Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IRS audits 10% of Tea Party donors
American Thinker ^ | 05/08/2014 | Rick Moran

Posted on 05/08/2014 6:53:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

When the IRS was targeting conservative groups seeking tax exempt status for special scrutiny, they demanded the list of donors supporting those groups in 17 cases. Despite assurances from the agency that the lists had been destroyed, a search requested by Congress revealed that at least 3 lists had survived. And of the donors on those lists, fully 10% of the individuals had been audited.

The rate of audits for ordinary Americans is about 1%.

Now, the House Ways and Means Oversight Committee is demanding that the Government AccoIRS intimidation on a whole other level.untability Office investigate the IRS to see why so many Tea Party donors were audited.

Washington Times:

“The committee uncovered new information indicating that after groups provided the information to the IRS, nearly one in 10 donors were subject to audit,” Rep. Charles W. Boustany Jr., Louisiana Republican and chairman of the Ways and Means Committee’s oversight panel, told IRS Commissioner John Koskinen at a hearing Wednesday.

“The abuse of discretion and audit selection must be identified and stopped,” he said.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: audit; irsaudits; irsoutofcontrol; irsteaparty; irsteapartyscandal; searchworks; topofbreakingnews
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

1 posted on 05/08/2014 6:53:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

True, 10% seems like a lot, but someone needs to figure out what the audit rate would be for the this demographic of income earners without respect to political affiliation. It’s possible that these donors are in such a tax bracket as to make them subject to a higher than average audit rate.


2 posted on 05/08/2014 6:54:41 AM PDT by Rockitz (This is NOT rocket science - Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
"It’s possible that these donors are in such a tax bracket as to make them subject to a higher than average audit rate."

Bloody unlikely.

3 posted on 05/08/2014 6:57:49 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

See CutePuppy’s post for more detail.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3153501/posts?page=65#65


4 posted on 05/08/2014 7:00:54 AM PDT by Rockitz (This is NOT rocket science - Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is tyranny. This is the crime of the century

Barack Obama is the boss of the IRS. Barack Obama is responsible for this political oppression of Americans. Impeach and imprison Barack Hussein Obama

tweet this to all, email , facebook , email to Levin , Rush


5 posted on 05/08/2014 7:02:39 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

what do you work for Obama or the IRS

this is tyranny


6 posted on 05/08/2014 7:04:15 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Lois would know, but she ain’t talking.


7 posted on 05/08/2014 7:05:12 AM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Basically, the stats are that you would be 10 times more likely to be audited if you had a tea party donation on your return.


8 posted on 05/08/2014 7:05:51 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Actually the IRS is less likely to audit big income earners because they can afford tax lawyers to fight them. IRS likes to audit the middle class. They usually just pay up to avoid a long expensive fight.


9 posted on 05/08/2014 7:06:31 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr

That’s what waterboarding is for!


10 posted on 05/08/2014 7:07:08 AM PDT by SgtHooper (This is my tag!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
tea partiers are not millionaires or rich as you are implying . this is tyranny

also IRS denied conservative group formation at about a 500 to 1 ratio conservative to liberal group ratio. are those stats more to your liking or will you try to manipulate stats to defend the tyrannical IRS and Obama

11 posted on 05/08/2014 7:08:36 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
How many freepers are old enough to remember when the enemedia raked Richard Nixon over the coals for allegedly using the IRS to harass his political enemies?

And here BO's flunkies have been caught doing it red-handed and all we hear is crickets?

12 posted on 05/08/2014 7:09:41 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Proof that this corrupt administration is using the irs to enforce fascism.


13 posted on 05/08/2014 7:12:40 AM PDT by I want the USA back (Media: completely irresponsible. Complicit in the destruction of this country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

True, 10% seems like a lot, but someone needs to figure out”

...wishful thinking. Tea Party members are about as middle class and working class as they come. The average number of audits comes out to something like 0.7% of the tax paying population.


