Thread: Smoking gun in IRS political targeting - Shocker! Leftist group paid to review right

Massive bombshell: Smoking gun in IRS targeting

WND has uncovered a deafening bombshell in connection with Barack Obama's IRS.

Get ready for a political earthquake, because this is the big one ...

THE POWER TO DESTROY

Smoking gun in IRS political targeting

Shocker! Leftist group paid to review right

Published: 44 mins ago
Aaron Klein



WASHINGTON – Though President Obama insists the Internal Revenue Service is not guilty of political targeting of nonprofits, WND has learned the agency contracts with an avowedly “progressive” organization supported by George Soros to process data filed by smaller tax-exempt groups.

The federal agency process sends details contained in the annual filings for organizations with $50,000 in annual receipts or less to the Urban Institute, which is funded at least partly by government payments as well as contributions from far-left activist George Soros.

The IRS page directs groups to file with the Urban Institute, although apparently other providers also can file the Form 990 documentation, which is required of every nonprofit, small and large.

The IRS.gov page on the “Annual Electronic Filing Requirement for Small Exempt Organizations – Form 990-N (e-Postcard)” includes instructions to file online, and includes a direct link to the Urban Institute.



It’s for “most small tax-exempt organizations whose annual gross receipts are normally $50,000 or less,” since they are “required” to electronically submit Form 990-N, unless they choose an alternative Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.

“The organization that fails to file required e-Postcards … for three consecutive years will automatically lose its tax-exempt status,” the IRS warns.

There, in the “How to File” box, are instructions to use “this link” to file. The IRS explains, “When you access the system, you will leave the IRS site and file the e-Postcard with the IRS through our trusted partner, Urban Institute. The form must be completed and filed electronically. There is no paper form.”

That link leads to a page offering operations to “File your Electronic Form 990-N (e-Postcard).” You can register as a “New User” and you can “Create your Form 990-N.”

And “Submit your Form 990-N.”

The page URL is for “epostcard.form990.org,” and it carries the logo of the Urban Institute.



The supposedly “nonpartisan” organization’s employees have a record of donating nearly 100 percent of their political contributions to Democrats, and officially, the Urban Institute advocates for totally socialized medicine, carbon taxes and amnesty for illegal aliens.

And UI’s president, Sarah Rosen Wartell, is the co-founder of the Center for American Progress, widely considered ground zero for the development of many of the Obama administration’s progressive policies.

The issue of IRS targeting of tea-party and conservative groups arose in May 2013 when the agency admitted during a news conference that groups with “tea party” or “patriots” in their names were flagged for extra IRS review.

Dozens of organizations ultimately filed lawsuits over the targeting, and members have testified about the questions they faced from the IRS, such as about the content of their prayers, whether they would promise not to protest the Planned Parenthood abortion agenda, and others.

Many of those groups still are in court over their pursuit of fair treatment.

Even as recently as Thursday, an attorney representing several of those groups, Cleta Mitchell, told a congressional hearing, “The IRS scandal is not over. It is continuing to this day. And the Department of Justice is a sham. It is a nonexistent investigation.”

Mitchell, a partner in the Washington-based law firm Foley & Lardner LLP, is well-known for providing expert legal advice to conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. She blasted Obama’s claim on Sunday that there is no IRS scandal, and his insistence there was “not even a smidgen of corruption” in the agency’s targeting of conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.

“The IRS scandal is not just a bone-headed bunch of bureaucrats in some remote office, contrary to what the president of the United States told the American people,” she said.

Video at the Page Link:

She told the House Government Reform and Oversight committee the attacks were politically motivated because the direction came from “political elites in Washington — not in Cincinnati, but Washington.”

The attorney said she knew as far back as October of 2011 that the targeting was being guided by Washington, because when she contacted the Cincinnati IRS agent assigned to one of her clients and offered to try to help smooth the application process, she said she was told, “Oh, there’s a task force in Washington; we can’t do anything until we hear back from Washington.”

During that hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., took up the questioning.

“How can the president say there’s not a smidgen of criminality when Lois Lerner invoked the 5th Amendment, 41 witnesses haven’t been interviewed – including the two that are here right now? How can he possibly draw that conclusion?!” Gowdy demanded.

