The IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate the eligibility of groups !

[Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !]

As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
attention only to conservative groups.

Well, here ya go:

<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html>

The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.


It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !


--
---

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53XgcCrM/s400/cry_baby.jpg

SAVE AMERICA!!

Spay or neuter
your Republican!!
--
--> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one

cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> Well, here ya go:
>

> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>

>
> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>
> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> --
> ---
>

> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg...

>
> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> Spay or neuter
> your Republican!!
> --
> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right

But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt
requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for
his "friends"?

[The NAZI Party in America today is represented by the GOP]

On 5/15/2013 10:14 AM, Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E

>> SAVE AMERICA!!
>>
>> Spay or neuter
>> your Republican!!
>> --
>> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>
> But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt
> requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for
> his "friends"?
>

Sure.

Anything that identifies tax frauds and abuses are legit.
These are not Obama "enemies", but enemies of all Americans.

Those back helicopters have been replaced with drones. Nazi
Insurgents will no longer be tolerated on US soil .

boo




--
--

"The great masses' receptive ability is only very limited,
their understanding is small, but their forgetfullness
is great. As a consequence of these facts, all effective
propaganda has to limit itself only to a very few points
and use them like slogans until even the very last man
is able to imagine what is intended by such a word. "


GOP party spokesman : Adolph Hitler, in Mein Kampf

[Sir Ray]

On May 15, 11:24 am, The NAZI Party in America today is represented by

the GOP <GOPNaziKil...@poo.com> wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 10:14 AM, Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E

> > But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt
> > requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for
> > his "friends"?
> Sure.
>   Anything that identifies tax frauds and abuses are legit.
> These are not Obama "enemies", but enemies of all Americans.

Hell, the IRS should investigate all these so-call 501(c)(4) "Social
Welfare" groups, right, left and center. Actually any such tax-exempt
501 "non-profit" should be reviewed in depth periodically.

However, I wonder if there's a reason the IRS can't do that?
http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/gop-war-on-irs-costs-us-billions
"For any American concerned about the federal budget deficit, job one
must be to collect all of the tax revenue owed to the United States
Treasury. That's why supposed Republican deficit hawks simply aren't
serious about the national debt. After all, a new report confirmed
that steep GOP budget cuts at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are
hurting customer service, delaying refunds and costing Uncle Sam
billions of dollars annually. Thanks to the never-ending Republican
war on the IRS dating back to the late 1990's, tax evasion and
cheating are now depriving the U.S. of $400 billion each year."
<snip>
"The Internal Revenue Service can't keep up with surging tax cheating
and isn't sufficiently collecting revenue or helping confused
taxpayers because Congress isn't giving it enough money to do its job,
a government watchdog said Wednesday...
Congress cut the IRS budget to $11.8 billion this year. That is $300
million less than last year and $1.5 billion below the request by
President Barack Obama, who argued that boosting the agency's spending
would fatten tax collections and provide better service to taxpayers."

Nowadays, whenever there's problems in US governance, chances are
Republicans are involved somehow in causing them...

[deep]

They can if the applicant does not provide "social welfare" work as is
a requirement of the tax exempt status. What social welfare does the
Tea Party provide to people?

[Ivan Bodley]

"deep" wrote in message news:clc7p8pihm3svl9gf...@4ax.com...

> What social welfare does the
> Tea Party provide to people?

###
Why do YOU want a SOCIALIST WELFARE STATE, you retarded ,"unprovididing"
lazy leftist?

[JohnJohnsn]

On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:53:41 AM UTC-5, Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about ! wrote:
>
>
> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate
> the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status, and that there isn't
> an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its attention only to conservative
> groups. Well, here ya go: >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html
> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax
> Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three
> Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status. It is good to see IRS
> going after tax dodgers !

> -- --- > SAVE AMERICA!! Spay or neuter your VLILLLDM!!
> -- --- > Slow Left-wing thinkers ahead --> Stay to the Right!
>
IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo
The controversy over the Internal Revenue Service's targeting conservative groups for additional scrutiny has focused new attention on tax-exempt organizations.
By Gregory Korte, USA TODAY | 2:06 p.m. EDT May 14, 2013

WASHINGTON -- In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked.

That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months.

In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

[STORY: IRS gave liberals a pass; Tea Party groups put on hold
[http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/14/irs-gave-progressives-a-pass-tea-party-groups-put-on-hold/2159983/

As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups. They included:

• Bus for Progress, a New Jersey non-profit that uses a red, white and blue bus to "drive the progressive change." According to its website, its mission includes "support (for) progressive politicians with the courage to serve the people's interests and make tough choices." It got an IRS approval as a social welfare group in April 2011.

• Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment says it fights against corporate welfare and for increasing the minimum wage. "It would be fair to say we're on the progressive end of the spectrum," said executive director Jeff Ordower. He said the group got tax-exempt status in September 2011 in just nine months after "a pretty simple, straightforward process."

• Progress Florida, granted tax-exempt status in January 2011, is lobbying the Florida Legislature to expand Medicaid under a provision of the Affordable Care Act, one of President Obama's signature accomplishments. The group did not return phone calls. "We're busy fighting to build a more progressive Florida and cannot take your call right now," the group's voice mail said.

Like the Tea Party groups, the liberal groups sought recognition as social welfare groups under Section 501(c)(4) of the tax code, based on activities like "citizen participation" or "voter education and registration."

In a conference call with reporters last week, the IRS official responsible for granting tax-exempt status said that it was a mistake to subject Tea Party groups to additional scrutiny based solely on the organization's name. But she said ideology played no part in the process.

"The selection of these cases where they used the names was not a partisan selection," said Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations. She said progressive groups were also selected for greater scrutiny based on their names, but did not provide details. "I don't have them off the top of my head," she said.

The IRS did not respond to follow-up questions Tuesday.

Congressional critics say the IRS's actions suggest a political motives: "This administration seems to have a culture of politics above all else," said Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas. "A lot of the actions they take have a political side first, and put government second."

Flores complained to the IRS last year after the Waco Tea Party's tax-exempt application was mired in red tape. The IRS asked the group for information that was "overreaching and impossible to comply with," Flores said: Transcripts of radio interviews, copies of social media posts and details on "close relationships" with political candidates.

When Flores complained last year -- asking pointed questions about the IRS treatment of Tea Party groups -- the IRS response didn't acknowledge that it had treated conservative groups differently. "They did more than sidestep the issue," he said. "They flipped me the finger."

Before the IRS started separating out Tea Party applications, getting tax-exempt status was routine -- even for conservative groups. The Champaign Tea Party's treasurer, Karen Olsen, said the process was smooth, with no follow-up questions from the IRS.

Olsen, a retired IRS revenue agent, defended the agency.

"If you suddenly see a great increase in some kind of activity, and you don't understand why, then it might be reasonable to look more closely at what's happening with those applications," she said. "I'm not certain that there was an error on the part of the IRS at all. I know that's not a popular opinion."

Some liberal groups did get additional scrutiny, although they still got their tax-exempt status while the Tea Party moratorium was in effect. For the "independent progressive" group Action for a Progressive Future, which runs the Rootsaction.org web site, the tax-exempt process took 18 months and also involved intrusive questions.

Co-founder Jeff Cohen said tax-exempt status is a privilege, so he didn't mind answering the intrusive questions, as long as those questions were consistent and fair.

"From my perspective, if the IRS can hold up legitimate Tea Party applications today and get away with it, then who knows if progressive groups will be held up and specially scrutinized in a few years. It's utterly unacceptable, if that's what happened," he said.

Follow @gregorykorte on Twitter.

-30-

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/14/irs-tea-party-progressive-groups/2158831/

Now; we understand why this doesn't bother all you VLILLDMs, as you are all for harassing Conservative groups.

BUT; are you for the IRS breaking federal law and sharing private tax information with your "Progressive" (LIBERAL!) groups, too?

Progressive Group: IRS Gave Us Conservative Groups' Confidential Docs
by Wynton Hall 14 May 2013

The progressive-leaning investigative journalism group ProPublica says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office that targeted and harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle gave the progressive group nine confidential applications of conservative groups whose tax-exempt status was pending.

The commendable admission lends further evidence to the lengths the IRS went during an election cycle to silence tea party and limited government voices.

ProPublica says the documents the IRS gave them were “not supposed to be made public”:

The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year... In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)

The group says that "no unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to ProPublica.”

According to Media Research Center Vice President for Business and Culture Dan Gainor, ProPublica’s financial backers include top progressive donors:

ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure”–“progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

On Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to hold a formal hearing on the IRS conservative targeting scandal. IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George are slated to testify.

http://tinyurl.com/IRS-Gate-2013

ProPublica

ProPublica is the brainchild of Herbert and Marion Sandler, the former chief executives of the Golden West Financial Corporation, who have committed $10 million a year to the project.[8] The Sandlers hired Paul Steiger, former managing editor of the Wall Street Journal, to create and run the organization as editor in chief. At the time ProPublica was set up, Steiger responded to concerns about the role of the Sandlers' political views, saying on The Newshour with Jim Lehrer:

“Coming into this, when I talked to Herb and Marion Sandler,
one of my concerns was precisely this question of independence
and nonpartisanship... My history has been doing 'down the middle'
reporting. And so when I talked to Herb and Marion I said 'are you
comfortable with that?' They said 'absolutely'. I said 'well suppose
we did an expose of some of the left leaning organizations that you
have supported or that are friendly to what you've supported in the
past'. They said 'no problem'. And when we set up our organizational
structure, the board of directors, on which I sit and which Herb is the
chairman, does not know in advance what we're going to report on.”

