OK. Lets go over the scandal number two of the week because I think I helped simmer that other one (Beghazi) down…After we wrote that blurb up about that non issue of a story, it trickled outward right away to msnbc, and then eventually up to the Pres. They used my exact wording (odd) too…so lets keep this real thing going to see where it lands….and also….its ONLY Tuesday mind u but lets dissect the IRS thing by first by allowing me to give my one affiliation with the IRS. And, then again, I want to break that down too…
Back in 91 and/or maybe it was 92, we had an intern in our department at my job at that time, that worked at the IRS…In Vermont
though….He said to me first hand which I am paraphrasing today, but in a nutshell that his co workers at the IRS, and, at that time, hated (or loved) seeing people’s write offs per se, by us staff people in the in the entertainment industry.
Remember, this was 1991 and for people to be writing off going to concerts, or writing off gas when going out to clubs to see music every night, and/or so to speak that is; annoyed the people at the IRS. Or it made them angry that people would consider that to be work, let alone to have the audacity to write off that type of thing, on any tax form.
Now today, and especially during the Bush II years, you have people in production working for 4 weeks. The production ends. And, these people get to somehow start collecting unemployment insurance money in between their Indy contracted jobs. Then, these same people go back on salary again for another bunch of weeks during the same production and then when that ends, they start collecting unemployment insurance, again,….and they do that many times in a year…My point is that these reps at the IRS back then, targeted all music and entertainment people that went to write off what would be considered to be fun, in the eyes of the people that work at the IRS. I will also say that humanized them to me, for the first time in my life. I never thought of the IRS staffers, as people, until then or until I had met one I real life.
Regardless about my only first hand experience with the IRS, I am saying that anyone can be targeted, as they say. And I assume its age old; especially, if what was said to me, was stipulated by IRS people in 1991 and 1992. Not that its right, but I am just saying that its gone on for decades, but just said in different ways. But, also (also) I must assume these generalizations if you will, are based on some science. for instance, Ill get to the round about problem in that regard because we are in bad cycle that allows it to be this way.
First, second and third is that there were a ton of new non profits that were considered to be right winged or tea potty people, that sprouted up at the same time in 2010. The irony is that most of them, should NOT have been issued any tax exempt status
. But that is what I am going to figure out today. If you look at it that way, and you have many new non profits opening up in a short time frame, it makes absolute sense from a science POV, that they would get flags raised because of those filings. Just because of the numbers.
Then it goes back to being real about it because in reality, you cannot file that way unless you … well I am going to stop there because that brings me to the law.
I am now going to try to piece together what Ezra Klein
(Post & Wonk Blog) and Lawrence O’ Donnell
(Last Word) and then what I think Jonathan Chait
) is emphasizing or trying to emphasize about that scandal that I am now calling #2 of the week…(and again…its only Tues not even 1Pm east coast time)…..
There is a term or provision in the tax law code, 501C4
. That gives anyone that provides “social welfare
” to file for tax exempt purposes with the Internal Revenue Service
, or the IRS. It is stated that it is set up for “social welfare organizations, civic league or organizations not organized for profit but operated EXCLUSIVELY for the promotion of social welfare.” The word exclusively was amended back in 1959 to state that it “to be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate PRIMARILY to further the common good and general welfare of the community.”
The word primarily was added in these IRS laws, by the IRS themselves. They took it upon themselves to change the wording from EXCLUSIVE, to the word/term, PRIMARY. This was not done aby any Pres. or anyone on the Gov. of the USA
. It was done internally by the law makers within the IRS organization. Therefore, we must ask then what is the literal meaning of the word primary (see below)?
Most of all, and fundamentally here, is that do the organizations with the words “tea” and “party”in it, represent “the community and social welfare to further the common good and/or the promotion of social welfare for the benefit of the community?” The woman on Hardball last night, from that Tea Potty Organization admitted to it being political and I don’t even know if she knew what she was doing to herself because that’s the scam.
Its how do political organizations get this tax exempt status?