14 posted on 05/08/2014 7:13:47 AM PDT by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Right the news media made those scurrilous allegations against Nixon that but no one was targeted by Nixon's IRS . However it's been proven that Obama’s IRS did harass Obama’s political rivals, namely conservative every day American citizens. The news media put the watergate hearings on 24/7 on all 3 networks. the news media drummed Nixon out of office . but now the news media hides Obama's IRS scandal from the public. it's all cause Nixon was a Republican and Obama is a democrat
15 posted on 05/08/2014 7:16:26 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2; Democrat_media; MrB; albie

Please try to remember this 10% refers to Tea Party DONORS not Tea Party MEMBERS. Presumably the DONORS are at a higher income level than MEMBERS, and thus are probably more likely to be audited.


16 posted on 05/08/2014 7:18:56 AM PDT by Rockitz (This is NOT rocket science - Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: albie
how could any one defend this tyranny from Obama and his IRS is beyond me. and on a conservative site too. seems like there are democrat moles here. not you but that one defending the IRS you responded to
17 posted on 05/08/2014 7:20:36 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
bs you have no proof of that

Washington times says that rate of audit is too high

you are just trying to cause confusion and defend Obama and the IRS tyranny

18 posted on 05/08/2014 7:22:07 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
The IRS asked tea party groups for list of donors . then they audit 10% of people on THOSE SPECIFIC lists. plus these are just grass roots groups . that is tyranny

bs you have no proof of what you state or their incomes

Washington times says that rate of audit is too high

you are just trying to cause confusion and defend Obama and the IRS tyranny

19 posted on 05/08/2014 7:26:34 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“IRS audits 10% of Tea Party donors”

Leftist freaks will be self-righteously angry that the percentage is so low.


20 posted on 05/08/2014 7:28:25 AM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: albie

The IRS asked tea party groups for lists of donors . then they audit 10% of people on THOSE SPECIFIC lists. plus these are just grass roots groups . that is tyranny


21 posted on 05/08/2014 7:28:37 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
Please try to remember this 10% refers to Tea Party DONORS not Tea Party MEMBERS.

I see you're from California. Are you what they call a conservative out there? LOL

22 posted on 05/08/2014 7:28:51 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

The IRS asked tea party groups for lists of donors . then the IRS audits 10% of people on THOSE SPECIFIC lists. plus these are just grass roots groups . that is tyranny


23 posted on 05/08/2014 7:29:46 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

They are not random tea party donors. the people audited are people on specif lists that the IRS obtained from grass roots tea party groups

The IRS asked tea party groups for lists of donors . then they audit 10% of people on THOSE SPECIFIC lists. plus these are just grass roots groups . that is tyranny


24 posted on 05/08/2014 7:31:51 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

What would your normalizing criteria be, then?

Income bracket only?
Income bracket + political donation deductions?


25 posted on 05/08/2014 7:38:21 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If think that is enough “disparate impact” for Eric Holder to take a look at.


26 posted on 05/08/2014 7:39:34 AM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
the IRS is less likely to audit big income earners

Not true. Perhaps you're confusing income with assets.

The base rate for audits is about 1%. An audit rate of 10% for tea partiers is way out of line.

Million dollar income earners have an even higher audit rate.

http://www.kiplinger.com/article/taxes/T054-C000-S001-irs-audit-red-flags-the-dirty-dozen.html

27 posted on 05/08/2014 7:42:12 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Just know what I was told from someone who worked for the IRS. They preferred to audit the middle income earners because they couldn’t afford to fund a long term fight. They usually just wrote the check and prayed they didn’t get audited again.


28 posted on 05/08/2014 7:43:33 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media

Hell if I know. 10% is a huge number! If there are 1 million members, that 100,000. Inordinately high in any scenario!


29 posted on 05/08/2014 7:47:13 AM PDT by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MrB
The IRS didn't obtain those names to audit randomly or by income . The IRS obtained those names to audit from people trying to form tea party groups.

the IRS asked people who were trying to form tea party group for lists of “donors” . then the IRS audited 10% of the people on THOSE specific lists. these were just grass roots groups trying to form.

he is trying to confuse the issue by making it seem as if the IRS picked these people to audit at random but no it was because they were on those lists.only if they were picked at random can you say oh it's because their incomes were so high or some other excuse but he doesn't know their incomes or anything. he's just trying to spin to cover for Obama

It's obvious to anyone with common sense that the IRS asked for those lists to audit and intimidate those people.