The latest maneuver in the continuing battle is the pending proposal from the IRS to impose new rules on those nonprofits that essentially would prevent them from speaking about candidates or issues.

“This is a real assault on the First Amendment rights of American citizens, and we need to do everything we can to stop the IRS from implementing these new rules,” Mitchell said.

She said the goal of the rules is “to restrict the free speech of conservatives in the United States.

Progressives tend to focus on process issues, and these new IRS regulations are a direct attempt by the political left to rewrite the rules of political engagement unfairly in their favor.”

The Urban Institute has advocated for socialized health care in the United States, and back in the 1980s ran a critique of the Reagan administration. It followed with critiques of George H.W. Bush.

“In 2001, UI and the Brookings Institution began collaboration on a Tax Policy Center (TPC) to discredit President George W. Bush’s tax cut plans, which UI claimed disproportionately and unjustly favored ‘the wealthy,’” a report from Discover the Networks said.

The institute lamented “societal obstacles” that allegedly prevented African-Americans from prospering. It argued “public insurance appears to offer the best financial protection from high out-of-pocket expenses and financial burden for low-income families.” And its reports make “no distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens.”

Even the Los Angeles Times has unabashedly labeled the Urban Institute a “leading liberal think tank.”

The Urban Institute says it “gathers data, conducts research, evaluates programs, offers technical assistance overseas, and educates Americans on social and economic issues – to foster sound public policy and effective government.”

It has released dozens of extensive reports advocating redistribution through taxes. The “Tax Distribution and Economic Trends” section of its website provides links to many of those reports.
The group is a proponent of the carbon tax, which has been criticized as too heavily taxing the United States while distributing those funds to the Third World.

The Urban Institute got into the tax forms with the help of the IRS, which turned over documentation from 200,000 nonprofits from the American Cancer Society to the Heritage Foundation so a database could be created.

At the time, Linda Lampkin of the Urban Institute’s National Center for Charitable Statistics touted it as a way for individuals to access information about nonprofits.

A report in the Washington Post said Urban Institute officials, at one time while President Reagan was in office, accused Republicans of defunding the organization because of its leftist bias. At that point, it made connections with Ford, Mellon and other foundations for support.

It also started getting contributions from Aetna Life and Casualty, Exxon and General Dynamics. Among Ford’s funded projects was a study on immigration.

And an entire page at the Urban Institute’s website is dedicated to the IRS tea-party scandal, which is described as “small.”

Just last year, Soros provided a $250,000 grant for “collecting data and conducting sophisticated empirical research and analysis on the impact of various proposals for housing finance reforms on low-income families, communities of color and underserved markets.”

Another Urban Institute donor is the Joyce Foundation, an anti-gun group where Obama served on the board from 1994 to 2002.

Joyce gave a $400,000 grant to the controversial Media Matters progressive activist group in 2010, purportedly to “support a gun and public safety issue initiative.”

While Obama was on the Joyce Foundation board, the organization granted tens of millions of dollars to gun-control organizations. Also numerous large grants were provided to a group called Leadership for Quality Education, which was run by John Ayers, the brother of Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.

Also while Obama was at Joyce, the foundation gave numerous grants to the Small Schools workshop at the University of Chicago, which was founded by Bill Ayers and is run by avowed communist activist Mike Klonsky, who served with Ayers in the Students for a Democratic Society.



Top recipients of contributions from the Urban Institute's employees and family members (Source: Influence Explorer)

A 2011 US News and World Report story revealed that the Urban Institute’s orientation is “liberal” and of the $79,000 in political donations by employees from 2003-2010, zero percent went to Republicans or third-party candidates. Every penny donated went to a Democrat. A WND investigation of the donations and backgrounds of Urban Institute officers and trustees, found:

• Sarah Rosen Wartell, president of the Urban Institute – with compensation of $366,691 from the organization in 2012 – is co-founder of the Center for American Progress, the left-leaning Washington activist team also led by John Podesta, who now is working in the White House on Obama’s executive orders. She donated $1,250 to Obama’s 2008 campaign and $5,950 to Democrats since 2002. Wartell served as President Bill Clinton’s special assistant for economic policy and deputy director of the National Economic Council. Podesta’s group recently has suggested such changes as the involvement of labor unions in higher education. That idea includes a specific set of courses for all students to take “across a range of disciplines.” His idea was to have the Department of Education go ahead with the plan without consulting Congress.

