Sessions heaps taxpayer "settlement" payoff money on Tea Party, just before 2018 election, decides IRS was guilty.

This is what happens when you turn the Justice Department into an activist arm of the Republican Party by a former Republican Senator. Who would believe them? This stinks. It's a settlement, and a sneaky way to bypassing a decision by our courts. Was anyone proven guilty? Nope, but red meat loving Trumpian's are loving it. Oh, the liberal groups targeted got nothing...odd?

Tea Party groups hit the jackpot:

Justice Department Settles With Conservative Groups Over IRS Scrutiny: The Justice Department on Thursday announced it has reached settlements in a pair of lawsuits led by conservative groups that claimed they had been unfairly scrutinized by the IRS. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement Thursday that the criteria IRS agents used to flag the groups was "inappropriate" and "disproportionately impacted conservative groups," though a government watchdog report released this month suggested liberal groups faced similar scrutiny. This month's report by the inspector general's office for the IRS showed the agency also used words like "occupy," "green energy" and "progressive" to flag groups for scrutiny as well.

Republican Entitlement: their own Tax Delinquency's are okay, despite being 5 Times more prevalent than IRS employees.

In what should have been a completely embarrassing moment of elitist thinking and flat out hypocrisy by House Republican (including all WI Republican members except Ryan), oddly turned out to be anything but. They're in charge, and they get to work under a different set of rules than the rest of us. It was a high five moment for Democrats, who decided not to sit back and take it anymore. Roll Call:

IRS STAFF WITH TAX PROBLEMS: The House passed a GOP-drafted bill (HR 1206) that would prohibit the Internal Revenue Service from adding staff until it either (a) vouches that none of its 80,000 employees have a “serious” tax-delinquency not being resolved or (b) reports to Congress on why it cannot provide such a certification. Republicans said it was “hypocrisy” for IRS employees to have their own tax problems.

Real Hypocrisy? The Democrats made an important point to ivory tower Republican political elitists:

Democrats said tax delinquency by congressional staffs is five times more prevalent than at the IRS.

So the Democrats made Republicans vote on it. Republicans didn’t back down though, essentially saying they were special, more deserving, entitled, and aren't subject to the same standards than the people they serve:

The House defeated a bid by Democrats to negate HR 1206 (above) whenever serious tax delinquency on congressional staffs exceeds that at the Department of the Treasury, the parent agency of the IRS. The congressional rate is about 5 percent, compared to 1.19 percent at Treasury and 9 percent in the population at large, according to floor debate on this motion.

Voting yes were Mark Pocan, Ron Kind, and Gwen Moore.

Our elitist father figure authoritarian “leaders” voted in their own self interest; Jim Sensenbrenner, Glenn Grothman, Shawn Duffy, and Reid Ribble.

Tax Time Nightmare another gift from corporate America.

Check out the following expose from Ezra Klein about the tax software scheme by Intuit and H&R Block to make lots of money from an unsuspecting publilc. This is something I didn't know anything about.

For most Americans every dollar made, including our current family status, is already known by the IRS. It would be simple for the IRS to send you your tax form already filled out, waiting for your signature. You could also check the box and opt to do it yourself.

But the big financial software companies have successfully lobbied to kill that option. Here's a great video where Klein spills the beans on another corporate ripoff:

If I'm not itemizing deductions (like 70 percent of taxpayers), the IRS has all the information it needs to calculate my taxes, send me a filled-out return, and let me either send it in or do my taxes by hand if I prefer. This isn't a purely hypothetical proposal. Countries like Denmark, Sweden, Estonia, Chile, and Spain already offer "pre-populated returns" to their citizens. 

The United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan have exact enough tax withholding procedures that most people don't have to file income tax returns at all, whether pre-populated or not. California has a voluntary return-free filing program called ReadyReturn for its income taxes.

Obama and Reagan both backed this idea:

The Obama administration supports return-free filing, and Ronald Reagan touted the idea in a 1985 speech:

"We envision a system where more than half of us would not even have to fill out a return. We call it the return-free system, and it would be totally voluntary. If you decided to participate, you would automatically receive your refund or a letter explaining any additional tax you owe. Should you disagree with this figure, you would be free to fill out your taxes using the regular form. We believe most Americans would go from the long form or the short form to no form."

The Republican talking point for decades plays on the myth liberal Democratic Americans like taxes in general, and don't mind paying more. Without this silly caricature, they can't make the argument that freeloading off the work and legacy of generations before them is okay:

Republicans love it: Dark Money now controls Government!

