Schumer Calls for Using IRS to Curtail Tea Party Activities

[martybegan]

When far left and far right groups go for "educational awareness" to engage actually in politics, yes, Avatar, they should get their tax status removed.

so when unions engage in politics their tax status should be removed as well?

 

[JakeStarkey]

When far left and far right groups go for "educational awareness" to engage actually in politics, yes, Avatar, they should get their tax status removed.

so when unions engage in politics their tax status should be removed as well?

Are unions and businesses covered in the IRS code status as the educational awareness groups?

 

[Jarhead]

When far left and far right groups go for "educational awareness" to engage actually in politics, yes, Avatar, they should get their tax status removed.

How do you separate ideology and politics?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Tell us how the IRS does it.

 

[Yurt]

i see jakestarkey and his fellow libs are still ignoring the core issue....schumer isn't talking about targeting all groups, ONLY conservative groups.

and so far, as i predicted, the leftwingers on this board will defend this.

 

[OKTexas]

Americans United for Change
Americans United for Change enjoys 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. The organization exists, according to its own website, “to amplify the progressive message--to contribute to a grass roots groundswell for progressive policies. Progressives need to redefine ‘common sense’--by reasserting the primacy of the traditional progressive values that resonate with most Americans.”
The group spent $4.7 million in 2009 “redefining” common sense and, according to their IRS form 990, on “advocacy and education about public policy issues.” Americans United for Change directly engaged Republican senators facing reelection in 2008, running television advertisements against them. Naturally, no Democrat complained. Nor did the IRS revoke its 501(c) status.

Political activity, no?

This breaks on both sides of the aisle..dude.

Deflection much?

 

[natstew]

I've always said that if you scratch a liberal, underneath you'll find a fascist. Now they have no shame about revealing their fascist agenda.

Schumer Calls for Using IRS to Curtail Tea Party Activities | Washington Free Beacon

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) proposed using the Internal Revenue Service to curtail Tea Party group funding during a speech on how to “exploit” and “weaken” the movement at the Center for American Progress on Thursday.

Arguing that Tea Party groups have a financial advantage after the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, Schumer said the Obama administration should bypass Congress and institute new campaign finance rules through the IRS.

“It is clear that we will not pass anything legislatively as long as the House of Representatives is in Republican control, but there are many things that can be done administratively by the IRS and other government agencies—we must redouble those efforts immediately,” Schumer said.​

This is TYRANNY at it's worse! You people who are "thanking" this don't deserve freedom.

 

[francoHFW]

I believe in the checks and balances in the 3 branches of gov't, and believe the IRS is not dominated by either party- since reforms due to Nixon's criminal attacks on his ''enemies''., and saying Chuck wants to go after just RW GROUPS is more RW BLARNEY- THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES WHO'VE TRIED UNFAIR 'REFORM'' THAT I'VE SEEN... and thus they probably would by impacted more by fair reform...cheating, lying, thieving, pander to the rich, bought off hypocrites. Pub dupes lol

 

[francoHFW]

Washington Free Beacon LOL

 

[The T]

i see jakestarkey and his fellow libs are still ignoring the core issue....schumer isn't talking about targeting all groups, ONLY conservative groups.

and so far, as i predicted, the leftwingers on this board will defend this.

And defend groups they agree with doing the same thing. Double standards as always.

 

[The T]

Americans United for Change
Americans United for Change enjoys 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. The organization exists, according to its own website, “to amplify the progressive message--to contribute to a grass roots groundswell for progressive policies. Progressives need to redefine ‘common sense’--by reasserting the primacy of the traditional progressive values that resonate with most Americans.”
The group spent $4.7 million in 2009 “redefining” common sense and, according to their IRS form 990, on “advocacy and education about public policy issues.” Americans United for Change directly engaged Republican senators facing reelection in 2008, running television advertisements against them. Naturally, no Democrat complained. Nor did the IRS revoke its 501(c) status.