• Eric Toder, now an institute fellow at the Urban Institute and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, was previously President Bill Clinton’s Treasury deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis from 1993-1996 and served as director of the IRS Office of Research from 2001 to 2004. Toder also served on the Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council and the IRS’ information Reporting Advisory Committee during Obama’s administration from 2007-2010. He joined the Urban Institute in 1998. Toder contributed $3,800 to Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and $1,500 to other Democrats and Democrat committees. In 2004, he gave $4,000 to John Kerry.

• Freeman Hrabowski, vice chairman of the Urban Institute board of trustees, donated $5,000 to the Obama victory fund in 2008 and $1,000 to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. In 2012, he donated $5,000 to Obama’s victory fund. Since 2004, he has donated $21,900 – all to Democrat candidates.

• Jamie S. Gorelick, vice chairman of the Urban Institute board of trustees, served as President Bill Clinton’s deputy attorney general from 1994 to 1997 and also as vice chairman of Fannie Mae from 1997 to 2003, the year Fannie Mae was accused of improper accounting after it showed $9 billion in unrecorded losses. Gorelick was paid more than $26 million as a top Fannie Mae executive before the mortgage giant received a taxpayer-funded bailout. Gorelick is also reportedly the official blamed for the pre-Sept. 11 “wall of separation” that prevented the CIA and FBI from comparing investigation notes. She was appointed by former Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., to serve on the 9-11 Commission. Since 2000, Gorelick has contributed at least $257,150 to Democrat candidates and leftist organizations – including $10,000 to Obama’s 2008 victory fund and $10,000 to his 2012 victory fund – and only $6,500 to Republicans. She is also a major donor to the Urban Institute.

• Joel L. Fleishman, listed as the Urban Institute’s chairman of the Board of Trustees, gave $2,300 to Obama’s 2008 campaign. Since 2000, he has contributed $28,209 – all to Democrat candidates.

• Robert Solow, former vice chairman of the Urban Institute board of trustees, is a Nobel-Prize winning economist who is known for counseling Democrats, said he voted for Obama “with the greatest of pleasure” and donated to the president’s 2008 campaign.

• Robert D. Reischauer, listed as president of the Urban Institute in 2010, was a senior fellow of economic studies at the leftist think-tank the Brookings Institution in the late ’80s and ’90s. While he worked for the Urban Institute, he donated $2,000 to Democrat candidates.

Among other Urban Institute donors are the American Express Foundation, the Energy Foundation, the Fannie Mae Foundation, the Ford Foundation and the Soros-funded Open Society Institute.

The organization also receives huge amounts of federal dollars, getting nearly $55 million “during the last few years of the Clinton administration.” A 2011 filing by the organization revealed that its “government grants (contributions)” during that year totaled more than $44 million.

The Urban Institute was awarded substantial Treasury Department contracts in 2006 and 2007 when President George W. Bush was in office, totaling $2,082,685. However, both of the contracts are fairly straightforward and listed as “New Market Tax Credit Program Evaluation.” The Treasury Department explains, “The New Markets Tax Credit Program (NMTC Program) was established by Congress in 2000 to spur new or increased investments into operating businesses and real estate projects located in low-income communities.”

Many of the government contract databases offer very few details on Urban Institute contracts predating 2006.

In fiscal year 2014, the Treasury Department specifically awarded more than $4 million in contracts to the Urban Institute. There’s no indication whether those funds were used specifically for screening nonprofit applications for the IRS. Many of the services are vaguely categorized as “Program Evaluation Services,” “Special Studies/Analysis – Data,” “Other Professional Services” and “Operations Research and Quantitative.” Further descriptions include, “data matching services” for the IRS or “modification to add scope to research project.”