Criticism

Dave Kopel, a policy analyst for the libertarian Cato Institute and a former columnist for the now-defunct Rocky Mountain News, criticized a ProPublica report on hydraulic fracturing as a "one-sided series of facts arrayed to support a point of view". He argued that a common theme in ProPublica's work is that "the government is not doing a good enough job in controlling things, particularly things involving big business". ProPublica later responded to his article, countering those claims and saying quote, "using carefully culled quotations and selected statistics, Kopel asserts 'indisputably false facts' in ProPublica's reporting."

After the fallout from the IRS admitting to targeting conservative tax exempt groups for added scrutiny, ProPublica said that it had received confidential pending applications for groups requesting tax exempt status. ProPublica said it had requested the applications for 67 different nonprofits and received nine "applications (that) had not yet been approved — meaning they were not supposed to be made public."

Board members

Herbert Sandler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Sandler
Paul Steiger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Steiger
Henry Louis Gates, Jr. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates,_Jr.
Mary Graham http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Graham
Alberto Ibargüen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Ibarg%C3%BCen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProPublica

[Kicking Ass and Taking Names]

GODDAM RIGHT!!!!

[Kicking Ass and Taking Names]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com> wrote:

Why the fuck not?

He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
consequences."

[Poor Repressed, Deprived, Victimized Republic-Loons]

On 5/15/2013 11:50 AM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:53:41 AM UTC-5, Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about ! wrote:
>>
>>
>> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
>> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate
>> the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status, and that there isn't
>> an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its attention only to conservative
>> groups. Well, here ya go: >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html
>> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax
>> Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three
>> Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status. It is good to see IRS
>> going after tax dodgers !
>> -- --- > SAVE AMERICA!! Spay or neuter your VLILLLDM!!
>> -- --- > Slow Left-wing thinkers ahead --> Stay to the Right!
>>
> IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo
> The controversy over the Internal Revenue Service's targeting conservative groups for additional scrutiny has focused new attention on tax-exempt organizations.
> By Gregory Korte, USA TODAY | 2:06 p.m. EDT May 14, 2013
>
> WASHINGTON -- In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked.
>
> That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment.

Pointless data point.

All Real Americans know Tea baggers are old, racist, sore losers, tax
dodgers and have no "social welfare" concept at all. What these
groups are trying to do is hide behind hate and propaganda
they regurgitate using these filing in fraudulent manner.

Real Americans want groups like this charged and
taxed beyond existence.





--
-- ---
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53XgcCrM/s400/cry_baby.jpg
Conservatives remind me of Yosemite Sam, Wile E. Coyote, and Elmer Fudd.
They bring the guns, the stupidity, and of course, the failure. SAVE
AMERICA!! Spay or neuter your Republican!!

[deep]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:50:11 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<topco...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:53:41 AM UTC-5, Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about ! wrote:
>>
>>
>> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
>> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate
>> the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status, and that there isn't
>> an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its attention only to conservative
>> groups. Well, here ya go: >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html
>> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax
>> Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three
>> Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status. It is good to see IRS
>> going after tax dodgers !
>> -- --- > SAVE AMERICA!! Spay or neuter your VLILLLDM!!
>> -- --- > Slow Left-wing thinkers ahead --> Stay to the Right!
>>
>IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo

Can the Tea Party show they provide any "social welfare" as is
required by the tax exempt status in question? Doesn't seem like
they can. They do nothing to provide any aid to anyone. Lobbying to
destroy our republic if not social welfare.

[Gunner Asch]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:18:10 -0400, "Ivan Bodley" <bas...@bass.gov>
wrote:

Because he is a Marxist. Nothing more, nothing less. You guys didnt
realize that by now???


--
"You guess the truth hurts?

Really?

"Hurt" aint the word.

For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.
Raid® to a cockroach.
Sheriff Brody to a shark
Bush to a Liberal

The truth doesn't just hurt. It's painful, like a red hot poker shoved
up their ass. Like sliding down a hundred foot razor blade using their
dick as a brake.

They HATE the truth."

[Bert]

In news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net "Benghazi - A
flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !" <lo...@killer.xcm>
wrote:

> NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.193.10.180

" Cubano Rubio : Another anchor baby whose parents,swam to Florida" <pigs...@gop.com> 74.193.10.180
" Gloom and doom .. the only NOISE from the Party of No!" <do...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
"Ariel Castro : A Mormon and typical GOP follower" <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !" <lo...@killer.xcm> 74.193.10.180
"FEMA Camp Commander. Welcome to Agenda 21" <bit...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
"Fred G. Smit " <nos...@ho.com> 74.193.10.180
"Lions: 5654398, Christians : 0" <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
"Make Clint s day: Change his Depends." <al...@asdk.com> 74.193.10.180
"Poor Repressed, Deprived, Victimized Republic-Loons" <youarea...@ajksd.com> 74.193.10.180
"Poor Repressed, Deprived, Victimized RepublicLoons" <pr...@earm.org> 74.193.10.180
"Rehashed and repeated propaganda." <re...@yahh.cooom> 74.193.10.180
"RightTards and Gun Huggers lick sweat from my balls !" <a...@aksd.com> 74.193.10.180
"Thanks for all FREE stuff!!!" <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
"THANKS for all the FREE STUFF !!!" <ea...@asshole.com> 74.193.10.180
"Thanks for all the FREE STUFF !" <yourfuck...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
"Welcome to Agenda 21 (Boston)" <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
"Work will set you free ! ( just take a shower first)" <aj...@gsici.com> 74.193.10.180
"Work will set you free! You just have to shower first" <fuck...@gop.com> 74.193.10.180
ABM - Anyone But a Mormon <a...@loon.tard> 74.193.10.180
Ayatollah Santorum <a...@asasa.com> 74.193.10.180
Ayatollah Santorum <a...@skll.com> 74.193.10.180
Banging Alex Wagner like a drum <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
Bridge to nowhere <ea...@no.com> 74.193.10.180
Busch Wacked <beenB...@yahh.com> 74.193.10.180
Cubano Rubio : Another anchor baby whose parents swam to FLorida <sw...@poasd.com> 74.193.10.180
FEMA Rendition Camps Czar <fea...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
Fox News Blond Porn Starlets Outlet Mall <Fuc...@eatme.com> 74.193.10.180
Gingrich : Another adulterous serial rapist in the GOP party exposed <du...@askd.com> 74.193.10.180
King of Country of What <The...@lost.com> 74.193.10.180
Loons jerk off daily on Sarah Palin book cover <lo...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
Marco Rubio is still a Mexican - even with a red tie <pint...@hoo.com> 74.193.10.180
max headroom <maxhe...@localnet.com> 74.193.10.180
Mexican Born Polygamist Mormon Exterminator <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
Romney: A Polygamist whose career has been destroying America's middle class <suc...@laksdjl.com> 74.193.10.180
The NAZI Party in America today is represented by the GOP <GOPNaz...@poo.com> 74.193.10.180
The NRA is a Terrorist group <la...@lkas.com> 74.193.10.180
The NRA is an American Terrorist group <smapper...@gmail.com> 74.193.10.180
What DID a Frothy Mixture of Shit do to be associated with Santorum ? <als...@kas.com> 74.193.10.180

--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

> Tea Party provide to people?  - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Same social welfare work any group friendly to Obama provides.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 15, 11:50 am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names

> consequences."- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
IRS to suppress his opponent?

[deep]

Liar. You can't answer question, can you? That's because there is
none. Simple truth you lying asses can't grasp is the Tea Party does
NOT deserve tax exempt status. The IRS was doing their jobs, now the
Republicans want to crucify Obama (again), simply because people in
his admistration were doing their jobs.

You people are too pathetic for words. You would rather burn this
republic down rather than see poor kids have enough to eat and decent
medical care. You are truly evil. The very worst society has to
offer.

[deep]

HAHAHAHAHAHAA. Yea, right, the IRS "suppressed" Romney.

Yea right. You people have a rich fantasy life. Not much else, but
you have your fantasies.

[Frank]

On 5/15/2013 2:05 PM, Bert wrote:
> In news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net "Benghazi - A
> flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !" <lo...@killer.xcm>
> wrote:
>
>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.193.10.180
>

at least they are in Texas.
Who says only conservatives live there?

[Jeff M]

They BEGIN by blaming Obama. That's always step one, and their first
priority. For Obama's entire first term, their number one priority was
to make sure he didn't win reelection. Now, having failed at that, they
are simply out to do him as much damage as the possibly can.