Political activity, no?

This breaks on both sides of the aisle..dude.

Deflection much?

Note he bolted from the thread?

 

[natstew]

The IRS job is to curtail unlawful activities by any group, liberal or conservative or in between.

I assume you watched the hearings not long back about the Tea Party IRS stuff. I did too. Can you tell us what those people did that was illegal or even suspicious?

The law states:

Section 501(c)(4)
social welfare organizations
are tax
-
exempt
organizations that have as
their primary purpose engaging in social welfare activities.
Section 501(c)(4) defines
social
welfare organizations
as:
Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively
for the promotion of
social welfare, or local associations of employees, the
membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or
persons . . . and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable,
educational, or recreational purposes
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionla...01(c)(4) Social Welfare Organizations v.6.pdf

It's ILLEGAL to engage in political activities.

Enough of your dishonesty. here, read this:
"501(c)(4) organizations may inform the public on controversial subjects and attempt to influence legislation relevant to its program[43] and, unlike 501(c)(3) organizations, they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as its primary activity is the promotion of social welfare."
Liberal 501c4 organizations have been operating since 2008 under 40% social/60% political and that was fine until Conservative 501c4's showed up. The Irs has turned a blind eye to the Libtard 501c4's.

See also: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
501(c)(4) organizations are generally civic leagues and other corporations operated exclusively for the promotion of "social welfare", such as civics and civics issues, or local associations of employees with membership limited to a designated company or people in a particular municipality or neighborhood, and with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.[41] An organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.[37][42]
501(c)(4) organizations may inform the public on controversial subjects and attempt to influence legislation relevant to its program[43] and, unlike 501(c)(3) organizations, they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as its primary activity is the promotion of social welfare.[44] The tax exemption for 501(c)(4) organizations applies to most of their operations, but contributions may be subject to gift tax, and income spent on political activities – generally the advocacy of a particular candidate in an election – is taxable.[45] An "action" organization generally qualifies as a 501(c)(4) organization.[46] An "action" organization is one whose activities substantially include, or are exclusively,[47] direct lobbying or grass roots lobbying related to advocacy for or against legislation or proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation that is related to its purpose.[48] A 501(c)(4) organization may directly or indirectly support or oppose a candidate for public office as long as such activities are not a substantial amount of its activities.[37][49]

 

[RoadVirus]

I will simply say this to those who support this idea you will have a Republican President again I hope you will be as supportive of him or her using the I.R.S. as weapon against there political opposition as you seem to be now.

You mean like when the NAACP and Charlie Rangel were targeted under Bush?

Don't worry.

We're use to it.

Here we go!
Boooooooooooooooooooooosh!!

I don't know about the NAACP, but the IRS had plenty of reasons to target Rangel.

 

[natstew]

The law states:


It's ILLEGAL to engage in political activities.

Where does that statement make it illegal to engage in politics for these groups? It only makes it not applicable to a groups looking to make a profit, which Tea Party organizations usually do not do.

Educating people on topics is what the Tea party organizations do, which falls under this law.

Exclusively makes it illegal.



The Tea Party groups are not engaged in Social Welfare. They are engaged in politics.

TEA Party Groups are operating the same as Liberal/Progressive/Democrat groups.

2013 IRS scandal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: List of Internal Revenue Service political profiling controversies
Page semi-protected


Emblem of the Internal Revenue Service.
In 2013, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) revealed that it had targeted political groups applying for tax-exempt status for closer scrutiny based on their names or political themes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating the IRS's actions as part of a criminal probe ordered by United States Attorney General Eric Holder.[1] This led to both political and public condemnation of the agency and triggered further investigations.[2] Initial reports had described the targeting as nearly exclusively on conservative groups with terms such as "Tea Party" in their names. Further investigation revealed that certain terms and themes in the applications of liberal-leaning groups and the Occupy movement had also triggered additional scrutiny, though possibly at a lower rate.[3][4][5][6][7] The only known denial of tax-exempt status occurred to a progressive group.[8] The use of target lists continued through May 2013.[9]

Liberal groups were scrutinized at a much lower rate.