And federal records suggest there was a surge in prime awards payments from the Treasury Department to the Urban Institute in 2012, several months before the presidential election and when the IRS targeting of conservative groups was in full swing.

U.S. Department of Treasury contract awards to the Urban Institute from 2009-2012 (Source: USASpending.gov)

Current donors include the Ford and MacArthur foundations, Bill Gates’ foundation, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Popplestone Foundation, Stoneman Family Foundation, Price Family Charitable Fund and others. The Form 990 provides the public with financial information about the group, and it also is used by the government to keep up to date with nonprofits and prevent such organizations from abusing their tax-exempt status.

Failure to complete a form 990s for three consecutive years automatically results in the loss of tax-exempt status.

The forms can be filed by larger organizations either electronically or by filling out and mailing a complete form manually. Most nonprofits whose annual gross receipts are $50,000 or less are required to electronically submit Form 990, which is also known as the e-Postcard.

In 2007, the IRS modified its Form 990, requiring more significant disclosures on corporate governance and boards of directors.

The Urban Institute’s partnership with the IRS, meanwhile, goes back to 1997, when the nonprofit was contracted to digitize and help make the data associated with Form 990s more accessible to the public.

Also in 1997, the Urban Institute contracted with Philanthropic Research, Inc., which later renamed itself GuideStar, to digitize form 990s.

This is not the first time a Democratic Party president has used the IRS to target political foes.
As WND has reported, during President Bill Clinton’s term in office, IRS audits were conducted against individuals and groups who caused problems for the administration. Several prominent conservative groups found themselves facing IRS audits following their criticism of the president and his policies. Among the conservative groups targeted for audits were the Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America, Citizens Against Government Waste, National Review, American Spectator, David Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture and the Western Journalism Center.

In his 1999 column, “Clinton’s IRS gestapo,” WND Editor Joseph Farah wrote, “In a very real way, the IRS has been Clinton’s secret police agency – the go-to guys when no other punishment will do.”
A leader of a small exempt organization, who did not want his name used, told WND, “By unconstitutionally using a left-leaning ‘think tank’ to decide who lives or dies, Obama has turned the IRS into a conservative tar pit run by liberal policy activists. By denying 501c(4) status to conservative 501c(3) nonprofits, they are already trapped as non-political entities. Where most non-501c(4) organizations advocate for something in their area of interest, they are corralled for mass sacrifice on the altar of radical liberalism. I predict we will see mass revocations of thousands of good conservative corporate charters, most likely done all at the same time so we cannot stop them in time. This must be stopped now and a transparent, objective, non-partisan method for reviewing 990-N forms implemented immediately before the mass execution takes place.”

Officials with the IRS did not respond to WND requests for comment.

And former IRS official Marcus Owens told WND the process probably is viewed by the IRS as a cost-effective way of processing data.

The Urban Institute was set up in 1968 by President Lyndon Johnson to “study” the nation’s urban issues. Its members have included Cyrus Vance, Robwert McNamara and William Gorham.

Additional reporting by Chelsea Schilling and Bob Unruh and research by Brenda J. Elliott.


http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/smoking-g...cal-targeting/

