View Mobile Site

About those ‘scandals’ and Obama

Text Size: Small Large Medium
POSTED May 27, 2013 10:45 p.m.

Editor, Manteca Bulletin,

Much ado has been made lately about so called “scandals” attributed to the Obama Administration. Let’s take a closer look at what has the GOP salivating at the mouth:

1. Benghazi.: The Right just won’t this one go. I believe all the hub-bub about this one is not so much about pining it on Obama as it is getting something on Hillary Clinton. Everyone knows that if Hillary runs in 2016, she is going to be very hard to beat. The GOP knows this so they want Benghazi in their hope chest.

According to the GOP, the big deal on this one is why the Administration didn’t immediately call the attack on the U.S. Consulate a terrorist act perpetrated by  Al-Qaeda  and why the consulate  didn’t have immediate military assistance. As Hillary Clinton said at the Congressional hearings on the event: “What difference does it make who did the killing, the important thing is to make sure this doesn’t happen again!”. As for the military assistance, there was a CIA Global Response Staff a short distance away and they did respond. However they were too late and were only able to rescue some survivors. Where’s the “scandal” here?

2. Wire tapping of AP reporters who reported on Secret CIA activities involving a botched bombing plan. The surveillance wasn’t to catch the AP reporters, it was to see if they could locate the intelligence leak among its own ranks. The fear was that CIA operatives might be identified and their lives put in danger.  How is that a “scandal”?

3. IRS singling out groups with certain words in their title who were claiming 501C4 status. The groups were mostly Tea Party organizations. The law on 501C4 groups or individuals is that if they are applying for tax exempt status (501C4), they have to not be involved in politics, such as campaign fund raisers.  The law states 501C4 applicants be exclusively engaged in social welfare activities.

However in 1959 the word “exclusively” was changed to “primarily”. This was done by the IRS without the approval of Congress. This created a big loophole in the tax code. Now groups or individuals could claim 501C4 status at will. Remember they don’t have to apply for tax exempt status, they just claim they are. It leaves it up the IRS to figure out if their activities are “primarily” for Social Welfare activities.

Their benefactors do not have to be disclosed either. For example, Dick Cheney’s SuperPac is a 501C4 organization, so he doesn’t have to identify donors of any kind.

Now why would the IRS not look for words like “Tea Party” or “Patriots” in organization titles who claim tax exempt status? Have you ever heard of a Tea Party organization that wasn’t involved with politics?

If you were an IRS agent assigned to the 501C4 office, wouldn’t you narrow your search on 501C4 claims, much like you now do on Google?

How is this a “scandal”?

Larry Baca
Manteca
May 26, 2013

Commenting is not available.

Commenting not available.

Please wait ...