 

[Papageorgio]

The law states:


It's ILLEGAL to engage in political activities.

Where does that statement make it illegal to engage in politics for these groups? It only makes it not applicable to a groups looking to make a profit, which Tea Party organizations usually do not do.

Educating people on topics is what the Tea party organizations do, which falls under this law.

Exclusively makes it illegal.

The Tea Party groups are not engaged in Social Welfare. They are engaged in politics.

Shmucky Scewmer is not asking that all illegal 501cs be brought down or closed down, just Tea Party organizations. If you or he were serious about upholding the law, then would you not want ALL of them shut down? Not just a certain political affiliation.

 

[natstew]

I will simply say this to those who support this idea you will have a Republican President again I hope you will be as supportive of him or her using the I.R.S. as weapon against there political opposition as you seem to be now.

You mean like when the NAACP and Charlie Rangel were targeted under Bush?

Don't worry.

We're use to it.

Are you trying to be funny or something? Charlie Rangle headed the committee that wrote the tax laws and he flagrantly evaded paying income taxes. Charlie Rangle is on the level of Adam Claton Powell, remember him?

 

[BorisTheAnimal]

Combined with Cuomo's remarks, genocide is around the corner.

Prince Andrew and Chairman DiBlasio are both Communists, as is Shuma the Looza and all Democrats. Their true colors are just coming out now. I hope the GOP had the balls to take these fascists head on and utterly destroy them.

 

[natstew]

I believe in the checks and balances in the 3 branches of gov't, and believe the IRS is not dominated by either party- since reforms due to Nixon's criminal attacks on his ''enemies''., and saying Chuck wants to go after just RW GROUPS is more RW BLARNEY- THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES WHO'VE TRIED UNFAIR 'REFORM'' THAT I'VE SEEN... and thus they probably would by impacted more by fair reform...cheating, lying, thieving, pander to the rich, bought off hypocrites. Pub dupes lol

Franco, what kind of drugs are you on?

Americans United for Change
Americans United for Change enjoys 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. The organization exists, according to its own website, “to amplify the progressive message--to contribute to a grass roots groundswell for progressive policies. Progressives need to redefine ‘common sense’--by reasserting the primacy of the traditional progressive values that resonate with most Americans.”
The group spent $4.7 million in 2009 “redefining” common sense and, according to their IRS form 990, on “advocacy and education about public policy issues.” Americans United for Change directly engaged Republican senators facing reelection in 2008, running television advertisements against them. Naturally, no Democrat complained. Nor did the IRS revoke its 501(c) status.

And you would say the above is not political activities?

 

[TooTall]

The IRS job is to curtail unlawful activities by any group, liberal or conservative or in between.

I assume you watched the hearings not long back about the Tea Party IRS stuff. I did too. Can you tell us what those people did that was illegal or even suspicious?

The law states:

Section 501(c)(4)
social welfare organizations
are tax
-
exempt
organizations that have as
their primary purpose engaging in social welfare activities.
Section 501(c)(4) defines
social
welfare organizations
as:
Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively
for the promotion of
social welfare, or local associations of employees, the
membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or
persons . . . and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable,
educational, or recreational purposes
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionla...01(c)(4) Social Welfare Organizations v.6.pdf

It's ILLEGAL to engage in political activities.

Yes, so why is ACORN still alive?

 

[OriginalShroom]

Why am I not surprised to see Liberals supporting using Government Agencies to attack their political opponents?

They have supported Obama's use of a enemies list, order the deaths of people without judicial review even claiming no judicial review was needed, and making changes to signed laws without the approval of Congress.

Remember back when Nixon was the worst President ever for not condemning these types of actions?

Oh how times have changed.