[Gunner Asch]

He won the election by using wide spread voter fraud.

They are still being convicted right and left (Democrats) and the list
is still ongoing.

Gunner

--
"You guess the truth hurts?

Really?

"Hurt" aint the word.

For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.

RaidŽ to a cockroach.

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one
cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:

> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> Well, here ya go:
>

> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>

>
> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>
> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> --
> ---
>

> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg...

>
> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> Spay or neuter
> your Republican!!
> --
> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right

I agree that it is good to see the IRS go after those who should be
paying their taxes.

TMT

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 15, 2:05 pm, deep wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:34:44 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>
>
>
>
>

> offer.  - Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Want to bet that Westergrom is a fat lazy redneck whose kids go
hungry?

TMT

[deep]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 14:43:40 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org>
wrote:

>>>
>>> Same social welfare work any group friendly to Obama provides.
>>
>> Liar. You can't answer question, can you? That's because there is
>> none. Simple truth you lying asses can't grasp is the Tea Party does
>> NOT deserve tax exempt status. The IRS was doing their jobs, now the
>> Republicans want to crucify Obama (again),
>
>They BEGIN by blaming Obama. That's always step one, and their first
>priority. For Obama's entire first term, their number one priority was
>to make sure he didn't win reelection. Now, having failed at that, they
>are simply out to do him as much damage as the possibly can.
>
>
>

I'm sure they would love nothing better than to destroy him via
impeachment like they did Clinton, simply out of nothing more than
sheer spite and hatred.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

It was fun. And it sure annoyed the shit out of you people.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 15, 6:47 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > On May 15, 11:50=A0am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names

> > <PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>
> > > Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > >On May 15, 9:53=A0am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one

> > > >cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> > > >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the
> > > >> eye. I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> > > >> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt
> > > >> status, and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS

> > > >> directed it=

> > s
> > > >> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> > > >> Well, here ya go:
>
> > > >> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-de

> > > >> mo=

> > ...>
>
> > > >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it

> > > >> target=

> > ed
> > > >> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its

> > > >> e=

> > ye
> > > >> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit

> > > >> s=

> > tatus.
>
> > > >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> ---
>
> > > >>http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg

> > > >>..=

> > .
>
> > > >> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> > > >> Spay or neuter
> > > >> your Republican!!
> > > >> --
> > > >> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>
> > > >But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt
> > > >requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for
> > > >his "friends"?
>
> > > Why the fuck not?
>
> > > He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
> > > consequences."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
> > IRS to suppress his opponent?
>

> LOL! Answer your own question.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I know the answer. I wanted to hear your spin, Sybil.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 15, 6:58 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

> Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900

> Obama won by an almost 5 million votes. How many of these votes were
> fraudulen? Ti would have to be at least 5 million. And why was the final
> totals so close to the pre-election polling? Amazingly so.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

He "won" with fewer votes than he got in 2008. How many millions of
votes would Romney have gotten if Tea Party groups hadn't been denied
the opportunity to get their word out? What's the odds of a candidate
receiving 100% of the votes in any particular precints,like in
Philadelphia and Cleveland example ?

http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/11/in-some-philly-and-cleveland-precincts-obama-got-100-of-the-vote/

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 15, 8:11 pm, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>

> It was fun. And it sure annoyed the shit out of you people.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

It's always annoying to a progressive when you question their talking
points, then they can't back them up with FACTS.

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 15, 8:11 pm, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>

> It was fun. And it sure annoyed the shit out of you people.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

It was fun...to watch you Republicans fail..again.

Care to tell us about your hero Nixon?

Laugh..laugh..laugh...

TMT

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

> TMT- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Why did Obama "fire" the "acting" IRS Director when he knew the guy
was scheduled to leave next month when his assignment was over?? You
bought his lies but we're not.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325223/Obama-fires-acting-IRS-commissioner-pressure-grows-surrounding-political-targeting-conservative-groups-sought-tax-exempt-status.html

[Harold Burton]

In article <5193a175$0$12765$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,

"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"

<lo...@killer.xcm> wrote:

> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> attention only to conservative groups.

Which they mostly did.


snicker

[Harold Burton]

In article <e6f7p89ta0jm7b48t...@6ax.com>,

Gawd, gotta love it. An idiot leftard admits Democrats in general, and
Obama in particular, are corrupt.


Leftards, batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.

[Harold Burton]

In article <20130515195803.005$d...@newsreader.com>,
dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > >> He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
> > >> consequences."- Hide quoted text -
> > >>
> > >> - Show quoted text -
> > >
> > >Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
> > >IRS to suppress his opponent?
> >
> > He won the election by using wide spread voter fraud.
> >
> > They are still being convicted right and left (Democrats) and the list
> > is still ongoing.
> >
> > Gunner
>

> Obama won by an almost 5 million votes. How many of these votes were
> fraudulen? Ti would have to be at least 5 million. And why was the final
> totals so close to the pre-election polling? Amazingly so.

who cares how many Obama won by? Lickin Ass admits that the Obama
Regime is corrupt. Lickin Ass may be stupid, but at least in this case,
he's honest.



snicker

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <_PudnVDpbpnyeA7M...@giganews.com>,

He is the most likely suspect -- or maybe Valerie Jarrett, who is a
veteran of Chicago-style politics.

From what I am hearing, this scandal is not limited to the Cincinatti
office, but has occurred in Alabama and Florida, as well.

I know people there who have been subjected to rigorous audits -- the
common denominator has been support of Republicans.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
<cccc3221-048a-4d92...@r3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,

Now we have Nixon II.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 16, 10:47 am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 15, 6:47=A0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E"
> > > <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > > > On May 15, 11:50=3DA0am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names

> > > > <PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>
> > > > > Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > >On May 15, 9:53=3DA0am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that
> > > > > >no =

> > one
> > > > > >cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> > > > > >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets
> > > > > >> the eye. I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the

> > > > > >> duty =

> > to
> > > > > >> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt
> > > > > >> status, and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the

> > > > > >> IRS directed it=3D

> > > > s
> > > > > >> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> > > > > >> Well, here ya go:
>
> > > > > >> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-t

> > > > > >> o-=
> > de
> > > > > >> mo=3D

> > > > ...>
>
> > > > > >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it

> > > > > >> target=3D

> > > > ed
> > > > > >> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had

> > > > > >> i=
> > ts
> > > > > >> e=3D

> > > > ye
> > > > > >> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking

> > > > > >> nonprof=
> > it
> > > > > >> s=3D

> > > > tatus.
>
> > > > > >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> ---
>
> > > > > >>http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO

> > > > > >>53=
> > Xg
> > > > > >>..=3D

> > > > .
>
> > > > > >> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> > > > > >> Spay or neuter
> > > > > >> your Republican!!
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>
> > > > > >But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax
> > > > > >exempt requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt

> > > > > >requests fo=

> > r
> > > > > >his "friends"?
>
> > > > > Why the fuck not?
>
> > > > > He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
> > > > > consequences."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
> > > > IRS to suppress his opponent?
>
> > > LOL! Answer your own question.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I know the answer. I wanted to hear your spin, Sybil.
>

> Are you claiming that the President used to IRS to slander Romney?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes, if not directly then he used the IRS to go after Romney's donors
in a effort to scare away anybody that wanted to donate to Romney's
campaign. Why did Obama use the IRS to suppress any Conservative and
TeaParty support for Romneyduring the last election? Do you think
thats a fair way to win an election? Why is it taking you so long to
come to the same conclusion? I mean other than the fact that the
leftwing blogs where you get your daily talking points haven't told
you what to think yet.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/13/flashback-romney-donor-vilified-by-obama-campaign-then-subjected-to-2-audits/

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 16, 10:52 am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 15, 6:58=A0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
> > > > Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >On May 15, 11:50 am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names
> > > > ><PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>
> > > > >> Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no
> > > > >> >one cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> > > > >> >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets
> > > > >> >> the eye. I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and
> > > > >> >> the duty to investigate the eligibility of groups applying for
> > > > >> >> tax-exempt status, and that there isn't an issue of illegality

> > > > >> >> unless the IR=

> > S
> > > > >> >> directed its attention only to conservative groups.
>
> > > > >> >> Well, here ya go:
>
> > > > >> >> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-

> > > > >> >> to=

> > -d
> > > > >> >> emo...>
>
> > > > >> >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it
> > > > >> >> targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent
> > > > >> >> years, also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning

> > > > >> >> organizatio=

> > ns
> > > > >> >> seeking nonprofit status.
>
> > > > >> >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> > > > >> >> --
> > > > >> >> ---
>
> > > > >> >>http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wz

> > > > >> >>O5=

> > 3X
> > > > >> >>g...
>
> > > > >> >> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> > > > >> >> Spay or neuter
> > > > >> >> your Republican!!
> > > > >> >> --
> > > > >> >> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>
> > > > >> >But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax

> > > > >> >exemp=

> > t
> > > > >> >requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests

> > > > >> >f=

> > or
> > > > >> >his "friends"?
>
> > > > >> Why the fuck not?
>
> > > > >> He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
> > > > >> consequences."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > >Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
> > > > >IRS to suppress his opponent?
>
> > > > He won the election by using wide spread voter fraud.
>
> > > > They are still being convicted right and left (Democrats) and the
> > > > list is still ongoing.
>
> > > > Gunner
>
> > > Obama won by an almost 5 million votes. How many of these votes were
> > > fraudulen? Ti would have to be at least 5 million. And why was the
> > > final totals so close to the pre-election polling? Amazingly so.- Hide

> > > quoted t=

> > ext -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > He "won" with fewer votes than he got in 2008. How many millions of
> > votes would Romney have gotten if Tea Party groups hadn't been denied
> > the opportunity to get their word out? What's the odds of a candidate
> > receiving 100% of the votes in any particular precints,like in
> > Philadelphia and Cleveland example ?
>

> >http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/11/in-some-philly-and-cleveland-pr...
> > ct= s-obama-got-100-of-the-vote/
>
> Too rediculous. You over-estimate the influence of those TP dummies.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh?? Then why did Obama use the IRS to suppress the TeaParty
influence??