WND Related Stories

Attorney: Feds not interviewing IRS victims
'IRS probe a sham, nonexistent'
Obama: 'Not a smidgen' of IRS corruption
New IRS rules would scuttle tea parties
First IRS, now FBI shafts tea party
Look out! Obama weaponizing IRS
Tell IRS to stop harassing conservatives
IRS rule may allow political targeting
IRS retreats from attack on veterans
Members of Congress: Abolish IRS
Top names added to lawsuit against IRS
Now IRS targets veterans' group
Surprise! IRS assault on churches started with Holder
It's not just the IRS attacking conservatives
'Gang of 3': Time to dump the IRS
IRS investigation one step closer to White House
Americans' new rally call: End IRS
Americans: Obama used IRS for payback
House panel votes IRS official must testify
IRS chief unable to defend 'no wrongdoing' claim
New report: IRS deliberately broke rules
Voices of the tea party
Tea party fires back, 'audits the IRS'
American powerhouse goes full throttle vs. IRS
322 IRS visits to White House
Boehner: IRS scandal touches Oval Office
IRS tells ministry: You can't talk about that
Testimony suggests IRS is lying
Did a former White House counsel do it?
'Spock' apologizes for 'embarrassing' IRS video
Bombshell: 'Proof' IRS committed felony
IRS exempts terror front group over tea party
New IRS boss, same stonewall
IRS actually fears man who doesn't file taxes
Did IRS targeting start with Israel?
IRS agents carrying shotguns not a big deal?
Lawsuit: IRS, OSHA, ATF, FBI probed tea party group
Major role-reversal! IRS now in crosshairs
IRS scandals prompt Obama to 'get out of Dodge'
IRS to be sued in federal court
IRS to America: Your emails are ours
Congressman: IRS used 'Soviet-style intimidation'
Media blame Rush Limbaugh in IRS scandal
Democrats turn on IRS: 'There will be hell to pay'
Christians claim IRS harassment in election
Senator to IRS: 'That's a lie by omission'
IRS targeting brings tea party back from dead
Hillary helped draft IRS charge against Nixon
Congressman gets standing O for nailing IRS chief
Top IRS official ducks the big question
GOP rock stars rip into IRS
IRS playing politics with your health, too?
Lawmakers demand jail time for IRS scandal
'Fired' IRS commissioner already planned exit
Look who IRS blames for targeting tea party
Obama classmate: See, I told ya so about IRS
Why Obama released embarrassing IRS bombshell
1,600 pastors to IRS: Stay out of our pulpits!


http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/smoking-g...cal-targeting/

Republican Leaders Fight Back Against BARRY'S IRS Power Grab!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Ralph V. Cutolo on February 10, 2014 at 7:30am
View Blog

Republicans are fighting back against proposed new IRS rules that they say would make formal the tax agency’s infamous crackdown on Tea Party groups that oppose the Obama agenda, stripping them of their free speech rights during election cycles.

“Every American needs to know about this abuse of power,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) said in a recent speech on the Senate floor. “Let me be clear: What the administration is proposing poses a grave threat to the ability of ordinary Americans to freely participate in the Democratic process.”

FOLLOW LINKS BELOW>>>>

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/republican-leaders-f...

http://conservative-americans.com/IRS-Targets-Conservatives/republi...

http://patriotaction.net/profiles/bl...msg_share_post

NEW IRS RULES WOULD SCUTTLE TEA PARTIES

'All they did was shift tactics'

Published: 01/19/2014
GARTH KANT


WASHINGTON — Constitutional law experts tell WND the IRS hasn’t stopped targeting conservative groups, including tea parties. It’s just trying a different approach, one that may be impossible to stop.

Many have heard of the president’s repeated promises last week to bypass Congress to accomplish his goals, saying “I’m going to act on my own if Congress is deadlocked. I’ve got a pen, to take executive actions where Congress won’t, and I’ve got a telephone to rally folks around he country on this mission.”

But another effort to fundamentally transform the American political system has gone little noticed and barely reported by the mainstream media, and it has many conservatives alarmed about its possible effect on elections and free speech, because they are virtually powerless to prevent it.



On Nov. 29, 2013, the day after Thanksgiving, the IRS quietly proposed regulations that critics say would drastically change the nature of elections and severely limit the power of conservative grassroots organizations, such as tea parties, by redefining what is considered tax-exempt political activity.

The proposal would change the rules for a type of tax-exempt political organization called a 501(c)(4), which typically engage in citizen education and grassroots lobbying.

Attorney Cleta Mitchell

Numerous grassroots organizations (including many tea parties) are 501(c)(4)s, and many prominent conservatives see the proposed rules as an attempt to shut down such groups as the Tea Party Patriots, the Family Research Council and the American Family Association.

The new rules would remove tax-exempt status for certain political activities by redefining them as “candidate-related political activity.”