There’s a chance Republicans might be securing themselves a permanent majority party, both statewide and national.

Despite having no unified plan to solve societal problems, Republicans are focused like a laser on being in power forever. They're so sure of themselves that they’re not even worried that someday those the same laws could be used against them by Democrats.

The Dark Money Party: It’s hard to believe anyone would support secret donors pushing completely secret agendas (with the eventual elimination of open records laws), but that's what's happening. Scott Walker just signed into law coordination between campaigns and special interest groups running supposed “issue ads.” Any grownup know those ads are meant to influence elections, but for some reason we can’t honestly and legally say so. AP.

New laws are removing limits on the use and reporting of "dark money" from secret sources. The laws enable coordination between political campaigns and advocacy organizations, something almost all other states forbid.

Common sense tells you something is wrong here.

Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause Wisconsin, was among those who lobbied against loosening the rules.

"If you legalize the coordination, why would you give $20,000 to Walker when you could give $20,000 to an issue ad group and not have your name disclosed — or you could give an unlimited amount to that same group? It would be stupid to have your name out there if you could do it secretly."

Paul Ryan just Greased the skids to a Corrupt Dark Money free-for-all: It's funny how Walker's latest move fits in with the following jaw dropping addition to the just passed federal omnibus budget deal. Playing off the phony IRS attack on what was an avalanche of tea party groups seeking tax exempt status to influence elections, Ryan slipped this one in. Huffington Post:

A provision buried on page 472 (prevents) the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from taking any action to reign in the political activity of 501(c)4 organizations. These organizations weren't originally supposed to engage in political activity at all. In recent years, however, they've become a favorite of anyone who wants to buy political influence without attracting attention. Since there's no legal requirement that 501(c)4 organizations disclose their donors, anyone can use them as a vehicle to pour unlimited money into our political system.

As former Republican Federal Election Commissioner Trevor Potter has pointed out, even foreign nationals and governments could use 501(c)4s to quietly influence U.S. policy.

Let that sink in folks: Rather than allow the IRS to prevent the abuse of tax-exempt nonprofit status for purely political purposes by both parties, Congress has specifically banned the agency from taking any kind of action -- even at the risk of allowing secret foreign money to poison our elections.

This has Paul Ryan's finger prints all over it. He's got a proven track record of radical bills that would scare the living crap out of voters. Take a look at the list HERE. Add to the proliferation of dark money groups this gem...

On a similar note, another provision tucked away on page 1,982 prohibits the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from requiring corporations to disclose their political spending.

This is especially outrageous because disclosure is one of the least controversial and most basic steps toward reform the government can take. As noted by the LA Times' Michael Hiltzik, even the Supreme Court made a point of emphasizing the need for disclosure in its widely reviled Citizens United ruling:

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority:"With the advent of the Internet ... prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions and supporters ... determine whether their corporation's political speech advances the corporation's interest in making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are 'in the pocket' of so-called moneyed interests."

Why did IRS's Lois Lerner plead Fifth Amendment? Hiding something or....

The 5th:

Since dropping the bomb that her division of the IRS had been improperly giving extra scrutiny to conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status, Lois Lerner, head of the IRS Exempt Organizations division, has kept quiet. Tuesday, she made it official,pleading the Fifth at a House Oversight Committee.

But why? We can thank Rep. Darrell Issa. Here's the explanation from Martin Bashir and former House counsel Julian Epstein:

Green Bay Tea Party Protesters Fired their Rifles into Stacks of Paper, angry over IRS targeting.

There's a very good reason why we call tea party members "teatards" or "teabillies." The following recent protest over the IRS's targeting of crooked tea party groups lying to get tax exempt status in Green Bay is exhibit A.

Teabillies aimed their rifles at stacks of paper representing the tax code. I'm utterly speechless. This was a good idea? One teatard whined about the complicated tax code, which by the way was created by big business seeking every loophole possible, all the while wearing a US Bank hat. Maybe he didn't understand what caused the Great Recession? Breathtakingly bizarre and mind numbing, these sheeple will continue to parrot their big donor talking points, oblivious to the world around them.

Watch the accident, from WKOW:

Oh, Never mind!! Rep. Issa was told about IRS investigation well before Election, so what's all the belly aching about?

I'm not hearing any apologies. Republicans are big on public apologies.

When you try to fool the public with manufactured outrage, you’re bound to get caught.

