Tea Partiers harassed by IRS?

[CountDeMoney]

It was little low-level desk jockeys in Cincinnati trying to figure out a way to streamline the vetting for all the applications they got buried with.  That's all.

Like I said: nothing to see here, move along.

[derspiess]

  Don't ever change, Seedy.

[alfred russel]

The IRS admitted it was inappropriate to target only specifically political groups of a certain political bent. Since Presidents in the past have at times abused the IRS to punish political opponents it should come as no surprise there are internal guidelines against such things. So there's really no debate about that, the IRS did wrong. If it was just over-reach by some bureaucrats that the Inspector General has found and that will be dealt with, there's no problem. If the IRS Commissioner has lied about knowing about it (as it appears he has) he probably needs to lose his job for lying.

It's also worth looking into whether anyone associated with President Obama's campaign had anything to do with this heightened scrutiny. I honestly doubt that it was White House driven or directed, but it's something that out of due diligence needs to be investigated. If it is found to be so, you're basically talking Watergate style improper activity FWIW.

Delusions of Watergate aside  , I wonder to the extent this gets exploited. From what I understand from talking to people that have worked for Koch Industries, for instance, they take some extremely aggressive tax positions--tax positions that a public company would be reluctant to take because of the scrutiny they would be under (and very often they are buying public companies and taking them private). It could be their Republican patronage is in part motivated to make any serious IRS action against them seem partisan and also give them political allies in a fight.

[Admiral Yi]

I'm saying the only thing the IRS can be accused of in this situation is excessive apologizing to make up for organizational low self-esteem, which one expects from the most universally despised organ of the Federal government, with the notable exception of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

It's unfortunate the IRS has to feel the need to apologize for this, but only in an overly politicized atmosphere where "talking points" can equate "cover up" for frothing right wingnutters can "additional scrutiny" of an application for tax exemption equal "targeting".

This is a reasonable (i.e. not totally wacky) narrative of the events.  It does however have two major problems.  One is that the IRS does not have an institutional history of apologizing publicly for doing its job correctly.  The other is the statement of Lois Lerhner, who said she learned in a meeting that organizations with Tea Party associated names were being targeted for extra scrutiny and information.

The ship may have already sailed on this one Seedy.  There's an article in today's NYT by Ross Douhot (not exactly a Tea Party standard bearer) taking the targeting as given and drawing it into what he calls a pattern of "Brown Scares"--exaggerated and hyped fear of right-wing extremism.  Raz might enjoy that article.

[Razgovory]

I would think that flying a plane into an IRS building is extreme.

Oh, and here's the IRS apologizing about something in March.  http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/03/27/irs-apologizes-for-star-trek-video-as-congress-jumps-at-chance-to-criticize-spending/

[Admiral Yi]

Thanks for sharing Raz.

[11B4V]

Typical Obama BS. Like Benghazi. Dead Amassador, just a protest over a film, not a teerorist attack...... Oh wait the elections over, it's a terrorist attack.

Obama=Nothing to see here

[CountDeMoney]

The ship may have already sailed on this one Seedy.

Bah.  Bah, I say.

If Citizens United didn't unleash the floodgates for every nut with a tricorn, a musket and a picture of Obama in a Nazi uniform to file for tax exemption, there'd be no need to take a closer look at organizations applying for "social welfare" status. 

Bah.

[CountDeMoney]

Typical Obama BS. Like Benghazi. Dead Amassador, just a protest over a film, not a teerorist attack...... Oh wait the elections over, it's a terrorist attack.

Obama=Nothing to see here

[11B4V]

Typical Obama BS. Like Benghazi. Dead Amassador, just a protest over a film, not a teerorist attack...... Oh wait the elections over, it's a terrorist attack.

Obama=Nothing to see here

It will come out eventually. Until then, not even on my radar. Same with the IRS targeting.

[Sheilbh]

If it was just over-reach by some bureaucrats that the Inspector General has found and that will be dealt with, there's no problem. If the IRS Commissioner has lied about knowing about it (as it appears he has) he probably needs to lose his job for lying.

Yep.

It's also worth looking into whether anyone associated with President Obama's campaign had anything to do with this heightened scrutiny. I honestly doubt that it was White House driven or directed, but it's something that out of due diligence needs to be investigated.

And I'd add that it may not be under direction from Obama's campaign - though that would be far more serious. It could be a case of bureaucrats trying to curry favour with their political bosses by being a little over-officious against their opponents. In which case there's another sort of problem that needs addressing.

Typical Obama BS. Like Benghazi. Dead Amassador, just a protest over a film, not a teerorist attack...... Oh wait the elections over, it's a terrorist attack.

There's a thread for this. But I still don't get the issue over Benghazi. I think it's bollocks. Allegations wafting on the insubstantial wish that there's a scandal. What's the alleged cover-up covering up?

[OttoVonBismarck]

A Wall Street Journal update:

IRS Scrutiny Was Deeper Than Thought

By JOHN D. MCKINNON

WASHINGTON—Government investigators have found that the Internal Revenue Service scrutinized conservative groups for raising political concerns over government spending, debt and taxes or even for advocating making America a better place to live, according to new details likely to inflame a widening IRS controversy.

