The Real War on Women Occurred at IRS

RUSH: Let me start digging into this IRS Stack that I have here. UK Daily Mail: "When a Tennessee lawyer asked the IRS for tax-exempt status for a mentoring group that trained high school and college students about conservative political philosophy, the agency responded with a list of 95 questions in 31 parts, including an ultimatum for a list of everyone the group had trained, or planned to train.

"'Provide details regarding all training you have provided or will provide,' the IRS demanded. 'Indicate who has received or will receive the training and submit copies of the training material.' That question was part of the tax collection agency's February 14, 2012 letter to Kevin Kookogey. founder of the group Linchpins of Liberty. He had submitted his application 13 months earlier. 'Can you imagine my responsibility to parents if I disclosed the names of their children to the IRS?' he asked MailOnline. It's 'an impossible question to answer fully and truthfully,' he said, 'without disclosing the names of anyone I ever taught, or would ever teach, including students.'"

Barack Obama's brother or cousin or some such thing -- I can't find it in my massive list of things in front of me here -- was granted tax-exempt status. The IRS ordered just this one group in Tennessee, an educational group, to turn over a list of high school high school and college students that it had trained in conservatism. The federal government demanded a list of everyone this group had ever trained or planned to train.

"Linchpins of Liberty mentors high school and college students and teaches them conservative political philosophy." This group wasn't even linked to the Tea Party. It was just conservative. The IRS inspector general report listed seven questions the agency should never have asked. This question, however, was not one of them. Here's some sample questions this educational group had to answer to the IRS.

Has any person or organization provided educational services to you? If yes, provide the following:
a.) The name of the person or organization
b.) A full description of the services provided.
c.) The political affiliation of the person or organization.

This is none of their business. It had nothing to do with whether or not you have the application approved or denied.

"Provide details regarding all training you have provided or will provide. Indicate who has received or will receive the training and submit copies of the training material," you're using to train people in conservatism.

An impossible question. A series of impossible questions to answer. But these groups tried and the information they provided, in some cases, was given to ProPublica. And that ended up on the computers of so-called mainstream journalists. And then it ended up in local newspapers, maybe national news, local TV newscasts. A story about a local group applying for tax-exempt status would be subject to a scathing report on your local news, bunch of racists, so forth. This is how it worked.

RUSH: Folks, let's talk about the War on Women for just a second, because the real War on Women was not involving Mitt Romney. The real War on Women had nothing to do with conservatives or contraception or birth control or abortion or any of that. That was entirely manufactured. The real War on Women was occurring at the IRS. The real War on Women was the IRS and the Obama regime denying tax-exempt status to 527s and Tea Party groups. And I'm telling you, many of those were headed by women at the leadership level.

By the way, it was Obama's half-brother, Abongo Malik Obama who was granted a tax exemption for his charity, which was called the Barack H. Obama Foundation. He was granted tax-exempt status within less than a month, but there was a bonus. His tax-exempt status was made retroactive two years prior because he had been collecting donations illegally for two years prior to having been granted tax-exempt status. I'm not making this up. Obama's half-brother, Abongo Malik Obama, got a tax exempt grant for his foundation in less than a month, and they made it retroactive when they found out he had been collecting money as a tax-exempt foundation illegally for two years.

So the IRS said, "Okay, well, we'll legalize you here, and we're going to give you your tax-exempt status, and we're gonna date it back two years so that everything you've been doing now is legal." I don't know which half-brother this is. Look, at some point you lose the ability to keep track of 'em all. I don't know if it's the guy in the hut who finally got out of the hut and started a foundation. I'm just telling you, he's got a half-brother who for two years was collecting money for the Barack H. Obama Foundation under the guise that it was tax-exempt. He was telling donors that their donations were tax-exempt and all that, and they weren't. He had not been granted status. He finally was granted status less than a month after he applied and they made it retroactive two years prior so that he wasn't guilty of anything.

Listen to Jennifer Stefano, War on Women, here's the real War on Women. This is last night, Fox Business Network, the Willis Report. She spoke with Americans for Prosperity, Pennsylvania state director, Jennifer Stefano, about the IRS targeting conservative groups. And Willis said, "How were you targeted? Tell us your story."

