Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Even a stopped clock is right every couple of hundred days or so. Trump finally got something right. Of course, it has frightening implications, but we can hammer out the details later   ( huffingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Misc, IRS, church, IRS officials, Tax, IRS decision, tax-exempt status, church official Mike, IRS rules  
•       •       •

5841 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Nov 2017 at 1:53 AM (12 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-11-09 08:33:18 PM  
This won't be popular around town.
 
2017-11-09 08:39:53 PM  
A con taking on a scam.

This should be interesting.
 
2017-11-09 08:46:39 PM  
It will be forgotten as soon as they make a nice contribution to the GOP.
 
2017-11-09 08:57:52 PM  
While you're at it, you might as well-
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 09:05:01 PM  
You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?
 
2017-11-09 09:17:09 PM  

Clutch2013: You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?


From his perspective, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

Narrator: There is.
 
2017-11-09 09:25:12 PM  

Clutch2013: You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?


Not seeing a downside here.
 
2017-11-09 09:30:21 PM  
I'm sure Scientology has a dossier on Trump ready to go.
 
2017-11-09 09:33:33 PM  

revrendjim: Clutch2013: You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?

Not seeing a downside here.


I know.  That's the best part.
 
2017-11-10 12:07:04 AM  
a highly inappropriate level of interference with the IRS by the administration

What else is new?
 
2017-11-10 12:56:38 AM  
As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.
 
2017-11-10 01:54:31 AM  
farm4.static.flickr.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-10 01:56:20 AM  
We should just rid of the tax exempt status altogether.
 
2017-11-10 01:57:30 AM  

Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.


Exactly what I wanted to say.
I agree with Scientology and that is just the starting point, because from there you do the same to each and every religion in the land...
 
2017-11-10 01:59:23 AM  

scottydoesntknow: A con taking on a scam.

This should be interesting.


It would be hilarious for them to sue him for slander, and discovery-fu the hell out of every scam he's ever run.
 
2017-11-10 02:00:37 AM  

Percise1: Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.

Exactly what I wanted to say.
I agree with Scientology and that is just the starting point, because from there you do the same to each and every religion in the land...


Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't they tax exempt based on them being charitable organizations (not that they all do charitable work, but that's another story). Don't think it's an example of government endorsement of religion
 
2017-11-10 02:03:43 AM  
Trump:
Go for it.  Pussy.
 
2017-11-10 02:09:57 AM  
I'm not entirely sure what the TFA is about, an actress who was formerly part of the Church said she talked to Trump and he promised her some things. That's nice I guess. There's no public comment from Trump, any of his administration officials or the IRS. The rest of the article is more of an information piece about Scientology and how the IRS would hypothetically go about revoking tax exemption.

Could someone explain the newsworthyness of this please, because I ain't seeing it.
 
2017-11-10 02:12:50 AM  
All them "God says vote republicans" need to pay a tax.
 
2017-11-10 02:14:13 AM  

Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.


Secular groups can file for tax exempt status as well, so it doesn't run afoul of the establishment clause.  The reason so many churches need to lose tax exemption is their flagrant disregard for the rules about pushing politics from the pulpit.
 
2017-11-10 02:16:36 AM  
No matter who loses, we win.

Actually, you know what? This feud will end with Trump being declared the re-incarnation of L. Ron, and he'll resign the Presidency to become the head of the CoS. It's PERFECT for him.
 
2017-11-10 02:19:57 AM  

mdemon81: I'm not entirely sure what the TFA is about, an actress who was formerly part of the Church said she talked to Trump and he promised her some things. That's nice I guess. There's no public comment from Trump, any of his administration officials or the IRS. The rest of the article is more of an information piece about Scientology and how the IRS would hypothetically go about revoking tax exemption.

Could someone explain the newsworthyness of this please, because I ain't seeing it.


Wait no, i'm slightly wrong. The actress didn't even talk to Trump, she was only told by a Trump aide that he totally supports her cause.

realmolo: This feud


What feud? Is anyone actually reading TFA?
 
2017-11-10 02:20:06 AM  

Murkanen: Secular groups can file for tax exempt status as well, so it doesn't run afoul of the establishment clause. The reason so many churches need to lose tax exemption is their flagrant disregard for the rules about pushing politics from the pulpit.


I still can't get over the fact, if even they don't politic from the pulpit, they sell TIMESHARES in the afterlife and don't have to prove it exists.  They play the long con, dupe people from birth to death taking 10% +/- the whole time with no burden of proof, no taxation, and no questions asked.