The latest details about the IRS handling of applications for tax-exempt status by tea party, patriot and other conservative groups in recent years were provided to congressional investigators by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. The findings were reviewed Sunday by The Wall Street Journal.

On Friday, a top IRS official said the agency was "apologetic" for what she termed "absolutely inappropriate" actions by lower-level workers in selecting some conservative groups for extra scrutiny to determine whether their applications should be approved. The official, Lois Lerner, said that agency workers picked groups for extra scrutiny according to whether they had "tea party" or "patriot" in their names, among other criteria.

The new details suggest that agency workers also were examining statements in the groups' applications to determine whether they had a political leaning.

Tax-exempt groups organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code are allowed to engage in some political activity, but the primary focus of their efforts must remain promoting "social welfare."

Promoting social welfare can include lobbying and advocacy for issues and legislation, but not outright political campaign activity. But some of the rules leave room for IRS officials to make judgment calls and probe individual groups for further information.

The inspector general office has been conducting an audit of the IRS handling of the applications process. Its report is expected to be released this week.

The audit follows complaints during 2012 by numerous tea-party and other conservative groups that they had been singled out and subjected to excessive and inappropriate questioning. Many groups say they were asked for lists of their donors and other sensitive information.

IRS officials said last week that the focused review of conservative groups was initiated by lower-level civil servants in the IRS Cincinnati office, not by political appointees in Washington, and was not politically motivated. Instead, they say it stemmed from a misguided effort to centralize review of a growing number of applications for tax-exempt 501(c)(4) status.

On Sunday, a government official said that the inspector general report also will note that IRS officials said no one outside the IRS was involved in developing the criteria that the IRS now acknowledges were flawed.

Some but not all of the detailed findings likely will appear in the inspector general report.

The findings provided to congressional investigators show that some IRS workers in 2010-2011 weren't just singling out groups according to their names, as IRS officials suggested on Friday. Instead, they apparently were probing the applications themselves for indications of political interests or leanings.

"From February through August 2010, no official criteria [for the heightened review] existed, but specialists had been asked to be on the lookout for Tea Party applications, and the IRS Determinations Unit had begun searching its database for applications with 'Tea Party,' 'Patriots,' or '9/12' in the organization's name as well as other 'political sounding' names," according to the detailed Treasury inspector general findings.

By June 2011, some IRS specialists were probing applications using the following criteria to identify tea-party cases, according to the Treasury inspector general findings: "'Tea Party,' 'Patriots' or '9/12 Project' is referenced in the case file; issues include government spending, government debt or taxes; education of the public by advocacy/lobbying to 'make America a better place to live'; statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run."

The criteria since have been revised at the insistence of top IRS officials to be more neutral.

[Admiral Yi]

Bah.  Bah, I say.

If Citizens United didn't unleash the floodgates for every nut with a tricorn, a musket and a picture of Obama in a Nazi uniform to file for tax exemption, there'd be no need to take a closer look at organizations applying for "social welfare" status. 

Bah.

This is a good point, one I hadn't considered.  It is after all basic human nature, when confronted with a sudden deluge of work which can not possibly be accomplished in the time allotted, to ask for additional work.

[OttoVonBismarck]

And like I said I do not believe the White House had anything to do with this whatsoever. I simply do not believe that is what happened. All I was saying is if they did it would be a serious issue, it'd be abuse of power to harm opposition groups during an election. That's as serious as it gets in terms of political misdeeds in this country.

The public good requires that the IRS be a trusted (but obviously not loved) entity, there cannot be even the appearance that the IRS is used for political means by the party in control of the White House. For that reason, while I think the Inspector General from Treasury appears to have done an amazing job (and in fact deserves credit for uncovering this--something in itself that reinforces the integrity of Treasury and the IRS), we do need some level of scrutiny to produce "public assurance" that this was indeed what it appears to be--overzealous bureaucrats.

If IRS Commissioner Shulman knew about this improper activity from subordinates, especially before the 2012 House Ways and Means Subcommittee meeting where he testified about it, and did not disclose it, that's the ball game for him. I don't think Shulman has anything to do with the heightened scrutiny, I do think it was just overzealous bureaucrats and they cleaned it up and made sure the policy was fixed when it was discovered. But at his level of government, you don't get a free pass. Actually for his sake he better not have been lying before the House because that would make him indictable for perjury. But even if he learned about it after his House testimony last year, he has repeatedly made statements denying anyone at the higher levels knew about it (which we know categorically is false) so even just for lying to the public about this (assuming he truly didn't know back i 2012 when he testified) is enough to me, to injure the integrity of the IRS that he needs to go.

[11B4V]

There's a thread for this. But I still don't get the issue over Benghazi. I think it's bollocks. Allegations wafting on the insubstantial wish that there's a scandal. What's the alleged cover-up covering up?

I'll sit and wait on this and Benghazi. The turds will float to the top, always does. Whether the turds are the GOP (Tea Party) investigating or State Department incompetence or inappropriate practices by the IRS.  Either way it will come out. Clinton will be scrutinized to the umpteenth degree, for the Benghazi issue, if she steps on the stage for the 2016 Prez run. 

I didnt like Romney, nor did I vote for him. He should have drilled the Black Jesus in the debate over Benghazi. A major error on his part.

Obama administration is not transparent. Oh wait, that was a campaign promise was it not?    What's his legacy going to be? Obama-care