STEFANO: This was before I joined Americans for Prosperity. I was just a stay-at-home mother. I was pregnant with another baby, and I wanted to do what was right. My Tea Party group was becoming really large and I couldn't run the money and the donations through my bank account. I was advised the IRS would come after you for that. So I started calling other groups and I thought I would file and create an organization, and here they were all getting targeted by the IRS, and I got scared.

STEFANO: These are all out there now, and I have actually documents showing it. You know, "Send us your Facebook pages, your Twitter pages," and I said, "Does that include personal pages?" and they said, "Everything." They wanted to know your personal relationships with politicians and political parties. And I asked, "What would happen if I don't send this to you?" and they said, they made an insinuation like, "Look, it can be considered perjury if you omit things from the IRS." I'm a pregnant stay-at-home mother on one income, I thought, "Oh, my goodness, I'm not doing anything." I stopped.

RUSH: Exactly. She stopped. She's trying to set up a tax-exempt organization to raise money for the causes she believed in. She's a Tea Party woman. This is the War on Women. She didn't start the group. She did not start her group because she was scared of being charged with perjury if she didn't answer all the questions and send in all of the information that they were demanding. So there's your answer, in part, why the electorate didn't look the same in 2012 as it did in 2010. These groups were shut down. The regime shut them down, made it, in this woman's case, impossible for her to set up her fundraising group and to begin working on behalf of the things she believed in.

RUSH: Look, in plain, simple language for low-information voters to understand this. What was happening was, it just wasn't fair, folks, what the IRS was doing was not fair to these Tea Party groups. They were denying them the right to participate in the political process by harassing them because of what they believed. That's not American, that's not fair, and it was mean. It was really mean.

We often ask how the Jews could have voluntarily walked into the box cars. Well in that same vein, how is it that all these Conservative groups now coming forward simply remained silent when Obama’s IRS goons came for them in the middle of the night? How is this possible?

The number of groups now coming forward is staggering. The Facebook requests, the health requests, the tax information leaked, the harrasement. How is it that no one said much?

If the IRS can’t be trusted to control themselves around a high-school track team, then HOW can we trust them with ALL of our medical information...?

Imagine a drunk guy careens through a farmer’s market, pedestrians flying everywhere, then slams into a pre-school. And he walks up to ya, asking for keys to your TANK.

Would you hand them over?

But right now that’s what we plan on doing.

His tax-exempt status was made retroactive two years prior

That is not unusual or illegal, its the law. From IRS:

Generally, organizations required to apply for recognition of exemption must notify the Service within 27 months from the date of their formation to be treated as described in section 501(c)(3) from the date formed.

http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Application-for-Recognition-of-Exemption

I think the penalty for the IRS inteference in politics should be taking 1/2 of all reported political donations to the major parties and allocating the funds to 3rd parties, including the TEA Party. That is, of course, dependent on anyone actually defining the TEA Party on a national level.

This is approaching the level of requiring a disbanding of the whole organization,

as well as suing, as individuals, those who practiced this malfeasance.

Basically, what the IRS did was to totally shut out all grass roots conservative organizations and give favor to liberal orgs. That’s jail time. Or if not, then it’s pitchfork and torch time.

6 posted on 05/15/2013 1:14:52 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)

And also the IRS was asking these conservative groups to turn in list of their members. Which means that some FReepers names could be on the IRs enemies list.

Surely I’m not the only one here who has had trouble with the IRS. Anyone else? We may find we are on the target list....

See, what I don’t get is why these groups don’t put on their application things like “education in progressive causes” and “civil rights” and “community organizing” and stuff that has all the lib buzzwords in it, thus leading to quick 501c(4) approval, but then if they come back later and complain, the actual dictionary definition of the words and phrases is totally compatible with conservative beliefs and work. Plus, it would also catch them out on their bias; in order to complain because you “misrepresented yourself” they have to implicitly admit the standards are different for different politics.

Well, OK, then why couldn’t the conservative groups just proceed on the same basis? Everyone’s claiming this shut them down for the 2010 and 2012 cycles.

How is it that no one said much?

I could see how that happens. Lets say a small group of people want to form a tax exempt organization. If they get stonewalled by the IRS and want to pursue it, the next step might be to contact their congress person. Good luck with that if you are in a dem or rino district. The next step would be to hire a lawyer. This story did break because enough people went to the Landmark Legal Foundation for help. It took a while, but they got results.

If you've never setup one up before, then you don't know what to expect.

Exactly. They might have thought that degree of intrusiveness was normal for the process.

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.