albaby1

Boards Post

albaby1 posted to the Political Asylum board. 5:24 AM

Paternity leave

I know I'm dropping out of a few threads in midstream, but Albabyboy decided he couldn't wait another three weeks to join the world. AB^2 Mark II arrived today, which means I won't be much around the boards for a while. DW and son are doing great. [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:05 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

Without looking at the details of their applications, I think many, if not all, of these groups do not meet the IRS's definition of a social welfare group.

On what basis? You don't know anything about these groups at all, beyond the [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 9:35 AM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

That's not my claim. My claim is that political groups applying for 501(c)(4) status deserve additional scrutiny, not that they automatically are ineligible.

I thought that you stated above that these groups shouldn't have been [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 10:09 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

Good luck proving in court that Joe Blow didn't don't money to the Tea Party Committee of East Smithville because its (c)(4) status was still under review even though it makes no difference at all with regard to the deductibility of the [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 6:00 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

(1) 501(c)(3) status is irrelevant to donors, so they didn't lose donations because of the delay.

It's 501(c)(4), and how do you know that it's irrelevant to donors? Our law firm has a weekly 'casual day' where proceeds go to a [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 4:43 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

(1) 501(c)(4) is the section of the tax code dealing with social welfare organizations.

(2) Political organizations don't need 501(c)(4) status to be tax exempt. All they need to do is file a FORM 1112-POL with their [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 4:14 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

Yes, but that's irrelevant to my argument. Social welfare organizations need 501(c)(4) status to be tax exempt. But these groups in question are primarily political organizations. Political organizations don't need 501(c)(4) status for tax [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:46 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

That's wrong. They didn't even need to apply for 501(c)(4) status to be tax-exempt. If they refrained from activities while awaiting an IRS determination, that's their fault for being ignorant of the rules.

I'm not sure I understand [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:10 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

So that means the proper supporting paperwork was NOT filed--by choice. Claiming "it is hard" is not a valid excuse.

The IRS requested information that they were not permitted to require - not "proper supporting [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:07 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

I agree, but that's why the IRS was, in my opinion, correct to ask for additional information. The Al Qaeda Bowling Club, may have nothing at all to do with Al Qaeda, but it's not crazy to ask them to prove it.

They're not correct to [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 2:25 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

The explicit purpose of the Tea Party is to directly participate in political campaigns and to oppose certain candidates, both Democrats and certain Republicans. The tea party is not organized exclusively to promote social welfare. It is organized [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 1:21 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

That's why I find it so puzzling that no one is asking why partisan political groups are applying for non-profit status in the first place.

Because political groups are allowed to apply for non-profit status under 501(c)(4). Many [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Atheist Fools board. 8:12 AM

Re: Proposed shield law

OK. Basic question. What is the difference between a warrant and a subpoena?

Probable cause. You need probable cause to get a warrant, but not for a subpoena. The latter is a much lower standard of proof.

Albaby

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Atheist Fools board. 8:30 PM

Re: Proposed shield law

But it is a seizure, is it not? Unless the telecom gives it willingly (and why would they?).

Not one that requires a warrant, no. Absent any expectation of privacy, the government is allowed to subpoena the records of businesses [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Atheist Fools board. 8:01 PM

Re: Proposed shield law

That's unnerving, albaby. That should probably be repealed also. Seems like "unreasonable search and seizure" to me.

Actually, it's not (according to the SCOTUS). Remember, when the government seeks to obtain records of the [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Atheist Fools board. 7:07 PM

Re: Proposed shield law

Just repeal the effin' Patriot Acts! Then warrants would once-again be required for this sort of thing!

Sheesh. It's not complicated.

They don't need warrants to get phone records from your telecom carrier, but it has [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 4:03 PM

Re: Tea Party Groups Plan To Sue IRS

It's going to be interesting to see how they calculate damages in this, considering no one's application was actually denied. Maybe they'll sue for the cost of postage and phone bills.

The damages would likely be those caused by the [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:13 PM

Re: Lamest scheme ever

Anyone know how many of the conservative groups in the IRS scandal had their applications rejected and were denied 501(c)(4) non-profit status?

None. As in not one.

Anyone know what this supposed effort at political intimidation [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Political Asylum board. 3:04 PM

Re: Tea Party Groups Plan To Sue IRS

What took them so long? In other words, why'd they wait until after this became a political "scandal" to sue?

Without getting into the merits at all, this is a pretty obvious answer.

In the space of about a week, [more]

Boards Post

albaby1 replied to the Television Banter board. 10:43 AM

Re: Game of Thrones 5/12

I had forgotten an awful lot of the backstory - events that have already passed time-wise on the HBO show and not explored or shown and pretty much abandoned.

Yep - and that might be why they feel the need to spend some time with [more]