Tax Deductible
A new feature has appeared on the Orly Taitz blog, DefendOurFreedoms.us, a “NonProfit Federal Tax ID#” down at the bottom of the page.
I suppose this is in response to calls for more transparency at sites like hers and Phil Berg’s. However, donors should be aware that while the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation may be a non-profit, it is not a charity, not a 501(c)(3). Donations to the DOFF are not tax deductible.
The way to verify a charity, an organization eligible to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions, is through the IRS Search for Charities page. The quick search is to put the word “Defend” in the search box, and the name type “Starts with”.
Orly never says contributions to her are tax deductible, but someone might mistakenly confuse a non-profit with a charity. Since Defend Our Freedoms Foundation is in essence a political organization, it can never be 501(c)(3).
I think I just figured out part of the picture with Orly. I believe she’s a Larouche-ite. Notice her emphasis on the supposedly British allegiance of BHO: in her second video she points out that we fought the Revolution against the British. But the clincher for me came when I found this page:
http://defendourfreedoms.us/2009/01/11/december-2008–law-of-nations-or-principles-of-the-law-of-nature-2.aspx
It argues that the importance of Vattel has been hidden because of the war against Leibnizian principles by the Anglo-Dutch conspiracy and that English common law tradition played no roll in formulating the Constitution. She clearly did not write the article, and no reference is given. Larouche’s same old mistaken ideas about Leibniz have been rolling around in his head like marbles in a tin can for years. In fact he knows nothing about Leibniz or Newton or Sarpi or any of the other figures off intellectual history he writes about, and he is also utterly incapable of writing a single clear and coherent sentence—so the style of Orly’s Vattel article is unmistakeable. Her fury at the bankers is Larouche-ite too. Plus of course she’s a racist, and an idiot, and a fanatic who think it is brave and strong to talk about secession and civil war.
It wouldn’t surprise me that this non-issue is the new recruiting hook for some of the usual paranoid fringe groups. Including Larouche, they were milking “9/11 Truth” for a while, but I had expected that would lose its cachet after President Obama was elected.
Has Alex Jones and crew started singing this tune yet?
Cut and paste from …
Leibnizian Natural Law
Life, Liberty, and
The Pursuit of Happiness
How the Natural Law Concept of G.W. Leibniz
Inspired America’s Founding Fathers
by Robert Trout
http://east_west_dialogue.tripod.com/id10.html
Following some introductory quotes the piece starts out with …
“While preparing a presentation on the economic policies of Alexander Hamilton for chapter meetings of the LaRouche movement, […]”
Well, to be fair the ID number might not be up at the IRS website yet. As I recall, it takes a little time to cycle through. In fact, it takes time to get a formal exemption letter from the IRS…how long has she been in the birther biz?
Secondly, it’s hard to see how she can show a true charitable purpose, but categories like “educational” are pretty broad.
Here is her California corporation listing at the SOS’ website:
SOS Listing
It looks like she only filed her articles of incorporation, etc. with the state last month.
Now, it may be that she incorporated under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law (Pt. 1 (commencing with Sec. 5002) and Pt. 2 (commencing with Sec. 5110), Div. 2, Title 1, Corp. C.), without applying for tax-exempt status with the IRS or FTB. Even so, she’d have a fair amount of record keeping and reporting to do; for instance, she has to file the names of the corporate officers with the SOS within 90 days of filing the articles.
If she’s really going the 501(c)(3) route – even as a private foundation – she’ll have to do a LOT of public reporting. Whoo-hoo.
(PS, the “Nonprofit Federal Tax ID #” appears to be nothing more than an EIN. That’s really the only way the IRS identifies you even if you’re an exempt organization…at least that’s true for the 501(c)(3) I volunteer with.)
If the contributions were tax deductible, you may be sure her web site would say so. If it BECOMES a 501(c)(3), I’ll be the first in line to protest it.
Yes, it’s hard to see how it would qualify in the first place, but in any case it would be a long line!
I just read this on nutty Orly’s blog: That the first Common Law, Citizens Grand Jury had “at approx. 4:15 pm March 28th in the city of Stockbridge GA the people of Georgia returned an indictment against Barrack Hussein Obama!!!!!! 25 Jurists, duly sworn in, heard testimony and in a unanimous vote, indicted the usurper”. Can you please explain this futile exercise to me? They have stated they are a branch of our government. I always thought if you were indicted, the next step would be arrest. They are truly insane. The following is a comment from Orly’s blog:
James wrote:
I thought ordinary citizens can not sue or conven a grand jury against a sitting President. The only indictment that can be issued to a Sitting President is the one issued by Congress in a form of an impeachment.
Reply to this
3/28/2009 12:19 PM Defend Our Freedoms Foundation wrote:
Under the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, with the power confirmed and reinforced by the US Supreme Court, ‘we the people’ have the power to instigate criminal charges when it comes to government oversight.
Citizens sitting as Federal Grand Jurors are the fourth branch of the States government.
THIS IS TRULY UNBELIEVABLE(excuse the caps)!!!! Your opinion would be greatly appreciated. I’m going to also ask for Native Born Citizen’s opinion.
The “Citizens’ Grand Jury” is harmless/pointless at best, criminal at worst.
Best case scenario (for them) is being ignored; worst case is having charges filed against them.
Somehow it wouldn’t surprise me if these things had been going on for years … think Clinton murder ring, etc.
I really don’t know. The “Citizens Grand Jury” has the same validity as the “Ladies afternoon bridge club”. Americans are free to associate, but they are playing with fire. One of those nut cases is going to go blow something up.
It seems telling that the “citizens grand jury” news appears at the conclusion of Dr Taitz’s WA DC trip. It rather distracts from any “disappointments” she encountered, no?
Hmmm, here’s a 9/11 Truther Citizen Grand Jury “comprised of 25 responsible citizens, fully sworn in the Common Law tradition”:
Truther Citizen Grand Jury
(Looks like they were quite popular in LA, San Diego, and Austin, at least.)
Here are citizen grand juries convened under state laws:
“Here are citizen grand juries convened under state laws:”
It would appear that the birther grand juries are more like lynch mobs than “citizen grand juries”.
The kansas citizen grand juries look like petition driven events.
The birther citizen grand juries are really based on Magna Carta cluase 61.
compare from
Ed Hale’s Bigfoot ranch
http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2442810129/show/999708
claudia makes her case at post #13
The Magna Carta on-line
http://www.usconstitution.net/magna.html
look at clause 61
replace the term Barons with People and you got yourself instant citizen grand jury.
Dr. Conspiracy were you reading my comments on Ed Hale’s site? I posted that the citizen grand jury sounds more like a lynch mob or kangaroo court. MY posts were quickly deleted and I was banned as usual.
And in news that’s just as important and valid, the local fantasy baseball league has announced that the World Series was won by the San Diego Padres against the Detroit Lions. Ty Cobb was at bat for the Padres in the final game, against the pitching of Cy Young, with Gaylord Perry pitching for the Padres, striking out Ted Williams when he was at bat.
Kangaroo Courts. It’s the “first we give him a fair trial, then we hang him” mentality.
Kevin, no, I didn’t read your comment (I rarely get over to Plains Radio). Mine was a follow on to an article I wrote some time back, Scapegoats and Lynch Mobs.
I agree. The state laws seem designed to allow citizens to petition for action by the prosecutor’s office, even if they’re politically motivated at the outset.
The truthers’ and birthers’ approach is another bird altogether …