[Padraigh ProAmerica]

Re: The IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate the
eligibility of groups !

Group: talk.politics.guns Date: Wed, May 15, 2013, 1:09pm (EDT-2) From:
deep

====================

SOMEONE in the IRS ILLEGALLY gave Romney's tax information to certain
people in the media.
--------------------------

--
"Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff."--

Frank Zappa--

[Padraigh ProAmerica]

Re: The IRS has the authority and the duty to investigate the
eligibility of groups !

Group: talk.politics.guns Date: Wed, May 15, 2013, 1:05pm (EDT-2) From:
deep
On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:34:44 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey
rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com> wrote:

They can if the applicant does not provide "social welfare" work as is a
requirement of the tax exempt status.  What social welfare does the

Tea Party provide to people?  - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Same social welfare work any group friendly to Obama provides.
Liar. You can't answer question, can you? That's because there is none.
Simple truth you lying asses can't grasp is the Tea Party does NOT
deserve tax exempt status.

====================

The problem was that, due to the rules currently in place, they DID fit
the requirements for a 501(c)(4).

What a few rogue IRS people did went FAR beyond bounds. WE now know of
five based in Cincinatti who should be fired forthwith.
----------------------------------

The IRS was doing their jobs, now the Republicans want to crucify Obama

(again), simply because people in his admistration were doing their
jobs.

========================

They went FAR beyond any reasonable action. Ever hear of equal
protection, DooDoo?
-----------------------------

You people are too pathetic for words.

==================

And you are either too stupid or too partisan to be honest.
---------------------------------

You would rather burn this republic down rather than see poor kids have
enough to eat and decent medical care. You are truly evil. The very
worst society has to offer.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 16, 4:02 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 10:47=A0am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E"
> > > <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > > > On May 15, 6:47=3DA0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > > > "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E"
> > > > > <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > > > > > On May 15, 11:50=3D3DA0am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names

> > > > > > <PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,
> > > > > > > 1900
>
> > > > > > > Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > >On May 15, 9:53=3D3DA0am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink
> > > > > > > >th=
> > at
> > > > > > > >no =3D

> > > > one
> > > > > > > >cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than
> > > > > > > >> meets the eye. I said elsewhere that the IRS has the

> > > > > > > >> authority and t=
> > he
> > > > > > > >> duty =3D

> > > > to
> > > > > > > >> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for
> > > > > > > >> tax-exempt status, and that there isn't an issue of

> > > > > > > >> illegality unless the IRS directed it=3D3D

> > > > > > s
> > > > > > > >> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> > > > > > > >> Well, here ya go:
>
> > > > > > > >> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-lett

> > > > > > > >> er=
> > -t
> > > > > > > >> o-=3D
> > > > de
> > > > > > > >> mo=3D3D

> > > > > > ...>
>
> > > > > > > >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting

> > > > > > > >> i=
> > t
> > > > > > > >> target=3D3D

> > > > > > ed
> > > > > > > >> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also

> > > > > > > >> h=
> > ad
> > > > > > > >> i=3D
> > > > ts
> > > > > > > >> e=3D3D

> > > > > > ye
> > > > > > > >> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking

> > > > > > > >> nonprof=3D
> > > > it
> > > > > > > >> s=3D3D

> > > > > > tatus.
>
> > > > > > > >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > >> ---
>
> > > > > > > >>http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI

> > > > > > > >>/w=
> > zO
> > > > > > > >>53=3D
> > > > Xg
> > > > > > > >>..=3D3D

> > > > > > .
>
> > > > > > > >> SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> > > > > > > >> Spay or neuter
> > > > > > > >> your Republican!!
> > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > >> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>
> > > > > > > >But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax
> > > > > > > >exempt requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax

> > > > > > > >exempt requests fo=3D

> > > > r
> > > > > > > >his "friends"?
>
> > > > > > > Why the fuck not?
>
> > > > > > > He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections
> > > > > > > have consequences."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using
> > > > > > the IRS to suppress his opponent?
>
> > > > > LOL! Answer your own question.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > I know the answer. I wanted to hear your spin, Sybil.
>
> > > Are you claiming that the President used to IRS to slander Romney?-

> > > Hide =

> > quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Yes, if not directly then he used the IRS to go after Romney's donors
> > in a effort to scare away anybody that wanted to donate to Romney's
> > campaign. Why did Obama use the IRS to suppress any Conservative and
> > TeaParty support for Romneyduring the last election? Do you think
> > thats a fair way to win an election? Why is it taking you so long to
> > come to the same conclusion? I mean other than the fact that the
> > leftwing blogs where you get your daily talking points haven't told
> > you what to think yet.
>

> >http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/13/flashback-romney-donor-vilified-by-...
> > a-= campaign-then-subjected-to-2-audits/
>
> You're ranting about the fairness of a non0event, so I'll give a
> non-response. This is getting too pathetic.
>
> All the uncountable bad things in the world to worry about, and you're
> inventing new ones.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

So, tell me Sybil. What is it about Obama? He's either in the center
of all these scandals or he was completely out of the loop. Either way
he's fucked. Good luck defending him. It's gonna be a long hot summer
for you moonbats.

[benj]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 03:43:56 +0000, Denny wrote:

>> So, tell me Sybil. What is it about Obama? He's either in the center of
>> all these scandals or he was completely out of the loop. Either way
>> he's fucked. Good luck defending him. It's gonna be a long hot summer
>> for you moonbats.
>

> This about Obama, and thanks for the chance

It's obviously about Obama not being able to do anything because Bushites
are all to blame for it all. Simple.

> Benghazi. Non-event. I think the righties really realize that, but
> they've gone so far it's too late bo back up.

Hmmm. Attack by Islamic terrorists. Description as "protest" by Obama and
officials. Ambassador and others all dead including two contractors in
Alamo-style defense. Help requeste and denied. Rescue told to "stand
down". Sure sounds like a non-event to me.

> AP? Another anti-link campaign gone bad. A simple over-reaction.

Right, Watergate was a simple "over-reaction". Your nose is growing.

> IRS? standard operating procedure. The newbie investigators are trained
> to double-click all looney organizations. But not to talk about it.

Ah, so all conservative organizations are "looney" while all leftist ones
are "sensible"? And you have the balls to claim that nothing political
and unfair was going on? Your nose is REALLY long now! Even OBAMA
called it unacceptible or did he consider conservatives and republicans
"looney" as well and was just lying about it?

> Non of tis has anything to do with Obama's abilities or character, but
> you have a blindspot about him like a massive black hole (LOL!) You've
> totally thrown away logic and reason defending nothing.

Luckily we have YOUR sanity to explain to us how dead ambassadors are
"nothing", Conservatives are "looney" and therefore have no rights, and
pouring over what are essentially wiretap files is just an
"overreaction". I think we've got our position on this.

[Gray Guest]

"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"

<lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
@news.suddenlink.net:

>
>

Seig Heil, fucktard.

Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has that
authority?

--
Refusenik #1

Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.

Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama

[pyotr filipivich]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Wed, 15 May 2013 13:21:42 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On May 15, 11:50 am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names<PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one

>>> >cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
>>> >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.

>>> >> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to

>>> >> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,

>>> >> and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its

>>> >> attention only to conservative groups.
>>>
>>> >> Well, here ya go:
>>>

>>> >> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>
>>>
>>> >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
>>> >> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
>>> >> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.

>>>
>>> >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !

Which ones are they going after "Timothy "Turbo Tax" Geitner - the
Secretary of the Treasury?

>>> >>http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg...