30 posted on 05/08/2014 7:50:42 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media

It is the “liberal’s” fondest desire to use the power of the State to punish (and eventually exterminate) those who would disagree with them.

They have no desire to “convince”, just to eliminate.


31 posted on 05/08/2014 7:52:24 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Unlike some here, I see your point. But an audit rate of 10% of any given population is still pretty high.


32 posted on 05/08/2014 7:52:42 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

They’re evil bastards then.

I’m encountering the same issue with property taxes.
They’re targeting folks in the middle income where they have “enough” money to squeeze more out, but not quite enough to fight them.


33 posted on 05/08/2014 7:55:06 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad

what are the chances that 10% of the people on 3 small lists are audited. not much . this is tyranny

The IRS is supposed to RANDOMLY audit people after they completed their tax return. this was not random . the IRS audited those people because they were on the “donor” lists that the IRS asked tea party groups for. these were grass roots groups trying to form


34 posted on 05/08/2014 8:00:31 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
I agree that the percentage audited is far too high, given the known political affiliations of these donor/taxpayers. But some of them are going to be prime candidates for audit anyway, just because their AGI falls above a certain level. Many of these taxpayers will be successful self-employed professionals who might be inclined to gravitate toward the Tea Party.

Not every candidate for audit is "randomly" selected, and it is an error in judgment to believe otherwise.
35 posted on 05/08/2014 8:14:38 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

How strange. I wonder why and IRS person would say something so untrue.


36 posted on 05/08/2014 8:15:15 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Gosh I don’t know. She only worked for them for 30 years as an auditor. I’m sure she’s lied about lots of other stuff besides. I’ll have to pay more attention to her. She’s just been a neighbor for 10+ years now. I’m sure she’s up to something!


37 posted on 05/08/2014 8:18:09 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

“If think that is enough “disparate impact” for Eric Holder to take a look at.”

You got that right. If a corporation doesn’t have average race or sex statistics in their hiring practices, they can be subject to charges for discrimination - even if there’s no actual complaint.


38 posted on 05/08/2014 8:23:17 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
I think many people understand what you are saying and agree that if that is the case it is terrible. I think what they are also saying is that there is a chance that it might not be the case. The most important thing though is that it should be relatively easy to determine one way or the other. It is simply a matter of math.

There are certain generally accepted characteristics that make someone more likely to be audited. The exact percentages of how much more likely are statistics that can be known. We should look at them. If you were to learn that for people who claimed charitable deductions the audit rate went from X% to XX% and then you learned that tea party members were X% more likely to donate to charity then it might make more sense why the tea party donors where audited more. There are many other factors including income, dependents claimed, the type of form used, if filing as a small business, etc...I would assume that tea partiers are more likely to own a business, have children, have higher income and fall into other categories that could make them more likely to be audited. THE POINT IS THAT I DON'T KNOW BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.

So often, there are those on our side who go off half cocked and look like idiots when the facts end up showing that they don't know what they are talking about.

Do I think Obama would do something like this? --Yes

Do I think that his administration abuses power nearly every chance it gets? -- Yes

Do I think that they did it in this case? -- Probably, but with a little more information we can be sure.

