.
• Alliance for a Better Utah, Inc.
  Multi-issue education and advocacy organization promoting progressive ideas and causes.
• Coffee Party USA
  Founded on the underlying principle that the government &#8220;is not the enemy of thev people.&#8221; Seeks to remove corporate influence from politics.
• Louisiana Progress Action Fund Inc.
  Advances progressive state policy solutions.
• Progress Texas
  Organizes rapid response communications in opposition to conservative groups.

​

There are a couple important caveats to over-interpreting the results of this list.

More here: 1/3 of Flagged 501(c)(3)&(4) Applications were from Non-Conservative Groups

 

[The Rabbi]

That was made clear (as if we didn't see it before) when Issa did not want Lerner to give her testimony unless it was with Lights Camera Action! She offered to talk without immunity -- but sans the camera's, to the full committee, and with a written deposition which would be a matter of public record --

he didn't want that. That tells us it wasn't about getting to the truth. And dammit, I want to know the truth. If there were crimes committed at the IRS, I want to know it.

But no, It's all about the Dog, Pony, and cameras in his "cut the mic" kangaroo court.

You never answered the question as to what difference it would make if she gave her testimony privately, which was recorded, or publicly.
Probably because it is easier to repeat this particular lie.

Why won't Issa answer that question?

It's not about finding out what happened. It's about using her as a show trial punching board for Fox Newsers to get a boner over as he bully's and berates her in public.

We've seen how he operates.

No one asked Issa the question.
I'm asking you the question. Issa was told she would testify.

 

[The Rabbi]

1/3 of Flagged 501(c)(3)&(4) Applications were from Non-Conservative Groups

On May 30th, the site Tax Analysts published a more in-depth analysis of IRS data on tax exemption applications that were flagged for specialist “potential political” review. Martin A. Sullivan, working from a number of documents released by the IRS, estimates that approximately 1/3rd of flagged applications were submitted by either liberal or apparently politically neutral organizations.
Much of his post is taken up with an explanation of how the numbers were reached. Essentially Sullivan worked backwards from a list of approved 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) recently released by the IRS. Using data included in the TIGTA audit and outside references, Sullivan and team worked through that list to determine what political lean — if any — these organizations had.
Here are the results:

• 122 Conservative groups
  • 46 of these groups names contained BOLO terms (Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12) and were automatically flagged
• 48 non-conservative organizations
  • 11 of these group are involved in self-described “progressive” causes
  • Another 17 are formed around traditionally liberal themes (social or environmental justice, anti-corporations, outreach to dispossessed and marginalized communities.
• 6 organizations about which Tax Analysts can make no determination — they might or might not be aligned with a political cause

The Tax Analysts post contains an annotated breakdown of the 48 non-conservative groups whose applications were held for review and ultimately approved. Its clear from the list that many of these groups have a liberal agenda. For example:

• Progress Missouri Education Fund
  “A multi-issue progressive advocacy organization” focused on state and local policy.
• Alliance for a Better Utah, Inc.
  Multi-issue education and advocacy organization promoting progressive ideas and causes.
• Coffee Party USA
  Founded on the underlying principle that the government “is not the enemy of thev people.” Seeks to remove corporate influence from politics.
• Louisiana Progress Action Fund Inc.
  Advances progressive state policy solutions.
• Progress Texas
  Organizes rapid response communications in opposition to conservative groups.

​

There are a couple important caveats to over-interpreting the results of this list.

More here: 1/3 of Flagged 501(c)(3)&(4) Applications were from Non-Conservative Groups

You keep telling half truths.
The whole truth is that conservative groups were targeted for delays and extra scrutiny, including questions they had no right to ask.
Why is this? What did Lerner mean whenn she said she was under pressure?

 

[paperview]

Yes they did apologize...

Because they used questionable sorting tactics.

That's the problem. You guys can't seem to accept it wasn't all about the Tea Party.

But there is never an end to the conservative victimhood, so ride that pony all the way into the sunset, and Daryl, Daryl and his other brother Daryl fall flat on their face with another phony scandal.

"Late yesterday, Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werful released a report that seemed to indicate that the “Be On The Lookout” lists utilized by IRS employees in charge of examining 501(c)(4) applications included not only words that tended to ensnare conservative organizations, but also those that would likely ensnare liberal/”progressive” organizations:

WASHINGTON — The instructions that Internal Revenue Service officials used to look for applicants seeking tax-exempt status with “Tea Party” and “Patriots” in their titles also included groups whose names included the words “Progressive” and “Occupy,” according to I.R.S. documents released Monday.

The documents appeared to back up contentions by I.R.S. officials and some Democrats that the agency did not intend to single out conservative groups for special scrutiny. Instead, the documents say, officials were trying to use “key word” shortcuts to find overtly political organizations — both liberal and conservative — that were after tax favors by saying they were social welfare organizations.