>>>
>>> >> SAVE AMERICA!!
>>>
>>> >> Spay or neuter
>>> >> your Republican!!
>>> >> --
>>> >> --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>>>
>>> >But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt

>>> >requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for

>>> >his "friends"?
>>>
>>> Why the fuck not?
>>>
>>> He won the election and, as The Dick Cheney says, "Elections have
>>> consequences."- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>Did he "win" the election or did he steal the election by using the
>>IRS to suppress his opponent?
>

>He won the election by using wide spread voter fraud.
>
>They are still being convicted right and left (Democrats) and the list
>is still ongoing.
>

And voter suppression is part of that vote fraud. And it does
appear, that it was not just low level ACORN activists, but IRS
supervisors doing the vote suppression.

What the Progressive Democrat is admitting is that he too believes
that when you win an election, the laws don't apply to your side any
more. In his way of thinking, his fellow Progressive Democrats can
commit crimes day and night, because they won an election. I doubt he
would feel the same way if the a "Radical" Republican won an election,
and started the same sort of targeted investigations of Progressives.
--
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.

[RD Sandman]

dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote in
news:20130518091817.161$o...@newsreader.com:

> Wrong. But in the same vein. The first thing Nixon did after his
> inaugeration, the very same day, was to have a meeting of his inner
> circle. Unknown guys then, but later household words: Haldeman,
> Erlichman, Mitchell. Nixon called the meeting to order and asked his
> crew to work night and day to take care of his enemies. Only a
> Republican would be that vindictive.
>
> Trivia question:
>
> What was the first thing George W. Bush did, after his inaugeration
> ceremony?
>

Had sex with Laura?

--
Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman

You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On May 18, 8:18 am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> > Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> on Wed, 15 May 2013 13:21:42 -0700

> > typed in misc.survivalism  the following:
> > >On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey

> Wrong. But in the same vein. The first thing Nixon did after his
> inaugeration, the very same day, was to have a meeting of his inner circle.
> Unknown guys then, but later household words: Haldeman, Erlichman,
> Mitchell. Nixon called the meeting to order and asked his crew to work
> night and day to take care of his enemies. Only a Republican would be that
> vindictive.
>

I suppose you can provide a cite for that claim.

> Trivia question:
>
> What was the first thing George W. Bush did, after his inaugeration

> ceremony?- Hide quoted text -
>

Fumigated the Whitehouse then replaced all the stolen silverware,
ashtrays, dishes, lamps and towels that the Clinton's had pilfered
then replaced all the laptops that the Clinton's had corrupted with
kiddie porn.

[pyotr filipivich]

dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) on 18 May 2013 13:18:17 GMT typed in
misc.survivalism the following:

>pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Wed, 15 May 2013 13:21:42 -0700
>> typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>> >On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:35:49 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey
>> >rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>On May 15, 11:50 am, Kicking Ass and Taking
>> >>Names<PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>> >>> Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one
>> >>> >cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
>> >>> >> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the
>> >>> >> eye. I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty
>> >>> >> to investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt
>> >>> >> status, and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS
>> >>> >> directed its attention only to conservative groups.
>> >>>
>> >>> >> Well, here ya go:

>> >>> >> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it
>> >>> >> targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years,
>> >>> >> also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning
>> >>> >> organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>> >>>
>> >>> >> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>>

>> Which ones are they going after? Timothy "Turbo Tax" Geitner -

>> the Secretary of the Treasury?
>>
>> >>>

>Wrong. But in the same vein. The first thing Nixon did after his
>inaugeration, the very same day, was to have a meeting of his inner circle.
>Unknown guys then, but later household words: Haldeman, Erlichman,
>Mitchell. Nixon called the meeting to order and asked his crew to work
>night and day to take care of his enemies. Only a Republican would be that
>vindictive.

So you are in agreement, that if a Republican did something, then
it makes it acceptable for a Democrat to do it, in spades? That does
seem to be the gist of Democrat's argument "Everybody else did it!"
Their self-defense makes sense: Democrats have a long history of
acting as if the laws don't really apply to them. E.G., Timothy
"Turbo Tax" Geitner.
And there is a big difference between investigating fro fraud, and
asking for a list of all social contacts (including the facebook
friends), a description of any prayers you make, and the names,
occupations and addresses of your friends - all under threat of
perjury - before you will be permitted to be considered if you qualify
for the boon of being a tax deduct able organization.

>
>Trivia question:

What source of ethical behavior does the Democrat party have,
other than looking to see what the Republicans have?
And why are they now excusing the very same behavior they formerly
found so regnant?
--
pyotr filipivich
"We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious
is the first duty of intelligent men." George Orwell

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <20130518091817.161$o...@newsreader.com>,

dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

> pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Wrong. But in the same vein. The first thing Nixon did after his
> inaugeration, the very same day, was to have a meeting of his inner circle.
> Unknown guys then, but later household words: Haldeman, Erlichman,
> Mitchell. Nixon called the meeting to order and asked his crew to work
> night and day to take care of his enemies. Only a Republican would be that
> vindictive.
>

> Trivia question:
>
> What was the first thing George W. Bush did, after his inaugeration
> ceremony?

OH? And Valerie Jarrett didn't proclaim after the 2008 election: "We're
ready to rule!"

And Barack Obama didn't tell Eric Cantor the "Elections have
consequences."?

This behavior is pure Chicago-style DemocRAT standard.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:22:13 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
<No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:

>"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"
><lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
>@news.suddenlink.net:
>
>>
>>
>
>Seig Heil, fucktard.
>
>Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has that
>authority?

The relevant legal statute is quite clear.

The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
money.

Doggett Challenges GOP Exploitation of IRS Failure

http://doggett.house.gov/index.php/news/571-doggett-challenges-gop-exploitation-of-irs-failure-

Washington�Today, in response to U.S. Congressman Lloyd Doggett
(D-Texas), a senior member of the House Ways and Means Committee,
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, J. Russell George,
appointed by President George W. Bush, disputed Republican claims of
�corruption at the IRS� and that our tax system is �rotten at the
core.�

While deploring one recent IRS failure, Rep. Doggett challenged
Republican exploitation of the incident as another unjustified
overreach to promote more tax-subsidized secret money in campaigns, to
alter tax laws by shifting more burden to working families, and to
impede implementation of the Affordable Care Act. He also called upon
the Treasury Department to respond promptly to a petition filed with
it by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

I don�t believe there�s any lack of clarity in the statute here. The
statute that is in effect, has been in effect for decades and it
requires that before there is tax-exempt status, as Mr. Lawrence
O�Donnell, as the Crew Group, the Citizens for Responsibility and
Ethics in Washington has pointed out in a petition, you are to be
denied this status if you are not exclusively engaged in social
welfare according to the statute, is that not correct?

The statute is explicit. It uses the word �exclusively.� The
regulation the IRS adopted 30 or 40 years ago uses different language.

IG George: Mr. Doggett, I have to demure the Secretary; that�s a tax
policy question and I�m not in a position-

REP. DOGGETT: I�m not asking you for tax policy, I�m just asking for a
clear reading of the statute. And a clear reading of the statute that
has been in place for decades and is in place today says that there
should be a denial of tax-exempt status to any group that is not
exclusively engaged in social welfare operations and it was only after
a regulation adopted long ago, long before any of you were at the IRS,
that changed exclusively to primarily, that there was any discretion
for this section to be involved in this operation.

IG George: Mr. Doggett, I do know that we have indicated that some
clarification from those in the policy area of the Department of the
Treasury might be needed in this area to help clarify again.

REP. DOGGETT: Well, in April, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics
in Washington filed a petition with the Treasury Department and the
IRS to address that. If the statute, the clear wording of the statute
had been followed, we would not be having to deal today with selective
enforcement, we wouldn�t have any problems with enforcement in this
area at all. And I hope that that petition is honored and responded to
promptly, as I believe you have fulfilled your responsibilities, Mr.
George, as Inspector General. Thank you for your testimony and, Mr.
Miller, thank you for yours and for stepping aside.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <br2jp89n4o9ht5ih4...@4ax.com>,

GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:22:13 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
> <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"
> ><lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
> >@news.suddenlink.net:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Seig Heil, fucktard.
> >
> >Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has that
> >authority?
>
> The relevant legal statute is quite clear.
>
> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
> money.

When was Tea Party given taxpayer money? We do know that ACORN got
millions.

[Gray Guest]

On 19 May 2013, you wrote in talk.politics.guns:

> On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:22:13 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
><No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"
>><lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
>>@news.suddenlink.net:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Seig Heil, fucktard.
>>
>>Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has
>>that authority?
>
> The relevant legal statute is quite clear.
>
> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
> money.

Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?

[benj]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 00:54:28 +0000, Gray Guest wrote:

> On 19 May 2013, you wrote in talk.politics.guns:

>> The relevant legal statute is quite clear.
>>
>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>> money.
>
> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?

It's simple. The Tea Party members (known to lefties as "Teabaggers") all
support and defend the constitution of the United States of America which
makes them the enemy of all leftards (known to the media as
"progressives"). And the basic rule is if the president can't make an
"enemies list" and use the IRS to hammer them, then what in hell is this
country coming to? I'd say any president who can't keep his birth
certificate secret for two terms and wiggle out of blame for using the
IRS as political punishment isn't worthy of the office!

