Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
Mon May 27, 2013, 03:40 PM May 2013

O'Donnell needs to school NYT's Confessore on "primary" v. "exclusive"

The paper of record is still clinging to the standard of "primary" in the criticism of the IRS.

I've seen it repeatedly.

The law says "exclusive"

The interpretation is "primary" -- a wrongful interpretation.

Come on, NYT. A public correction is in order!!

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
O'Donnell needs to school NYT's Confessore on "primary" v. "exclusive" (Original Post) grasswire May 2013 OP
Quite right. elleng May 2013 #1
FAIL!!!!! grasswire May 2013 #2

elleng

(131,145 posts)
1. Quite right.
Mon May 27, 2013, 04:09 PM
May 2013

'I.R.S. agents are obligated to determine whether a 501(c)(4) group is primarily promoting “social welfare.” While such groups are permitted some election involvement, it cannot be an organization’s primary activity. That judgment does not hinge strictly on the proportion of funds a group spends on campaign ads, but on an amorphous mix of facts and circumstances.'

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/us/politics/nonprofit-applicants-chafing-at-irs-tested-political-limits.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&hp

FAIL!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»O'Donnell needs to school...