Republicans, like Paul "cheap shot" Ryan, grilled IRS inspector General J. Russel George, feigning disappointment they weren't told about the tea party investigation before the Obama election. You do know this is all about making Obama’s presidency illegitimate, right?

In a mind bending turn of events, even though Rep. Darrell Issa knew about the investigation, he let his do-nothing comrades in crime go on and on about being kept in the dark. Somebodies in trouble:          

Yahoo: Much has been made of the fact that senior Treasury Department officials were told about the investigation into the treatment of tea party groups in June 2012 - months before last year's the Presidential election. Republicans who requested the investigation were also told about it at approximately the same time. In a letter dated July 11, 2012, the man who conducted the investigation - IRS inspector general J. Russell George - wrote to Rep. Darrell Issa, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, telling him that he was investigating the issue and offering to keep him updated as the investigation progressed. "The Oversight Committee knew about the audit because it requested it," an Issa aide told ABC News.

So…Issa kept that to himself? Apparently…

George said he had notified top Treasury officials - including Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin - about his investigation in June 2012, part of a routine briefing on the issues he was looking into. Republicans pounced on that revelation as evidence top Administration officials knew about the targeting of conservative groups well before the 2012 election. It is now clear that at least some key Republicans knew about the investigation as well.

My god aren't we done yet with these crooked cry babies?

IRS/Teabilly flap should result in pulled tax exempt status for all "Party" affiliated supposedly "Social Welfare" groups.

Exposed, finally!!! IRS fumble brought into daylight, regrettably for conservative billionaire funding sources, the conservative con game that forces taxpayers to pick up their campaign tab.

See, they're not racist...

This wasn't so much the IRS targeting for political purposes as it was a dumb shortcut to deal with tea party freeloaders who thought they had easy way to avoid paying taxes. They actually claimed they were "social welfare" groups. Despite hating all things "social" and all things "welfare," they sold their souls for a free ride.

Because of this hoax, the U.S. lost tax revenue making everyone else pay for their partisan agenda. They also didn't want to disclose how much money the Koch's contributed to Americans for Prosperity under 501(c)(4) rules. In fact, the IRS didn't even look into the larger lawyered up groups.

Real Balls: Tea parties actually thought they could sell the public on their convoluted, revisionist, simpleton perspective of the constitution, as a social welfare benefit to society.

Ironically, teabilly whining actually prompted the IRS to investigate. If done for political purposes, nothing would have happened:

...oops, spoke too soon.

jsonline: Treasury officials said that (they) were looking into the IRS' handling of applications for tax-exempt status, partly due to allegations raised by conservative organizations."

The outrage is more of a distraction from the real question; why are these obvious political organization and arms of conservative campaigning receiving "social welfare" status? These angry teabillies might be doing more to dismantle the free ride than anything else.

But one more thing can't be ignored. The anger over money in politics and the mind boggling activist Citizens United ruling could get worse if Republicans had their way. More money and creeping fascism is possible if we just do away with the IRS, or reduce it into a toothless agency.

The top Republican admitted it wasn't partisanship, but something else, just to make his grander point: 

Assimilated Koch whore McKenna

Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the Ways and Means Committee said, "The reality is this is not a personnel problem. This is a problem of the IRS being too large, too powerful, too intrusive and too abusive of honest, hardworking taxpayers."

Yeah, those were really "hard working" retired tea party freeloaders bused around states protesting for the Koch's taxpayer draining Americans for Prosperity. They wore their mod mentality proudly by their openness to fall in line as another cog in the AFP machine. Like conservative radio's surreal visitor from an alternate universe, Vicki McKenna. 

IRS Targeted Tea "Party," why?..."Party" refers to a political group and not a social welfare organization. Dead giveaway.

Here's the first take on the IRS targeting teatard organizations. The IRS apparently didn't know how to interpret the rules after the torrent of applications came in after the Citizens United decision. Even more interesting is Lawrence O'Donnell's look at the original law regarding regulation of tax exempt groups. But more of that later:



Here's O'Donnell's fascinating take on the actual law for 501 (c) (4)'s. The IRS's interpretation changed "exclusively" to "primarily," a confusing and broad application, which resulted in the problem we're seeing now. The original language:

"Social Welfare organizations;  Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated EXCLUSIVELY for the promotion of social welfare." 

Ironic that tea party mobs would ever allow themselves to be called "social welfare" groups. I might keep that in mind the next time they shout something about socialism or welfare.