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

The tax credits they fraudulently claimed by masquerading as a charity
of course.

[Harold Burton]

In article <hrrlp8520013s19rj...@4ax.com>,

GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 20 May 2013 14:52:17 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <br2jp89n4o9ht5ih4...@4ax.com>,
> > GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:22:13 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
> >> <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"
> >> ><lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
> >> >@news.suddenlink.net:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Seig Heil, fucktard.
> >> >
> >> >Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has
> >> >that
> >> >authority?
> >>
> >> The relevant legal statute is quite clear.
> >>
> >> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
> >> money.
> >
> >
> >When was Tea Party given taxpayer money?
>
> The tax credits they fraudulently claimed by masquerading as a charity
> of course.

Cite?


Leftards, liars every last one of them.


snicker

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Did you miss it first time around?

http://doggett.house.gov/index.php/news/571-doggett-challenges-gop-exploitation-of-irs-failure-

[RM V2.0]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message
news:hrrlp8520013s19rj...@4ax.com...

Just when you think you can't get any dumber.... Since when do credits
equate to giving cash? Refunds are not even "tax payer" money in the sense
you speak of but their own money being returned to them. If you ever get a
job you might understand the difference.

[RM V2.0]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message

news:sq2mp8lk9knp6d9dc...@4ax.com...

So explain why ACORN is tax exempt.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Obviously you are unaware of EITCs but we digress, so back to the Tea
Party fraudsters.

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section
501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Charitable-Organizations/The-Restriction-of-Political-Campaign-Intervention-by-Section-501%28c%29%283%29-Tax-Exempt-Organizations

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations
are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating
in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in
opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.

Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of
position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in
favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly
violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.

Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of
tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

[Mike Smith]

That has nothing to do with the TEA Party. They are advocating for
less government, less tax, and more common sense from our government.

They are advocating for what they believe in, just like the NAACP and
other tax-exempt libtard organizations.

Mike Smith

[benj]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 03:09:58 -0500, RM V2.0 wrote:

> So explain why ACORN is tax exempt.

That would be because they are leftwing Obama supporters.

Politics: Reward your friends, punish your enemies.

[Aviroce]

IRS INVESTIGATIONS OF TAX EXEMPT GROUPS IS MANDATORY TO MAINTAIN TAX
EXEMPTION
By Aviroce

Jews have been caught with their pants down. Although none of those
in the administration is involved in the IRS investigations or
auditing, the idea of such IRS investigations is fair and equitable
and mandatory to make sure those who ask for Exemption from Taxes are
really qualified. I pay about 32% in income taxes and I do not see
why others pay much less. Taxes should be the burden of every
American in a fair share.
Why Jews then? There is an Arabic proverb that goes like this, "You
bald-headed man we do not know where to kiss you from." The head and
the cheeks are the same. Now you may understand why this
investigation targets Jews, called in this case "Conservatives" and
sometimes they call themselves "Neo-Conservatives" and they mix with
the Republican Party so well that you cannot distinguish who is who.
These end up as acts of subversion, evasion, and criminal deception
to
defraud the American people.
A Jew is a member of a race. A Jew is a member of a church.
Recently, a Jew was defined as a Zionist so that a Jew is a Zionist
and a Zionist is a Jew. These diabolical attributes of a Jew can be
misleading, deceiving and with intention to defraud the American
people. When it comes to a Jew and taxes, a Jew declares himself as a
religious figure entitled for exemption on the basis of religious
beliefs. Money saved from such exemption has been used for political
Jew agenda such as colonization of Palestine, providing services to a
foreign state and many times is to give the state of Israel economic
advantages even most Americans cannot enjoy and the Jews are having a
ball at the expense of the American people.
Although even Democrats might have such unqualified organizations,
with Jew organizations it is on a wide scale. For instance, The
Zionist Organization of North America and Jewish Community
Organization enjoy tax exemption and these get billions of dollars
tax
exemptions. Granted the Catholic Church has sexual scandals which
really make them look bad. But look at their charity and charitable
contributions to help society. These Catholic charities are indeed
for the good of society. Compared to Jew organizations, such tax
exemptions are used to seal and confine economic power within the Jew
community and pass the same to a foreign country called Israel.
IRS must investigate all non-profit organizations and monitor their
activities to maintain their exemption status. It is enough that
Imperialism and Zionism go hand in hand. But when it comes to taxes
let Zionism be taxed as Imperialism is paid for by after tax money
from the American people.
Aviroce







On May 15, 7:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one

cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
> As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> attention only to conservative groups.
>
> Well, here ya go:
>
> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>
>
> The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
> anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
> on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>
> It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>

> --
> ---
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg...

[Aviroce]

your assumption is false. But investigation of both applicants as
well previously certified is in order. Subversion is indemic.



On May 15, 8:14 am, "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E"
<burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 15, 9:53 am, "Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one

> cares about !" <l...@killer.xcm> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> > I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> > investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> > and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> > attention only to conservative groups.
>
> > Well, here ya go:
>
> > <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>
>
> > The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
> > anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
> > on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>
> > It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> > --
> > ---
>
> >http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_NUZ_fM-TQKQ/Sf9PJCiSbLI/AAAAAAAANYI/wzO53Xg...
>
> > SAVE AMERICA!!
>
> > Spay or neuter
> > your Republican!!
> > --
> > --> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right
>

> But does the IRS have the "right" to deliberately hold up tax exempt
> requests for Obama's "enemies" and fast track tax exempt requests for

> his "friends"?- Hide quoted text -

[Steve Rothstein]

But that would only be fraud if the organization was a 501(c)3
organization. The whole controversy involves 501(c)4 organizations,
which are allowed tax exemptions and to be politically active.

So, there was no fraud, and IRS did show a political bias. You may be
upset with the law, but for the TEA party or ACORN to obey the law, no
fraud occurred, except int he IRS application.

Steve Rothstein

[RD Sandman]

Steve Rothstein <stephan_...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:QMudnf9aod-rCgbM...@earthlink.com:

As long as that political activity is not their paramount purpose.

> So, there was no fraud, and IRS did show a political bias. You may be
> upset with the law, but for the TEA party or ACORN to obey the law, no
> fraud occurred, except int he IRS application.
>
> Steve Rothstein
>

[RM V2.0]

"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message

news:rfcmp8thm7r29kufi...@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 21 May 2013 03:09:30 -0500, "RM V2.0" <BL...@biteme.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message
>>news:hrrlp8520013s19rj...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 14:52:17 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>When was Tea Party given taxpayer money?
>>>
>>> The tax credits they fraudulently claimed by masquerading as a charity
>>> of course.
>>>
>>>
>>Just when you think you can't get any dumber.... Since when do credits
>>equate to giving cash? Refunds are not even "tax payer" money in the sense
>>you speak of but their own money being returned to them. If you ever get a
>>job you might understand the difference.
>
> Obviously you are unaware of EITCs but we digress, so back to the Tea
> Party fraudsters.
>

You are apparently unaware of what an EITC is used for. It is for low income
people and yes they can get more back than they paid in but this is
completely irrelevant to organizations.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <20130521124650.783$T...@newsreader.com>,
dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

> The IRS wasn't investigating the Tea Party/Patriot membership. They were
> peering over the shoulders of the leadership, and what they did with all of
> that money.

OH? So just what were they doing asking for membership lists, reading
material and other irrelevant items if they WEREN'T investigating Tea
Party/Patriot membership?

[Mike Smith]

On 21 May 2013 16:46:50 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>The IRS wasn't investigating the Tea Party/Patriot membership. They were
>peering over the shoulders of the leadership, and what they did with all of
>that money.

Thanks for posting more proof that you libtards are dumber than dirt.

If you had a clue, you would have done a real quick internet search
for what the "leaders" were commanded to produce by the IRS.

Mike Smith

[WangoTango]

In article <XnsA1C6D5628FB6CWe...@78.46.70.116>,
No_email...@wahoo.com says...

> On 19 May 2013, you wrote in talk.politics.guns:
>
> > On Sat, 18 May 2013 04:22:13 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
> ><No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>"Benghazi - A flavored coffee drink that no one cares about !"
> >><lo...@killer.xcm> wrote in news:5193a175$0$12765$bbae4d71
> >>@news.suddenlink.net:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Seig Heil, fucktard.
> >>
> >>Would you care to point out where in the Constitution the gummint has
> >>that authority?
> >
> > The relevant legal statute is quite clear.
> >
> > The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
> > money.
>
> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?

No shit, I didn't get it either.
This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
People are pretty ignorant.

[Jeff M]

On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
[snip]

>>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>>> money.
>>
>> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>
> No shit, I didn't get it either.
> This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
> People are pretty ignorant.

Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.

[Scout]

"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message
news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com...

No, it's not.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subsidies

[Jeff M]

Yes, they are. The fact, the economic concept, and the term of art are
too obvious, common and widely accepted to be intelligently argued or
denied.