According to Washington attorney Cleta Mitchell, who represents a number of the tea-party groups targeted by the IRS, these proposals would treat as candidate-related activities virtually everything that a 501(c)(4) normally does:

• Grassroots lobbying

• Candidate forums

• Candidate debates

• Voter registration

• Voting guides

• Issue advocacy

• Any public statements by officers of 501(c)(4)s that reference incumbents and candidates

Additionally, any event at which any candidate for office appears within 30 days of a primary, or 60 days of a general election, would be automatically deemed a “candidate-related political activity.”

The rules would also treat meetings with public officials as taxable events, even if the appearance was in an official capacity and not as a candidate.
Mitchell said 501(c)(4) groups would be left with very little to do because almost everything would be a candidate-related political activity.

Even worse, she predicts it would force citizens to get their information about candidates from 30-second television ads and the media rather than from candidate debates, candidate forums and by seeing public officials face-to-face in town hall and other meetings.

Tea Party Patriots President Jenny Beth Martin

Jenny Beth Martin, president and co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, an umbrella organization supporting thousands of local organizations and millions of members, told WND, “It’s going to affect our ability to have free speech and hold members of Congress accountable.”

“Speaking as one who’s been targeted by the IRS,” she said the regulations will severely hamper her groups members’ ability as citizens to coordinate with one another and understand what Congress is doing, and then to be able to decide when they need to hold Congress accountable.

That’s because, Martin emphasized, “It costs money to get a big group of people together to research bills and find out what Congress is doing and then get the information out to people.”

In the video below, Mitchell details how she believes the proposed IRS regulations would silence tea parties.


Confusion may arise over the 501(c)(4) designation because the IRS calls such groups “social welfare organizations,” which may conjure images of neighborhood watches or volunteer fire departments.

In fact, on March 12, 2012, Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Al Franken, D-Minn., and five other Democrats signed a letter demanding the IRS target conservative groups and impose tighter restrictions on 501(c)(4) groups affiliated with the tea parties because, they claimed, the groups were “masquerading as social welfare organizations.”



And, sure enough, just a few months later, in September 2012, IRS Director of the Exempt Organizations Division Lois Lerner announced the agency “will consider proposed changes” in the regulations governing eligibility for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status because of complaints that some “social welfare” groups were being used too politically.

That’s the same Lois Lerner who ended up, on May 10, 2013, apologizing for the IRS having inappropriately targeted conservative groups (such as 501(c)(4) tea parties) for years.

Lois Lerner

After sparking the entire IRS scandal, Lerner then invoked her Fifth Amendment right on May 22, 2013, rather than explain her actions to Congress.

However, despite Democrat’s objections, when it comes to the stated purpose of these groups, the IRS regulation on “501(c)(4) – Civic Leagues and Social Welfare Organizations” states “if you submit proof that your organization is organized primarily to promote social welfare, it can obtain exemption even if it participates legally in some political activity on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office.”

The website Legalzoom further clarifies: “501(c)(4) organizations are allowed to engage in political activities in ways that other tax-exempt organizations are not. For example, a 501(c)(4) may spend as much money as it wants on lobbying activities. It may also endorse or oppose any political candidates of its choosing, and participate in campaigns by offering money, time or the use of its facilities.”

Democrats objected to the political use of 501(c)(4)s for politics only after tea parties became a strong political force in the 2010 midterm elections, helping put the House of Representatives back under Republican control.

Bloomberg even noted in its article back on Sept. 24, 2012, that 501(c)(4)s “have long been politically active, but several such organizations have become especially visible in the 2012 Presidential election, causing some to question the appropriateness of significant political involvement under this provision of the tax code.”

Indeed, leftists have been using 501(c)(4)s for advocacy organizations during campaigns for years.

MoveOn.org and the NAACP are both 501(c)(4)s.

“Conservatives have been playing catch-up,” said David French, senior counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, which is suing the government on behalf of tea-party groups targeted by the IRS.

“501(c)(4)s are only a threat to the republic since conservatives have begun their own movement of utilizing every legal means available to influence issues the same way the left has for years,” he told WND.

When WND asked American Family Association, or AFA, general counsel Patrick Vaughn what made him think the proposed IRS regulations target conservatives, he said that’s because leftist groups more often use a type of tax-exempt organization named after section 527 of the IRS tax code.