Ya wanna get rich, make a religion or join a franchise, people literally hand you money for nothing.
 
2017-11-10 02:37:53 AM  
Good.  Revoke all religious tax exempt status, from the fundie asshats to the libbyest of lib treehuggers.
 
2017-11-10 02:49:49 AM  
They told this to Leah Remini so there's a very good chance that it's just the Trump classic of telling people what they want to hear whether you believe it or not.
 
2017-11-10 02:52:59 AM  

shpritz: They told this to Leah Remini so there's a very good chance that it's just the Trump classic of telling people what they want to hear whether you believe it or not.


Thank you. I thought I was reading an entirely different article or something.
 
2017-11-10 02:56:13 AM  

Clutch2013: You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?


That is the best possible outcome. Well that plus making them pay taxes.
 
2017-11-10 04:23:55 AM  

HighOnCraic: Clutch2013: You know, I'm trying to think of a stupider way to commit political and possibly literal seppuku, and I'm coming up bupkis.

Does he really think this ends anyway other than an inordinate amount of his dirty laundry getting aired out in f*cking public for all of us to take a giant, involuntary whiff?

From his perspective, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

Narrator: There is.


CounterPoint:  Donald Trump is the current POTUS.  There isn't.
 
2017-11-10 04:40:00 AM  

shpritz: They told this to Leah Remini so there's a very good chance that it's just the Trump classic of telling people what they want to hear whether you believe it or not.


There is, but I'm still sitting over here going 'oh please, oh please, oh please'.
 
2017-11-10 04:51:08 AM  
I suspect Trump's reason for wanting to die on this hill is "Clinton did it," which is only two steps below "Obama did it" in the 'Things I Must Revoke' pile.
 
2017-11-10 04:53:15 AM  
Oh ho ho. Scientology has immense money and lawyers. Please, piss them off.
 
2017-11-10 04:54:45 AM  

feckingmorons: This won't be popular around town.


What's your point? NOTHING Trump does is popular - he is the most loathed POTUS who has ever served - with no close competition.
He is the worst and least popular President to serve in my lifetime, and that includes Nixon.
Anyway - he doesn't have the guts to take on Scientology. They have money and power, and fight back. He will do nothing.
You know this as well as I do - even you don't think that gutless punk has a spine. Why even bother trolling for him at this point? Your heart obviously isn't in it, and your buyer's remorse is really showing.
 
2017-11-10 04:56:23 AM  

Dark Side Of The Spoon: shpritz: They told this to Leah Remini so there's a very good chance that it's just the Trump classic of telling people what they want to hear whether you believe it or not.

There is, but I'm still sitting over here going 'oh please, oh please, oh please'.


Taking on Scientology would require courage.
What are you even thinking?
 
2017-11-10 05:23:25 AM  

jso2897: Dark Side Of The Spoon: shpritz: They told this to Leah Remini so there's a very good chance that it's just the Trump classic of telling people what they want to hear whether you believe it or not.

There is, but I'm still sitting over here going 'oh please, oh please, oh please'.

Taking on Scientology would require courage.
What are you even thinking?


Yes, but does he know that? He may be too stupid and narcissistic to understand what sort of hornet's nest he's poking.
 
2017-11-10 06:06:30 AM  

jso2897: feckingmorons: This won't be popular around town.

What's your point? NOTHING Trump does is popular - he is the most loathed POTUS who has ever served - with no close competition.
He is the worst and least popular President to serve in my lifetime, and that includes Nixon.
Anyway - he doesn't have the guts to take on Scientology. They have money and power, and fight back. He will do nothing.
You know this as well as I do - even you don't think that gutless punk has a spine. Why even bother trolling for him at this point? Your heart obviously isn't in it, and your buyer's remorse is really showing.


Nixon did incrediblly terrible things that resulted in a LOT of people being killed and maimed.  If you haven't watched the Ken Burns Vietnam series I recommend it highly.

Trump is a horrible person and a terrible president.  But he's a piker compared to Nixon.
 
2017-11-10 06:18:47 AM  
I didn't read past the headline, but if Grumps said that, it is in no way because he's actually informed. Somebody pissed him off about something, they wouldn't agree to a shady deal, or somebody insulted him. So now he's certain that this is the worst scam in the history of everything.

He has no awareness of how much he appears like Scientology to people outside his cult.
 
2017-11-10 06:35:13 AM  

Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.


Yep.  I'm fine with religious institutions not paying taxes, provided they don't use roads, sewers, police, firemen, or rely on government food inspectors...
 
