http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-documents-show-irs-hq-control-tea-party-targeting/
I know it's not news, but maybe it should be.
.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
I've been following these stories pretty close.
It's not just the IRS, but DOJ, EVEN the VA.
On May 15, 2014 9:45 AM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-documents-show-irs-hq-control-tea-party-targeting/
I know it's not
And the Senate and the White House.
.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:30 AM, LRS Scout lrssc...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been following these stories pretty close.
It's not just the IRS, but DOJ, EVEN the VA.
On May 15, 2014 9:45 AM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
What if they only targeted conservative groups?
.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.comwrote:
Political-identified groups should be targeted for extra scrutiny when
applying for 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4).
I'd be interested in hearing what you have around
Political-identified groups should be targeted for extra scrutiny when
applying for 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4).
I'd be interested in hearing what you have around the DOJ and VA though.
Cheers,
Judah
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 7:30 AM, LRS Scout lrssc...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been following these
Extra scrutiny, yes, of course. And since the name of the group is often
indicative of their politicization, just a name search on buzzwords seems
reasonable. Regardless of political stance.
But punitive or extra scrutiny due to the specific beliefs is
anti-American, in my opinion. (again,
Let me see if I understand you correctly.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson jmi...@gmail.comwrote:
Extra scrutiny, yes, of course. And since the name of the group is often
indicative of their politicization, just a name search on buzzwords seems
reasonable. Regardless of
501(c)(4) has been a particularly abused tax-free structure for political
groups (of all persuasions). I really, really don't appreciate political
groups pretending to be cultural welfare organizations. It is blatantly
offensive to me and a crass end around what little campaign finance rules
we
From what I understand the only group to be denied 501(c) status was a
progressive group, the Maine chapter of Emerge America, which trains
Democratic women to run for office.
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/meet_the_group_the_irs_actually_revoked_democrats/
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:43 PM,
excellent point and I wholeheartedly agree.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.comwrote:
501(c)(4) has been a particularly abused tax-free structure for political
groups (of all persuasions). I really, really don't appreciate political
groups pretending to be
Larry Klayman's group is not the most objective. Its sort of like on
the radical extremist fringe of the right wing.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
So you have determined that free speech does not include political speech?
BTW, you seem fine with liberal groups not being audited. What other type
of speech would you like to shut down?
.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com wrote:
excellent
As typical, you understand things incorrectly.
.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Larry C. Lyons larrycly...@gmail.comwrote:
From what I understand the only group to be denied 501(c) status was a
progressive group, the Maine chapter of Emerge America, which trains
Democratic women to run
We're not discussing the messenger, we're discussing the content of the
emails obtained through the FOIA. Are you saying the emails are fake?
.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Larry C. Lyons larrycly...@gmail.comwrote:
Larry Klayman's group is not the most objective. Its sort of like on
14 matches
Mail list logo