39 posted on 05/08/2014 8:25:28 AM PDT by nitzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad
bs the IRS is supposed to look at the whole population and then from that determine who to audit . and you say they did that . bs. then by sheer coincidence the audited end up on the same lists the IRS obtained from the tea party groups the IRS was already oppressing . no way that 10% audited from the general population end up on the same small lists of groups the IRS was ALREADY oppressing and harassing with books of questions. and you defend this tyranny. the IRS audited them because they were on those lists of tea party groups

these were 3 small lists . IRS audits 10% on those lists

The only common denominator was they were on those lists. what other criteria can you prove that caused them to be audited . you can't and are just defending tyranny

40 posted on 05/08/2014 8:26:53 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: nitzy
It's already been proven that the IRS was harassing those tea party groups in many ways . then the IRS demands a list of members or “donors” of those oppressed groups . then the IRS also audits 10% of those on the lists the IRS obtained.

the IRS is supposed to look at the whole population and then from that determine who to audit . and you say they did that . bs. then by sheer coincidence the audited end up on the same lists the IRS obtained from the tea party groups the IRS was already oppressing . no way that 10% audited from the general population end up on the same small lists of groups the IRS was ALREADY oppressing and harassing with books of questions. and you defend this tyranny. the IRS audited them because they were on those lists of tea party groups

these were 3 small lists . IRS audits 10% on those lists

The only common denominator was they were on those lists. what other criteria can you prove that caused them to be audited . you can't and are just defending tyranny

The IRS harassed these groups for months with unjust interrogations so you want us to believe the IRS wouldn't also audit them. the IRS was already committing a crime , targeting them , harassing them not letting them organize etc.

41 posted on 05/08/2014 8:34:43 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
"Defending tyranny?" Please. You're taking yourself and your questionable understanding of the facts far too seriously here.

I'm correctly pointing out, as others have, that some of these people would fall within well-established criteria for audit anyway. Would 10% so qualify under said guidelines? No, and we agree on that. But some of these people are likely to have been audited in any event, although it would probably be 1/4 to 1/3 of the number actually audited.
42 posted on 05/08/2014 8:36:05 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad
Based on the IRS audits conducted in 2012, Americans who earned $50,000 to $100,000 faced an audit rate of just 0.64%,

from what i read of these groups that the IRS was already oppressing and from whom they obtained these member lists, their incomes should fall in that range. these people were not rich but middle class Americans wanting to be involved in the political process. the IRS denied them the right to be exempt from taxes and so they couldn't form. if they were so wealthy then they wouldn't need the tax exempt status .

the rate 10% is almost 20 times the regular rate. and coupled with the fact that the audited were on small lists the IRS was already oppressing then it is very likely the IRS audited them to intimidate them not randomly from the whole population

43 posted on 05/08/2014 9:08:50 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
Do you think it would be a good idea to more regularly audit businesses which owe large payments to the IRS than individuals who earn little income and are receiving a couple hundred dollars in returns? Wouldn't that be better stewardship of the public's money, to target resources on areas where there is more likely to be errors or fraud? If you agree, then you acknowledge that it may be beneficial to not look at all tax filings equally. Some factors are legitimate, some are not. Income, the amount of deductions, whether a business or not, etc...may be legitimate reasons to scrutinize a return. Political donations to tea parties are not a legitimate factor. We need to look at all of the data and determine which factors where being used in this case.

so you want us to believe the IRS wouldn't also audit them

When did I say that? I specifically said that they probably did. With a little more information we can be sure of it.

You are starting your argument by using statistics (10% vs 1% audited). When people on here suggest that we should keep using statistics to a deeper level to really nail down exactly what occurred, you claim there is no reason to do that. You seem to be saying that to look at any other statistics is simply covering for tyranny. We all agree that Obama is a tyrant. You see this 10% vs 1% number and think that you now have black and white clear cut evidence of his tyranny. It may be. But it may not be. For some reason you must be afraid of looking too closely at the data and I can't understand why. Don't you care about being right? Or is it more important to justify your narrative. Some people look at as much evidence as they can and then draw a narrative from it. Other people rely on emotions, intuition and anecdotes to draw a narrative then look for information that backs it up. When they find that information they cling to it tightly and refuse to acknowledge any other information that might contradict it.

I am not claiming your narrative is wrong. I am claiming your methods are.