But the practice appeared to go much farther than that. One such “be on the lookout” list included medical marijuana groups, organizations that were promoting President Obama’s health care law, and applications that dealt “with disputed territories in the Middle East.”

Taken together, the documents seem to change the terms of a scandal that exploded over accusations that the I.R.S. had tried to stifle a nascent conservative political movement. Instead, the dispute now revolves around questionable sorting tactics used by I.R.S. application screeners.

The acting I.R.S. commissioner, Daniel I. Werfel, formally ordered an end to all such “lookout” lists on Monday when he issued an assessment of the controversy that has led to harsh criticism of the nation’s tax collector."

IRS ?Lookout Lists? Also Included Liberal Groups. So, Was It Bipartisan ?Targeting??

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes they did apologize...

Because they used questionable sorting tactics.

That's the problem. You guys can't seem to accept it wasn't all about the Tea Party.

But there is never an end to the conservative victimhood, so ride that pony all the way into the sunset, and Daryl, Daryl and his other brother Daryl fall flat on their face with another phony scandal.

"Late yesterday, Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werful released a report that seemed to indicate that the “Be On The Lookout” lists utilized by IRS employees in charge of examining 501(c)(4) applications included not only words that tended to ensnare conservative organizations, but also those that would likely ensnare liberal/”progressive” organizations:

WASHINGTON — The instructions that Internal Revenue Service officials used to look for applicants seeking tax-exempt status with “Tea Party” and “Patriots” in their titles also included groups whose names included the words “Progressive” and “Occupy,” according to I.R.S. documents released Monday.

The documents appeared to back up contentions by I.R.S. officials and some Democrats that the agency did not intend to single out conservative groups for special scrutiny. Instead, the documents say, officials were trying to use “key word” shortcuts to find overtly political organizations — both liberal and conservative — that were after tax favors by saying they were social welfare organizations.

But the practice appeared to go much farther than that. One such “be on the lookout” list included medical marijuana groups, organizations that were promoting President Obama’s health care law, and applications that dealt “with disputed territories in the Middle East.”

Taken together, the documents seem to change the terms of a scandal that exploded over accusations that the I.R.S. had tried to stifle a nascent conservative political movement. Instead, the dispute now revolves around questionable sorting tactics used by I.R.S. application screeners.

The acting I.R.S. commissioner, Daniel I. Werfel, formally ordered an end to all such “lookout” lists on Monday when he issued an assessment of the controversy that has led to harsh criticism of the nation’s tax collector."

IRS ?Lookout Lists? Also Included Liberal Groups. So, Was It Bipartisan ?Targeting??

You retell half truths desperately.
The IRS apologzed for targeting conservative groups. Lerner said she was under pressure to do something about conservative groups.
Schumer and Franken pressured the IRS to target Tea Party groups.
Schumer, Franken urged IRS to target tea party in 2012 | The Daily Caller
Was this the pressure Lerner felt? I dont know.

But it all comes together in a very coherent and scary narrative: Democrats using the IRS to suppress legitimate expressions of free speech by the opposition.
Be afraid.

 

[paperview]

<cough>

from BEFORE the IRS imbroglio came up...

From 2011 -

Fox was hep on the bandwagon (some here might remember it) of contacting the IRS ...about an org they thought should be scrutinized...

"July 1, 2011- Fox News continues to hype this issue. They have run numerous stories on air by James Rosen, Steve Doocy, and Bret Baier, many of which include instructions and appeals to file an IRS complaint against Media Matters. Fox Nation has bumped the story to the top of their page all week, including the IRS link. See below for new action items."

 

[paperview]

O&#8217;Reilly Calls For Formal Objection Filed Against Media Matters&#8217; Tax-Exempt Status

Former White House Counsel to IRS: Pull Media Matters' Tax-Exempt Status | Fox Business

 

[Truthseeker420]

Yes they did apologize...

Because they used questionable sorting tactics.

That's the problem. You guys can't seem to accept it wasn't all about the Tea Party.

But there is never an end to the conservative victimhood, so ride that pony all the way into the sunset, and Daryl, Daryl and his other brother Daryl fall flat on their face with another phony scandal.

"Late yesterday, Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werful released a report that seemed to indicate that the “Be On The Lookout” lists utilized by IRS employees in charge of examining 501(c)(4) applications included not only words that tended to ensnare conservative organizations, but also those that would likely ensnare liberal/”progressive” organizations:

WASHINGTON — The instructions that Internal Revenue Service officials used to look for applicants seeking tax-exempt status with “Tea Party” and “Patriots” in their titles also included groups whose names included the words “Progressive” and “Occupy,” according to I.R.S. documents released Monday.