Because we, the tax payers, are paying for it. We subsidize any and every “tax exempt” company that falls under the 501C4 provision. And, we are paying for organizations like the ones that have the words, “tea” and “party” in it, to get tax free ads placed everywhere that not only are for political reasons, they also attack liberals, and dem’s in every ad. Therefore, should these people even be given these tax exempt statuses in the first places? They are 110% political and like I mentioned the one on Hardball last night that make no bones about where they stand on that political level. We have these political organizations with the ability to buy political ads in support of political candidates while attacking the opponents in any political race all hidden behind that tax exempt law. And, again, the IRS took it upon themselves to change that up so organizations can hide behind that vague tax exempt law.
Next thing about the term PRIMARY vs. EXCLUSIVE is the crazy thing here because under that same clause, you can be anonymous when filing using the 501C4 tax exempt code. You do NOT have to stipulate any of the names of any donor when filing that way. That way, along with being primarily political, they can spend up to what? 51% on ads which brings me back to the word primary. What does that mean because Lawrence (O’ Donnell) railed it off fast last night on his show, but here is the dictionary meaning of the word:
pri·ma·ri·ly [prahy-mair-uh-lee, -mer-, prahy-mer-uh-lee, -mer-uh-] Show IPA
1. essentially; mostly; chiefly; principally: They live primarily from farming.
2. in the first instance; at first; originally: Primarily a doctor, he later became a lawyer.
It says nothing about primary meaning 51% out of 100%.
Now it works both ways just like Ezra (Klein) says because no way in the history of man kind should the likes of Karl Rove’s group, American Crossroads GPS, and under no circumstance should Obama’s Organizing For America, be permitted that tax exempt status. yet they do get it.
But anyway…or overall…that’s the loaded gun fro the IRS. There is no way they could ever win no matter what the time, when you mention this on a surface level when in reality, you will see about it…laws will lessen….and you will get much more un regulation of this law….and provision…..The IRS aint going near this one and nor did they ever want to do it.
There are two ironies here and one is that more organizations that are political, will seep in to this status under this tax law. While again, the IRS stays hands off not saying a word to not allow it…and the other irony is that everyone is freaking out that the IRS is doing too much when that is NOT the case, they are doing too little…they should NOT be allowing certain elements under this tax exempt status. The scrutiny should be directed at them NOT rejecting these groups that they allowed to file this way.
Oh and last issue is that this NOT an attack on anyone. Nixon attacked his enemies during his time. He ordered audits on his people that were against his ways. that’s an attack on people’s rights, while abusing your power in office. Bush I audited the NAACP. But again, this issue today with the IRS, is being talked about before any audit happened like the ones I mention are an attack on people.
This is merely a look at whether they should be allowed to deal that way in the first place. That’s what not getting emphasized here. That’s the smoke screen here. Its not what is being led to believe in the media. Its kept so vague because this admin does NOT have a clue how to talk to the people. He is built on emotion. which is great to see….but, again, we need to be told about it in this simple way. it needs to be spelled out by them for real. This admin never deals head on that way.
Because think about what they (Ezra (Klein), Lawrence (O’ Donnell), Jonathan (Chait), etc….) are saying here….We are technically upset at them (IRS) because of the what they are supposed to be doing when we should be mad at what they are not doing. Its diabolical if you think about it. Its brilliant to be able to manipulate us that way….But it really is not what it seems…..
And, then scandal #3 of the week (AP)….is one I have no clue about but I will say that if anyone thinks that anything we do is private…and that everything about us is not accessible to anyone, if they make the efforts, is a fool that is delusional because I live my life knowing that I am being heard by anyone that wants to hear what I say. I don’t condone it, but we lost our privacy after 9/11.
Overall though as far as scandal number two of the week, I just don’t know why I am paying for tax exempt companies that are political just because the IRS is too scared to turn these groups that are scamming our tax system, down in the first places. It is so much easier to just say that how the Gov is interfering in your freedoms…its so easy to just leave it at that sentence….
Its just NOT the real scam with regard the IRS….