3 ms·
1. The IRS thing is completely separate from the NSA stuff, and the comment I responded to was discussing the NSA. 2. The IRS stuff is also way more complicate
by shardling 13y ago
1. The IRS thing is completely separate from the NSA stuff, and the comment I responded to was discussing the NSA.
2. The IRS stuff is also way more complicated than it seems. They're supposed to target political organizations, because they don't qualify for the tax-exempt status. And there was really only one large political movement forming new organizations in that time frame. I haven't seen any actual ( as opposed to speculative) connection to the "political elites" yet. Everything I've read points to institutional laziness rather than a politically instigated targeting.
Now, I'm not saying these things shouldn't be investigated! But claiming that they should currently be as big a scandal as Watergate doesn't sit right with me. It diminishes just how fucked up Watergate was.
- protomyth 13y ago"They're supposed to target political organizations, because they don't qualify for the tax-exempt status." This is untrue given that the former Obama campaign organization converted (and was approved) to change to a 501(c)4 and has the mission of advocating his 2nd term agenda. This was political targeting just like what FDR did many years ago. Who actually approved it is the question.
- shardling 13y agoBy "political" I really meant "involved in elections". (Which the organization you mention no longer is.) Sorry, sloppy language on my part.
- protomyth 13y agoThe actual rule is http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/irm_07-025-004.html#d0e332 http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/irm_07-025-004.html#d0e332