The documents appeared to back up contentions by I.R.S. officials and some Democrats that the agency did not intend to single out conservative groups for special scrutiny. Instead, the documents say, officials were trying to use “key word” shortcuts to find overtly political organizations — both liberal and conservative — that were after tax favors by saying they were social welfare organizations.

But the practice appeared to go much farther than that. One such “be on the lookout” list included medical marijuana groups, organizations that were promoting President Obama’s health care law, and applications that dealt “with disputed territories in the Middle East.”

Taken together, the documents seem to change the terms of a scandal that exploded over accusations that the I.R.S. had tried to stifle a nascent conservative political movement. Instead, the dispute now revolves around questionable sorting tactics used by I.R.S. application screeners.

The acting I.R.S. commissioner, Daniel I. Werfel, formally ordered an end to all such “lookout” lists on Monday when he issued an assessment of the controversy that has led to harsh criticism of the nation’s tax collector."

IRS ?Lookout Lists? Also Included Liberal Groups. So, Was It Bipartisan ?Targeting??

You retell half truths desperately.
The IRS apologzed for targeting conservative groups. Lerner said she was under pressure to do something about conservative groups.
Schumer and Franken pressured the IRS to target Tea Party groups.
Schumer, Franken urged IRS to target tea party in 2012 | The Daily Caller
Was this the pressure Lerner felt? I dont know.

But it all comes together in a very coherent and scary narrative: Democrats using the IRS to suppress legitimate expressions of free speech by the opposition.
Be afraid.

IRS apologized for making a mistake not for targeting conservatives.

 

[paperview]

The "'Merchant of Death" from Nashville complains about "half-truths" while posting links to Brietbart and Daily Caller.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because they used questionable sorting tactics.

That's the problem. You guys can't seem to accept it wasn't all about the Tea Party.

But there is never an end to the conservative victimhood, so ride that pony all the way into the sunset, and Daryl, Daryl and his other brother Daryl fall flat on their face with another phony scandal.

"Late yesterday, Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werful released a report that seemed to indicate that the “Be On The Lookout” lists utilized by IRS employees in charge of examining 501(c)(4) applications included not only words that tended to ensnare conservative organizations, but also those that would likely ensnare liberal/”progressive” organizations:

WASHINGTON — The instructions that Internal Revenue Service officials used to look for applicants seeking tax-exempt status with “Tea Party” and “Patriots” in their titles also included groups whose names included the words “Progressive” and “Occupy,” according to I.R.S. documents released Monday.

The documents appeared to back up contentions by I.R.S. officials and some Democrats that the agency did not intend to single out conservative groups for special scrutiny. Instead, the documents say, officials were trying to use “key word” shortcuts to find overtly political organizations — both liberal and conservative — that were after tax favors by saying they were social welfare organizations.

But the practice appeared to go much farther than that. One such “be on the lookout” list included medical marijuana groups, organizations that were promoting President Obama’s health care law, and applications that dealt “with disputed territories in the Middle East.”

Taken together, the documents seem to change the terms of a scandal that exploded over accusations that the I.R.S. had tried to stifle a nascent conservative political movement. Instead, the dispute now revolves around questionable sorting tactics used by I.R.S. application screeners.

The acting I.R.S. commissioner, Daniel I. Werfel, formally ordered an end to all such “lookout” lists on Monday when he issued an assessment of the controversy that has led to harsh criticism of the nation’s tax collector."

IRS ?Lookout Lists? Also Included Liberal Groups. So, Was It Bipartisan ?Targeting??

You retell half truths desperately.
The IRS apologzed for targeting conservative groups. Lerner said she was under pressure to do something about conservative groups.
Schumer and Franken pressured the IRS to target Tea Party groups.
Schumer, Franken urged IRS to target tea party in 2012 | The Daily Caller
Was this the pressure Lerner felt? I dont know.

But it all comes together in a very coherent and scary narrative: Democrats using the IRS to suppress legitimate expressions of free speech by the opposition.
Be afraid.

IRS apologized for making a mistake not for targeting conservatives.

The Internal Revenue Service inappropriately flagged conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status, a top IRS official said Friday.

Oops.

 

[paperview]

And Issa is still a dirtbag for pulling the race card -- accusing Cummings of calling him a racist re: "silencing the minority voice" -- when Cummings never did any such thing.

Disgusting.

 

[The Rabbi]

The "'Merchant of Death" from Nashville complains about "half-truths" while posting links to Brietbart and Daily Caller.

Ihave proven everything I wrote. You traffic in half truths and lies that have been exposed. You deflect. You manufacture. You ignore questions that show you are lying and dissembling.
The evidence is clear on this thread.

 

[The Rabbi]

And Issa is still a dirtbag for pulling the race card -- accusing Cummings of calling him a racist re: "silencing the minority voice" -- when Cummings never did any such thing.

Disgusting.

Issa never accused Cummings of any such thing.
Once again you spread lies.