It would be smart if someone in the administration saw this and ran with it. It would cancel out every one of these groups' tax exempt status immediately...no more problems:

President Wannabee Scott Walker Belly Flops into National Debate over IRS Tea Party Screenings.

I mean really, this is so tragically transparent an attempt to ass kiss the tea party low information voters that how could it mean anything but…Walker’s running for president. I say, why reelect him as governor? Walker has the balls to complain about Big Brother:

AP: Two Republican governors urged Obama to appoint a special prosecutor to

investigate the case. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker call the allegations "Big Brother come to life." They want a special prosecutor to find out if any laws were broken and say Obama should fire any IRS employees responsible for the situation. 

"Big Brother come to life" is already a way of life in Wisconsin. Of course besides the Patriot Act being okay, Walker likes using recall signatures as a black list, telling food stamp recipients what to eat, taking over local control of cities, politicizing the judicial branch, and installing a police state in and around the Capitol to discourage dissent. Oh, and made Republican legislators take oath of silence so they could lie to voters while redistricting.

Here's WKOW's coverage where Walker promises the IRS issue will not be forgotten in 2016.

Walker: "I think it'll have a lingering affect, and it unfortunately-on a national level, breeds more discontent and distrust of the federal government."

But on state wide level, you can trust Walker and the Republican control freaks?



Despite the fact the public, by 49%, think the state is lagging in job creation. By 44% many think Wisconsin is ahead of other states in job creation or just about the same. Something is terribly wrong in the Democratic messaging on this, since the media hasn't been exactly silent on Walker's record .

IRS targeting of Teabillies begs the question, where were they when Bush went after liberals?

The IRS scrutiny of tea party insurgent group’s hell bent on overthrowing the country finally got their “low information” attention. It took awhile for a few of them to read a newspaper.

Regardless of how this story turns out, tea party losers should ask themselves why they didn’t rise up during the Bush administration, after they passed the Patriot Act and created the costly Homeland Security Department.

Below, Salon’s David Sarota lists even more examples. One he did leave out was the politicization of the Justice Department in its efforts to prosecute nonexistent voter fraud efforts by Democrats.

Two wrongs do not make a right. But the discrepancy in reactions to wrongs does … That’s one of the big  takeaways from the reaction to news that the Internal Revenue Service allegedly targeting conservative organizations for extra scrutiny in their larger review of political groups’ tax exempt status.

In terms of partisanship, Republicans now screaming bloody murder over the IRS allegations clearly don’t care about the principles of equal protection, nonpartisan public services or impartial governance. We know this because most of them had nothing to say about the Bush administration’s actions against the GOP’s ideological opponents. In the context of that record, the GOP is really saying it is outraged when government resources are aimed at its friends, but more than happy to have those resources aimed at its enemies.

The Bush cabal didn’t just use the IRS for its political hackery, it mounted a full-scale government-wide assault on its enemies, marshaling disparate agencies in its smear efforts … in 2005, Bush’s IRS began an extensive two-year investigation into a Pasadena church after an orator dared to speak out against President Bush’s Iraq War … the Secret Service was repeatedly deployed to physically block suspected antiwar activists from attending public presidential events ... targeted some peaceful antiwar activists for arrest for the alleged crime of “holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone” of free speech (yes, the Bush White House cemented the precedent that the right to dissent is no longer a fundamental right, but is instead only allowed in certain “free speech zones”). Ultimately, in a case dealing with a man who was arrested for simply telling Vice President Dick Cheney that his “policies on Iraq are disgusting,” the Republican-dominated Supreme Court upheld the Bush administration’s use of “retaliatory arrests” against the administration’s ideological critics.

The Washington Post reported that “the FBI improperly investigated some left-leaning U.S. advocacy groups after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks…citing cases in which agents put activists on terrorist watch lists even though they were planning nonviolent civil disobedience.”

As the New York Times reported, “A former Central Intelligence Agency officer said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information” on prominent Iraq War critic Juan Cole … out CIA operative Valerie Plame as retribution for her husband’s criticism of that same war.

A Fox News’ headline this week summarizing a Karl Rove interview blared: “What if IRS Under President Bush targeted liberal groups,?”  as if that never actually happened…even though it most certainly did.
The lesson should be straightforward: according to Washington, politicized government is perfectly fine when it is punishing liberal forces that challenge the status quo, but totally outrageous when it is targeting conservative groups that preserve the status quo. Neither should be acceptable, of course.