2017-11-10 06:36:11 AM  

Tor_Eckman: Trump is a horrible person and a terrible president.  But he's a piker compared to Nixon.


Give him time :)
 
2017-11-10 06:38:01 AM  

Lackofname: Oh ho ho. Scientology has immense money and lawyers. Please, piss them off.


They're also responsible for some important tax rulings over recent decades, which is how they got those exemptions in the first place.

When you come down to it, the BS they believe is no crazier than the BS in other mainstream religions...so, tax breaks for one = tax breaks for all.
 
2017-11-10 07:01:23 AM  
I hope that no one sits him down and explains to him that all the Trumper morons would easily fall in to a cult if he started one.
 
2017-11-10 07:12:24 AM  

Tor_Eckman: Trump is a horrible person and a terrible president.  But he's a piker compared to Nixon.


Nixon founded the EPA and opened trade relations with China. Trump is trying to destroy both of these.

Nixon is still better than Trump.
 
2017-11-10 07:13:48 AM  

Tor_Eckman: jso2897: feckingmorons: This won't be popular around town.

What's your point? NOTHING Trump does is popular - he is the most loathed POTUS who has ever served - with no close competition.
He is the worst and least popular President to serve in my lifetime, and that includes Nixon.
Anyway - he doesn't have the guts to take on Scientology. They have money and power, and fight back. He will do nothing.
You know this as well as I do - even you don't think that gutless punk has a spine. Why even bother trolling for him at this point? Your heart obviously isn't in it, and your buyer's remorse is really showing.

Nixon did incrediblly terrible things that resulted in a LOT of people being killed and maimed.  If you haven't watched the Ken Burns Vietnam series I recommend it highly.

Trump is a horrible person and a terrible president.  But he's a piker compared to Nixon.


Nixon had five years unimpeded in office, too. What kind of smoking rubble do you think we will be looking at if Trump actually manages to last through his first term and win a second?
You do know the only hope Trump has in 2020 is to have us in a major war, right?
It's not an if, it's a when.
 
2017-11-10 07:18:51 AM  
Do it.

Either he destroys them or they destroy him.

Either way, it's a win.
 
2017-11-10 07:24:41 AM  

Snapper Carr: Do it.

Either he destroys them or they destroy him.

Either way, it's a win.


Not a shadow of a daydream of a chance. This is not a punching bag - this is an opponent, that can move, and duck, and hit back. Donald Trump has no taste whatsoever for such victims.
If you ever went to  a school that had born-rich bullies, you know Donald Trump.
 
2017-11-10 07:27:25 AM  

Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.


You really should do some reading.  Your argument is based on a lot of bad information.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/te​x​t/26/501
Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
 
2017-11-10 07:30:30 AM  
PunGent:
Yep.  I'm fine with religious institutions not paying taxes, provided they don't use roads, sewers, police, firemen, or rely on government food inspectors...

I feel the same way about The Human Society.
 
2017-11-10 08:55:41 AM  

Cyberluddite: I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.


So long as secular nonprofit organizations are eligible for tax exempt status, it would be a violation of the first amendment to make religious nonprofit organizations ineligible for tax exempt status.  However, I think that many religious organizations could be taken down by focusing on the "nonprofit" part.  Also there's that thing about not backing a particular political party or candidate.
 
Ant
2017-11-10 09:32:18 AM  
Huh, I always figured Trump would be at least a supporter of Scientology, even if he wasn't an adherent.
 
2017-11-10 09:33:34 AM  
Trump Thinks Scientology Should Have Tax Exemption Revoked

How about every religion that is based on made-up stories?
 
2017-11-10 09:37:43 AM  

Percise1: Cyberluddite: As I said in a red-lighted thread about this:

I agree that $cientology should lose its tax-exempt status. As should the Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., etc., etc. Because giving religions tax-exempt status is basically government endorsement of religions over secular interests and should be viewed as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Establishment Clause not only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, but it also prohibits the government from favoring religion over non-religion.

Exactly what I wanted to say.
I agree with Scientology and that is just the starting point, because from there you do the same to each and every religion in the land...


The rule should be that they all have to file, at the very least. Properties with actual places of worship (churches, temples, synagogues, mosques) can be tax free. Manses can be tax free only up to a certain value (no, pastor, you don't get a mansion). Land on which the church runs charities, schools, and non-profit outreach can be tax free. Investment properties than have nothing to do with charity or don't have churches on them are taxed. And everything is documented and filed, but you get to deduct the full cost of tax preparation.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report