He said the “huge money going to liberal causes” coming from big-money donors like George Soros goes into 527 organizations. If it comes from the grassroots, it flows through the unions.

Aside from a few large donors like the Koch brothers, most conservative money comes from smaller sources such as business owner and families, according to Vaughn, who noted that money traditionally flows into 501(4)(c) community-betterment organizations.

“The government and the IRS know that, so they’re targeting the structure the conservatives use.”

In fact, Vaughn believes it’s more than just an attempt to change tax rules.
It’s part of a “coup” and an attempt to shift power from the people to the president, according to the constitutional law expert.

“I think we are in the middle of a quiet coup” and the president is telling Americans that it is a “good thing” to go around their elected representatives to serve his constituency, according Vaughn.

He told WND, “The current administration does not respect the system. They want to fundamentally change it. They believe in power. They believe in whatever means are necessary to justify their ends. And that’s what they’re executing. I am serious about this.”

Vaughn explained how the executive branch of government is attempting to implement a bill Congress rejected in 2012, The Disclose Act. He believes administration is subverting the separation of powers by attempting to dictate, through an executive agency, the IRS, a law that Congress rejected.
Is that unconstitutional?

“You have to be careful here,” Vaughn warned, explaining that “administrative agencies have to fill in gaps that are left by the law” and they have latitude to figure out how to implement regulations.

French told WND the threat to the separation of powers and constitutional liberties is “very grave.”

He called it extreme overreach by a federal bureaucracy that is largely unaccountable to voters, and we now have “an entrenched hyper-partisan bureaucracy at the IRS” that only compounds the problem.

The attorney said the particular danger these regulations pose is the IRS is attempting, “in the critical phase when most Americans start paying attention to issues, in the 30, 60 or 90 days before an election, to muzzle dissenting voices.”

And French doesn’t just blame Democratic lawmakers for the IRS targeting of conservative groups.

He noted how President Obama began to publicly criticize conservative organizations following the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court on Jan. 21, 2010, which allowed corporations and labor unions to promote or oppose political candidates.

“The president himself began to publicly condemn 501(c)(4) citizens groups, casting aspersions on their funding sources, demanding transparency” and not long after that, “the IRS began to ask about funding sources and began to make demands far beyond its legal limits.”

French said when the IRS was caught abusing conservative groups, “they apologized, but all they did was shift tactics, trying to suppress speech by regulations rather than through lawless administrative actions, from 2009 to the present.”

The public and lawmakers are virtually powerless to stop the IRS from implementing the proposed regulations that would so fundamentally change 501(c)(4)s and the election system, unless there is a massive outcry from the public.

Feb. 27 is the last day for public comment on the changes, and after that, there is nothing stopping the IRS from adopting them.

Only the courts could stop the changes by declaring them an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers.

Concerned citizens can register their comments with the IRS at the Federal eRulemaking Portal.

They must include this citation: IRS REG-134417-13.
Mitchell recommends concerned citizens tell the IRS these rules are unacceptable because they would:

• Keep citizens from holding their public officials accountable

• Silence citizens and chill the very purpose of grassroots groups

• Create different rules and standards for different types of 501c groups, such that a charitable organization could do MORE than a grassroots group

• Force citizens to get their information about candidates from 30 second TV ads and the candidates and the media – rather than from candidate debates, candidate forums and seeing public officials face-to-face in town hall and other meetings

• Treat as candidate-related activities essentially everything that a grassroots organization does

• Force organizations to remove legislative voting records from their websites in even-numbered years

• Treat legislative voting records as a taxable, non-primary purpose activity of a c4 organization

• Treat meetings with public officials as taxable events, even when the official appears as an “official” and not as a candidate

• Treat internal membership communications as taxable, if there is a mention of a candidate or public official, if a group has more than 500 members who receive the communication

• Declare certain activities to be “candidate-related” political activities, even if no candidate is mentioned

• Allow labor unions, churches, universities, veterans groups, social clubs, business groups and others to have greater First Amendment rights than grassroots citizens organizations

To read Patrick Vaughn’s description of the proposed IRS changes and his analysis of what the would do, go here.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/new-irs-r...JXffpd7KMWz.99