Definition of 'Subsidy'
A benefit given by the government to groups or individuals usually in
the form of a cash payment or tax reduction.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/subsidy.asp
-----
Tax expenditures can affect more than just the targeted activity. When
certain people or organizations are selected to receive targeted tax
breaks through tax subsidies, the size of the tax base is reduced and
tax rates then have to be increased for everyone in order to bring in an
equivalent amount of revenue to the pre-tax expenditure level. Further,
if a tax subsidy is not expressly intended to make a tax more efficient,
then it will most likely produce an economic inefficiency.
http://subsidyscope.org/tax-subsidies/
-----
tax subsidy
A reduction in the amount of tax that a business has to pay, allowed by
the government for a particular purpose, especially to create jobs.
http://lexicon.ft.com/term?term=tax-subsidy
-----
tax subsidy
noun TAX, GOVERNMENT, ECONOMICS

Definition
a reduction in tax in order to reduce the cost of producing food, a
product, etc.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/business-english/tax-subsidy
-----
subsidy
Definitions
1. Economic benefit (such as a tax allowance or duty rebate) or
financial aid (such as a cash grant or soft loan) provided by a
government to (1) support a desirable activity (such as exports), (2)
keep prices of staples low, (3) maintain the income of the producers of
critical or strategic products, (4) maintain employment levels, or (5)
induce investment to reduce unemployment. The basic characteristic of
all subsidies is to reduce the market price of an item below its cost of
production. Also called subvention.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/subsidy.html
-----
Subsidy
Definition
...
A subsidy normally exemplifies the opposite of a tax, but can also be
given using a reduction of the tax burden. These kinds of subsidy are
generally called tax expenditures.
http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/subsidy
-----
But what is the difference from the standpoint of the industry between a
government transferring funds to it, on one hand, and waiving transfer
payments, i.e. taxes, that the firm would normally make to the
government, on the other? Assume that a firm starting a particular
business is required to pay a business license tax. If the firm receives
a government grant equal to the amount of the tax, there is no question
that this payment, the grant, is a subsidy. Out of the subsidy, the firm
must pay the tax. Alternatively, the government might not grant the
payment, but may simply waive the license tax. Both actions (the
granting of the subsidy and the waiver of the tax) have precisely the
same effect on the firm in that the firm does not pay the tax with its
own money. The waiver is as much a subsidy as is the direct grant.
Therefore, funds need not pass directly from government to workers or
firms for the government policy to constitute a subsidy.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4647e/y4647e05.htm
-----

[Scout]

"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message

news:5_Sdnb1Hy_fT6C_M...@giganews.com...

> On 6/7/2013 4:26 PM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message
>> news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com...
>>> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>>>>>> money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>>>>
>>>> No shit, I didn't get it either.
>>>> This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
>>>> People are pretty ignorant.
>>>
>>> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
>>
>> No, it's not.
>>
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subsidies
>
> Yes, they are. The fact, the economic concept, and the term of art are
> too obvious, common and widely accepted to be intelligently argued or
> denied.
>
>
> Definition of 'Subsidy'
> A benefit given by the government to groups or individuals usually in the
> form of a cash payment or tax reduction.
> http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/subsidy.asp

Sorry, but they aren't a recognized authority on the meaning of language.

Come back when you've got something better than a made up definition.

[Jeff M]

Your sole cite, Merriam Webster's publishers, aren't experts on
economics or economic terms, and obviously you know nothing about the
subject, either.

Also, even using YOUR own cite, entering "subsidy" and clicking the
"encyclopedia" tab, produces the following, proving you wrong:

"Examples of direct subsidies include payments in cash or in kind, while
more-indirect subsidies include governmental provision of goods or
services at prices below the normal market price, governmental purchase
of goods or services at prices above the market price, and *tax
concessions*." [e.a.]
http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/subsidy

More importantly, the sources you oh so conveniently snipped were
written by a diverse assortment of economic experts, and all also prove
you completely wrong, which is doubtless why you childishly felt
compelled to snip them.

Face it, Scout. Once again you've found yourself in way over your head,
didn't have a clue what you were talking about, and were decisively
proved to be wrong.

> Come back when you've got something better than a made up definition.

Come back when you've learned the first thing about economics and
taxation, and have developed at least a minimal degree of common sense
and intellectual honesty and integrity. That should be about, um,
never, I expect.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:53:41 -0500, loon@ wrote:

>As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
>I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
>investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
>and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
>attention only to conservative groups.
>
>Well, here ya go:
>

><http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html>

>
>The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
>anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
>on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.

Not as simple as "same letter". How many? How often? How long was the
processes stretched out, R vs. D?

One of the Congress critters actually said the IRS is completely
innocent and it was all the fault of the conservative applicants. If
they hadn't applied, there would not have been an issue. Now, THAT is
liberal logic at it's best.

>It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !

Soros is a tax dodger? The DNC are tax dodgers? Who knew?

[Scout]

"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message

news:DI6dnTg3e_l_4i_M...@giganews.com...

Oh, they are experts on the meaning of economic terms since they deal with
the meaning of words.

Your cite however is not such a recognized expert.

Come back when you have an authoritative source for meaning that supports
your claim.

[Gray Guest]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in

news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com:

Only to idiots who don't understand the langauge.

--
Refusenik #1

Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.

Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama

[Jeff M]

On 6/8/2013 12:22 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in
> news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>>>>> money.
>>>>
>>>> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>>>
>>> No shit, I didn't get it either.
>>> This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
>>> People are pretty ignorant.
>>
>> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
>>
> Only to idiots who don't understand the langauge.

I understand the *language* perfectly well, certainly better than you
do, as well as economic and tax policy and theory, and the terms of art
therein. You do not.

The concept, although obviously beyond your quite limited grasp, is very
plain and so universally accepted in all relevant professional fields,
which I have already proved unequivocally in this thread, that it is
beyond rational denial. Your ignorance of a fact is no evidence of its
non-existence.

Of course, you have have proven yourself many times over not only to be
rather poorly educated and informed, but also often irrationally blinded
to reality. So the denial of such well established, inarguable facts as
this by you and others of your low, simple-angry sort is hardly
surprising, and serves only as a hallmark of your own ignorance.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:05:31 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org>
wrote:

>On 6/7/2013 4:26 PM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message
>> news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com...
>>> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>>>>>> money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>>>>
>>>> No shit, I didn't get it either.
>>>> This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
>>>> People are pretty ignorant.
>>>
>>> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
>>
>> No, it's not.
>>
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subsidies
>
>Yes, they are. The fact, the economic concept, and the term of art are
>too obvious, common and widely accepted to be intelligently argued or
>denied.

Yet he will continue to bluster and foam.

This guy could get Olympics medals in straw clutching, equivocation
and disingenuousness.

[Jeff M]

On 6/8/2013 7:47 PM, GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:05:31 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/7/2013 4:26 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in message
>>> news:J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com...
>>>> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>>>>>>> money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>>>>>
>>>>> No shit, I didn't get it either.
>>>>> This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
>>>>> People are pretty ignorant.
>>>>
>>>> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
>>>
>>> No, it's not.
>>>
>>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subsidies
>>
>> Yes, they are. The fact, the economic concept, and the term of art are
>> too obvious, common and widely accepted to be intelligently argued or
>> denied.
>
> Yet he will continue to bluster and foam.
>
> This guy could get Olympics medals in straw clutching, equivocation
> and disingenuousness.

I see you've met Scout. ;-) He is a very intellectually dishonest
fellow, indeed. BTW, are you familiar with the Dunning Kruger effect?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 20:02:24 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org>

The self-presentation as an instant expert on any subject under the
sun being discussed is mind boggling.

The text mangling and editing out of cites and replies that are then
imperiously demanded, is just tedious and irritating.

>BTW, are you familiar with the Dunning Kruger effect?
>http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

Interesting and just about nails it, I guess.

Bertrand Russell in The Triumph of Stupidity in the mid 1930s said
that "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world
the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." Even
earlier, Charles Darwin, in The Descent of Man in 1871, stated
"ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 19:46:04 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org>
wrote:

Uh-oh!

Now you've done it. He's going to be threatening to have you murdered
or fed into his wood chipper next.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Nobody asked them to flood the IRS with fraudulent claims of
charitable status did they?

>
>>It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
>Soros is a tax dodger? The DNC are tax dodgers? Who knew?

Getting tax payers to pay their expenses while avoiding paying any tax
themselves is basic Tea Party dogma ,from the corporate welfare
guzzling Koch founders all the way down to the idiotic pawns agitating
for their own Medicare to be cut .

[Jeff M]

I've found that blowhards, bullies, and especially faux tough-guy
poseurs on the infobahn are uniformly cowards.

[Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E]

On Jun 9, 2:41 am, GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 18:09:43 -0700, Winston_Smith
>
>
>
>
>
> <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> >On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:53:41 -0500, loon@ wrote:
>
> >>As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
> >>I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
> >>investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
> >>and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
> >>attention only to conservative groups.
>
> >>Well, here ya go:
>

> >><http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-demo...>

>
> >>The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
> >>anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
> >>on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>
> >Not as simple as "same letter". How many? How often? How long was the
> >processes stretched out, R vs. D?
>
> >One of the Congress critters actually said the IRS is completely
> >innocent and it was all the fault of the conservative applicants. If
> >they hadn't applied, there would not have been an issue. Now, THAT is
> >liberal logic at it's best.
>
> Nobody asked them to flood the IRS with fraudulent claims of
> charitable status did they?
>
>
>
> >>It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>
> >Soros is a tax dodger? The DNC are tax dodgers? Who knew?
>
> Getting tax payers to pay their expenses while avoiding paying any tax
> themselves is basic Tea Party dogma ,from the corporate welfare
> guzzling Koch founders all the way down to the idiotic pawns agitating

> for their own Medicare to be cut .- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

But, it's perfectly OK for any leftwing related groups to "dodge
taxes".

[Winston_Smith]

On Sun, 09 Jun 2013 00:41:45 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
<D...@null.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 18:09:43 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:53:41 -0500, loon@ wrote:
>>
>>>As I suspected, there's both more and less to this than meets the eye.
>>>I said elsewhere that the IRS has the authority and the duty to
>>>investigate the eligibility of groups applying for tax-exempt status,
>>>and that there isn't an issue of illegality unless the IRS directed its
>>>attention only to conservative groups.
>>>
>>>Well, here ya go:
>>>
>>><http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row.html>
>>>
>>>The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted
>>>anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye
>>>on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status.
>>
>>Not as simple as "same letter". How many? How often? How long was the
>>processes stretched out, R vs. D?
>>
>>One of the Congress critters actually said the IRS is completely
>>innocent and it was all the fault of the conservative applicants. If
>>they hadn't applied, there would not have been an issue. Now, THAT is
>>liberal logic at it's best.
>
>Nobody asked them to flood the IRS with fraudulent claims of
>charitable status did they?

The flaw here is your assertion that they were fraudulent. In most
cases the IRS approved them. Just long after the election was over and
after the legal processes drained the cash they wanted to spend on
propaganda.

You are displaying liberal logic at it's best.

>>>It is good to see IRS going after tax dodgers !
>>
>>Soros is a tax dodger? The DNC are tax dodgers? Who knew?
>
>Getting tax payers to pay their expenses while avoiding paying any tax
>themselves is basic Tea Party dogma,

Got a cite?

>from the corporate welfare guzzling Koch founders

You told us about Koch; what's Soro's position on the matter?

Corporate welfare? Shall we talk about the dozen, now bankrupt, green
energy companies 0bama pushed? How's those GM (Government Motors)
Volts selling?

If importing things from China is cheaper for the average sheeple and
makes his life better - we are told by liberals that's a good thing.
But if solar panels, in competition with the UState run Solyndra and
such, make energy cheaper for the sheeple, (and our country greener)
why, that 's a bad thing and the Great and Powerful 0 slaps a tariff
on it. And then bitches about China's closed markets. More liberal
logic.

>all the way down to the idiotic pawns agitating
>for their own Medicare to be cut .

Too late. 0bama care has already cut it. The facts are just hidden
until later.


So then all the liberal business and celebrities, routinely file a
1040EZ with no deductions, no tax accountants, no tax attorneys, and
then kick in a million or two extra just to be certain? Is that the
theory your liberal logic has led you to?

You forgot to mention Apple, GE, and a bunch of other liberal, tax
avoiding companies. Like many party-loyalist, liberal sheeples, you
confuse avoidance with evasion (intentionally I'm sure). As long as we
have tax laws written by liberal lobbyists, anyone with a brain is
going to take advantage of every legal loophole in sight. The
loopholes are there for liberals and they sure do get upset when
someone else uses "their" loopholes.

When is 0bama going to fix the tax laws?

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Don't be silly.

It was a Republican that caught his fellow wing nuts at it.

http://whbl.com/news/articles/2013/jun/09/democrat-irs-testimony-shows-no-white-house-involvement/

WASHINGTON, June 9 (Reuters) - A U.S. Internal Revenue Service
manager, who described himself as a conservative Republican, told
congressional investigators that he and a local colleague decided to
give conservative groups the extra scrutiny that has prompted weeks of
political controversy.

In an official interview transcript released on Sunday by Democratic
Representative Elijah Cummings, the manager said he and an underling
set aside "Tea Party" and "patriot" groups that had applied for
tax-exempt status because the organizations appeared to pose a new
precedent that could affect future IRS filings.

Cummings, top Democrat on the House of Representatives Oversight and
Government Reform Committee conducting the probe, told CNN's "State of
the Union" program that the manager's comments provided evidence that
politics was not behind IRS actions that have fueled a month-long
furor in Washington.

"He is a conservative Republican working for the IRS. I think this
interview and these statements go a long way toward showing that the
White House was not involved in this," Cummings told CNN's "State of
the Union" program.

"Based upon everything I've seen, the case is solved. And if it were
me, I would wrap this case up and move on," he added.

[WangoTango]

In article <J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com>,
NoS...@NoThanks.org says...

I guess maybe in your world.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

Only on the Tea Party Fantasy Island is it not the case.

Oil and Gas Tax Breaks: $2.4 billion a year

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporate_Welfare/Oil_Tax_Breaks.html

Like the percentage depletion allowance just described, the oil
depletion allowance lets certain companies deduct 15% of the gross
income they derive from oil and gas wells from their taxable incomes,
and continue to do that for as long as those wells are still
producing.

Some smaller companies get to increase the deduction by 1% for every
dollar the price of oil falls below $20 a barrel.

This tax break, on which we lose about $1 billion a year, can add up
to many times the cost of the original exploration and drilling. In
fact, it formerly could amount to 100% of the company's profits-in
which case the company paid no taxes, no matter how much money it
made. Presently this is capped at 65% of profits.

The rationale for this loophole is that it encourages exploration for
new oil-presumably something no oil company would otherwise do. Oil
industry executives argue that other businesses are allowed to
depreciate the costs of their manufacturing investments. That's true,
but they're only allowed to take off the actual cost of those assets,
not deduct 15% of their gross income virtually forever.


Introduced in 1926, the oil depletion allowance was restricted in 1975
to independent oil companies that don't refine or import oil. To make
up for this, the larger, integrated companies were given the
intangible drilling cost deduction, which in some ways is even better.
It lets them deduct 70% of the cost of setting up a drilling operation
in the year those expenses occur, rather than having to depreciate
them over the expected life of the well. The other 30% they can take
off over the next five years. This boondoggle costs us about $500
million a year.

A third tax break is the enhanced oil recovery credit. It encourages
oil companies to go after reserves that are more expensive to
extract-like those that have nearly been depleted, or that contain
especially thick crude oil. The net effect of this credit, which costs
us $500 million a year, is that we pay almost twice as much for
gasoline made from domestic oil as we do for gas made from foreign
oil.

[WangoTango]

In article <hogfr8p2vdvqa66ur...@4ax.com>, D...@null.net
says...

> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:05:45 -0400, WangoTango
> <Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com>,
> >NoS...@NoThanks.org says...
> >> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> >>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
> >> >>> money.
> >> >>
> >> >> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
> >> >
> >> > No shit, I didn't get it either.
> >> > This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
> >> > People are pretty ignorant.
> >>
> >> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
> >
> >I guess maybe in your world.
>
> Only on the Tea Party Fantasy Island is it not the case.
>
> Oil and Gas Tax Breaks: $2.4 billion a year
>

You sure went to a lot of trouble to harp about something that has
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Tea Party. Want to try keeping on
topic? Tell me how much the Tea Party has "cost" you.

[GOP_Decline_and_Fall]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:08:27 -0400, WangoTango

<Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <hogfr8p2vdvqa66ur...@4ax.com>, D...@null.net
>says...
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:05:45 -0400, WangoTango
>> <Asga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <J6GdncsGKfFE1S_M...@giganews.com>,
>> >NoS...@NoThanks.org says...
>> >> On 6/7/2013 3:51 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>> >> [snip]
>> >> >>> The Tea Party should never have been given even a cent of taxpayers
>> >> >>> money.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Whatnthe fuck are you babbling about now, you simpering chimp?
>> >> >
>> >> > No shit, I didn't get it either.
>> >> > This is a non-profit organization thing, not a government grant thing.
>> >> > People are pretty ignorant.
>> >>
>> >> Tax breaks and exemptions are forms of taxpayer funded subsidies.
>> >
>> >I guess maybe in your world.
>>
>> Only on the Tea Party Fantasy Island is it not the case.
>>
>> Oil and Gas Tax Breaks: $2.4 billion a year
>>
>You sure went to a lot of trouble to harp about something that has
>ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Tea Party.

What an odd idea that mushrooming fraudulent claims of charitable
status by Tea Party activist groups has nothing to do with the Tea

Party.

>Want to try keeping on
>topic? Tell me how much the Tea Party has "cost" you.

With their gridlock in the self-declared "do nothing" House they have
time and time again brought the whole country to the point of
bankruptcy, not to mention destroying the Republican party they
infiltrated and severely damaging the reputation of America at home
and abroad.