44 posted on 05/08/2014 9:13:09 AM PDT by nitzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: nitzy
Based on the IRS audits conducted in 2012, Americans who earned $50,000 to $100,000 faced an audit rate of just 0.64%,

from what i read of these groups that the IRS was already oppressing and from whom they obtained these member lists, their incomes should fall in that range. these people were not rich but middle class Americans wanting to be involved in the political process. the IRS denied them the right to be exempt from taxes and so they couldn't form. if they were so wealthy then they wouldn't need the tax exempt status .

the rate 10% is almost 20 times the regular rate. and coupled with the fact that the audited were on small lists the IRS was already oppressing then it is very likely the IRS audited them to intimidate them not randomly from the whole population .

the IRS denied them the right to have tax exempt status . then the IRS demanded and obtained those lists of tea party members. and from those lists audited them at a rate of close to 20 times that would occur if they had not been on those lists.why would they commit one crime harassment , rejection of status (unjustly) and the so unlikely to not commit another of auditing them?

45 posted on 05/08/2014 9:21:25 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
from what i read of these groups that the IRS was already oppressing and from whom they obtained these member lists, their incomes should fall in that range. these people were not rich but middle class Americans wanting to be involved in the political process

Are you saying that all of the people who donated to these 3 tea party groups (the people who were audited at 10%) had incomes in the $50-$100 range, were not business owners, didn't claim a large number of exemptions, etc...? Where did you read this? We don't even know how many people were on the lists. For all we know, it could be 10 people and only one of them was audited. It could be 9 people who earned in the $50-$100K range that you mention and none of them were audited and one who was a business owner with $1,000,000 dollars in write offs who was audited. The point is that we don't know. If we investigate further we should find out.

...ts.why would they commit one crime harassment , rejection of status (unjustly) and the so unlikely to not commit another of auditing them?

I have said twice that there is a good chance they did. It is simply ignorant to state something as fact before seeing all of the data when there is data available to determine the ultimate truth.

46 posted on 05/08/2014 9:39:21 AM PDT by nitzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SgtHooper

LOL!


47 posted on 05/08/2014 9:51:16 AM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nitzy

you liberal you have no proof that their incomes were that high

rate of audit is .64% for up to $100,000 /year incomes.
IRS audited tea party groups at 10% almost 20 times the
rate of audit,. rate of audit was 20 times what it should be for these average Americans . very unlikely these tea party people were rich as you say or even over $100,000k per year as you say you lying liberal


48 posted on 05/08/2014 11:40:56 AM PDT by Democrat_media (Obama ordered IRS to rig 2012 election and must resign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad

From http://www.cnbc.com/id/101580865/

“10.9 percent of people making $1 million or more were audited.”

In other words, it’s probably not 11 to 1 (10/0.9) over auditing of Tea Party DONORS, but something significantly less.


49 posted on 05/08/2014 12:11:30 PM PDT by Rockitz (This is NOT rocket science - Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media
O.K. I am not sure if you are just messing with me, you have a very loose grip on the English language, your reading comprehension is terrible or if you are just flat out stupid.

The phrase in the English language "For all we know...." means "it is not yet known but it is possible". When I say "For all we know there could be 10 people and they make $XXX per year..." I am saying that it is possible. I am not claiming their incomes were actually that high. Only an idiot of incredible magnitude would claim as absolute fact a statistic about a group of unknown people with no evidence what so ever to back up their claim.

What I meant is that without a deeper understanding of the exact metrics we can't tell.

There may have only been 10 people who donated to those 3 groups and one got audited. In this case, it would be very stupid for conservatives to point to this case as an example of the evil of Obama. There are many better examples out there.
There may be a lot more than 10 people and a large group of middle income people got audited. In this case we need to look at other aspects of the numbers which may provide an explanation. If all other aspects of the statistics are analyzed and there is still no obvious reason for the higher number of audits then it would be right to say that the Obama administration targeted these people because they were on the lists.

Without more information, a person would be very stupid to make definitive, objective statements in regard to the audits.

If you copy and paste the .64% audit rate....20 times as high..blah blah blah..information again I will know once and for all that you are just messing with me. No one could actually operate a computer while being that stupid.

50 posted on 05/08/2014 12:46:08 PM PDT by nitzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson