In formal comments filed with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) this week, the Center for Individual…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
CFIF Files Comments in Support of IRS Rulemaking to Protect Donor Privacy

In formal comments filed with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) this week, the Center for Individual Freedom (“CFIF”) offered strong support for the IRS’s proposed rulemaking to eliminate the requirement that certain nonprofit organizations provide the names and addresses of contributors on Schedule B of their annual tax filings.

As CFIF notes in its filing, "the Proposed Rulemaking would help protect the First Amendment rights of subject organizations and their citizen donors, without negatively impacting the legally permissible handling of the nation’s tax laws or 501(c) organization tax filings."

Read CFIF’s comments here (PDF).…[more]

December 11, 2019 • 03:45 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Notable Quotes
 
On Lies, Damn Lies and Politicians:
 
 

"Elizabeth Warren has a moving story about being fired from a teaching job because she was pregnant, a story that perfectly complements her political narrative that she is the tribune and champion of those who have been treated unfairly by the powerful. Joe Biden has a moving -- and horrifying -- story about his wife and daughter being killed by a drunk driver, a story that similarly could not have been designed more perfectly to bolster his political image as a man who can be counted on to soldier on in the face of adversity.

"Of course, neither story is true.

"Are we still caring about that sort of thing?"

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Posted October 14, 2019 • 07:36 am
 
 
On the Ellen DeGeneres Twitter Storm:
 
 

"In a deeply polarized nation, Ellen DeGeneres deserves praise for practicing tolerance toward others and not choosing her friends based on how they vote -- an anomaly these days, especially in far-left Hollywood and the #Resistance movement, whose rabid followers have allowed their political persuasions to extinguish any semblance of civility, open-mindedness and respect for different points of view.

"Luckily for American pop culture, Tinseltown still has a sliver of rational folks within its city limits. In DeGeneres' case, she spread goodwill at a football game in Texas last weekend and did more to unify the country than half the pols in Washington.

"It started with a photograph that went viral of the affable talk show host and former President George W. Bush sitting next to each other at a Dallas Cowboys game, smiling and enjoying each other's company. That should be viewed as positive, but it instead triggered an onslaught of online backlash from the left, so much so that DeGeneres was compelled to address on her hit TV show the Twitter mob who lashed out at her for sitting next to a conservative and being friendly toward him."

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Adriana Cohen, Nationally Syndicated Columnist, National TV Commentator, Boston Herald Columnist & Host of the “Adriana Cohen Show"
— Adriana Cohen, Nationally Syndicated Columnist, National TV Commentator, Boston Herald Columnist & Host of the “Adriana Cohen Show"
Posted October 11, 2019 • 07:33 am
 
 
On Ukrainian President Zelensky's Take on Phone Call With POTUS:
 
 

"Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told reporters Thursday his controversial July call with President Trump involved no bribe, blackmail or quid pro quo, as impeachment-minded Democrats claim.

"Zelensky spoke at a daylong event with media inside a Kiev food market, and said he believes the transcript released by the White House is accurate and that he knew the U.S. had withheld $400 million in military aid due to concerns about corruption and concern for American 'taxpayer money.' But the issue, he said, was never linked to Trump's desire that Kiev rekindle an investigation into an energy company with ties to former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden."

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Greg Wilson, Fox News.com Managing Editor
— Greg Wilson, Fox News.com Managing Editor
Posted October 10, 2019 • 08:06 am
 
 
On Ukraine Opening Probe Months Before POTUS Call:
 
 

"A newly unearthed document shows that Ukrainian officials had opened a new probe into the firm linked to Hunter Biden months before President Trump's phone call with that country's leader, Fox News contributor John Solomon reported late Tuesday.

"Solomon said Tuesday on 'Hannity' that the U.S. government knew Ukraine was planning to look again into activities at Burisma Holdings, an energy company that employed then-Vice President Joe Biden's son as a member of its board of directors, early this year. The report is noteworthy because President Trump has been accused by Democrats of threatening in July to withhold foreign aid to Ukraine unless its new president pursued an investigation into the company and the younger Biden's role there.

"'The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation,' he claimed. 'This is long before the president ever imagined having a call with President Zelensky,' he added, noting Petro Poroshenko was still Ukraine's president at that time. ...

"Solomon said the timeline of the alleged 'illicit funds' coincided in part with the time Hunter Biden held a place on the firm's board. The younger Biden was reportedly paid as much as $1 million per year for his time on the board, but Solomon said investigators in Ukraine filed a 15-page 'notice of suspicion' indicating they were 'looking at the possibility that the $3.4 million paid to Hunter Biden's firm may have been part of the illicit funds that were moving through the company.'"

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Charles Creitz, Fox News
— Charles Creitz, Fox News
Posted October 09, 2019 • 08:08 am
 
 
On Surging Middle-class Incomes:
 
 

"The latest Census Bureau Current Population Survey data now show that middle-class incomes, after adjusting for inflation, have surged by $5,003 since Donald Trump became president in January 2017. Median household income has now reached $65,976 -- an all-time high and up more than 8 percent in 2019 dollars under the Trump presidency.

"This data was compiled by the statisticians at Sentier Research, an economic research group whose founders have more than 30 years of experience at the Census Bureau in analyzing the monthly income numbers. ...

"These income numbers are PRE-TAX, so they do NOT include the impact of the Trump tax cut. The Heritage Foundation estimates that the average household has saved $1,400 a year on their federal taxes from the 2017 Trump tax cut. This means many working-class families now have a $6,000 higher after-tax, and after-inflation paycheck today."

 
 
— Stephen Moore, Economist, Economic Consultant
— Stephen Moore, Economist, Economic Consultant
Posted October 08, 2019 • 07:53 am
 
 
On the House Democrats' 'Impeachment Inquiry':
 
 

"Do the Democrats have a good-faith belief that President Trump has engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors, or are they engaged in a political stunt, the objectives of which are to appease irrational elements of their base and to batter Trump for 2020 election purposes?

"If they have a good-faith belief that the president's impeachment must be considered, they owe it to the country to vote on conducting an impeachment inquiry, rather than continue dodging accountability. Indeed, if Democrats really believe what they say -- if they really believe there have been appalling abuses of power, rather than mere missteps or political disputes -- then they should be proud to vote on it.

"Only the House can impeach the president. If there is to be an inquiry about invoking this most solemn and consequential of the House's powers, the House must vote to conduct it. It is not for the Speaker and her adjutants to decree that there is an inquiry. If the inquiry is to be legitimate, the House as a whole must decide to conduct it.

"Members of the House are the representatives of the sovereign -- the People. In November 2020, the People are scheduled to vote on whether Donald Trump should keep his job. If Democrats, who control the House, truly believe the president has committed impeachable offenses and is so unfit for his duties that we can't wait just 13 months for the sovereign to render that verdict, then they should vote to conduct an impeachment inquiry. If they are afraid to vote on it, then they shouldn't be doing it. And, as their committee chairmen are fond of saying, we should draw a negative inference against them."

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
— Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
Posted October 07, 2019 • 08:02 am
 
 
On the House Democrats' 'Impeachment Inquiry':
 
 

"There is no impeachment inquiry. There are no subpoenas.

"You are not to be faulted if you think a formal inquest is under way and that legal process has been issued. The misimpression is completely understandable if you have been taking in media coverage -- in particular, reporting on a haughty Sept. 27 letter from House Democrats, presuming to direct Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, on pain of citation for obstruction, to cooperate in their demands to depose State Department officials and review various records.

"The letter is signed by not one but three committee chairmen. Remember your elementary math, though: Zero is still zero even when multiplied by three.

"What is portrayed as an 'impeachment inquiry' is actually just a made-for-cable-TV political soap opera. The House of Representatives is not conducting a formal impeachment inquiry. To the contrary, congressional Democrats are conducting the 2020 political campaign."

Read entire artcicle here.

 
 
— Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
— Andrew C. McCarthy, Legal Commentator, Terrorism Expert and Former Federal Prosecutor
Posted October 04, 2019 • 08:03 am
 
 
On Blasting AG Barr For Doing His Job:
 
 

"With all of the breathless headlines of the last two weeks, it is astonishing that the entire city of Washington is not swooning from hypoxia. Much of the media have blasted out the news that Attorney General William Barr is 'implicated' in the Ukraine scandal, after sources said he pressed leaders in Australia, Italy and England to supply evidence about the origins of the Russia investigation. Esquire Magazine was a tad more descriptive, proclaiming Barr was now 'far up s--t creek' because of his calls.

"Yet not only is there a valid reason for such calls, but they could indicate that the creek could become a storm of sorts for Democrats over the coming weeks. The calls made by Barr were reportedly linked to the ongoing investigation by United States Attorney John Durham into the origins of the Russia investigation. It is not uncommon for an attorney general, or even a president, to ask foreign leaders to assist with ongoing investigations. Such calls can shortcut bureaucratic red tape, particularly if the evidence is held, as in this case, by national security or justice officials. A call to request assistance for the Durham investigation would 'implicate' Barr in nothing other than an official investigation. ...

"Even worse is there could be a one two punch coming on the Russia investigation. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is said to be close to releasing his report on the secret surveillance targeting Trump officials. The report is expected to be both comprehensive and damaging for many involved in the start of that investigation. Durham and Horowitz will not be easily dismissed. Both are widely respected and are working with career investigators. If either finds improper conduct, it could reinforce the position of Republicans and moderate Democrats in voting against the impeachment or removal of Trump, who strongly maintains that the Obama administration not only improperly targeted his campaign for investigation but proved lax in investigating allegations against Democrats ranging from Hillary Clinton to Joe Biden."

Read entire article here.

 
 
— Jonathan Turley, George Washington University Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law
— Jonathan Turley, George Washington University Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law
Posted October 03, 2019 • 07:45 am
 
 
On the Democrats' (Latest) Revenge Scheme:
 
 

"Another day, another scandal that's sure to trigger the Trump administration's downfall -- if only the American people would be less picky about what the definition of the word 'evidence' is.

"The Ukraine Call Transcript. The Whistleblower Complaint. The Impeachment Inquiry. The pieces of this latest impeachment jigsaw have reached mythic status, bolstered by frenzied reporting, and insistence on the part of Democrats and advocates that this time, they've got the president right where they want him.

"In reality, the documents offer very little in the form of an obvious smoking gun. Both the transcript and the complaint have become a cultural Rorschach test: no matter the evidence (or lack thereof) the reader will see exactly what they want to see. ...

"Fortunately, the American People have grown wearily accustomed to looking past the fakery and seeing these world-ending controversies for what they truly are: breathless revenge schemes orchestrated by a fallen political party."

 
 
— Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
— Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
Posted October 02, 2019 • 07:48 am
 
 
On Rushing Headlong Into Impeachment:
 
 

"Impeachment does, or at least should, give rise to the most serious deliberations. This case does not come close to meeting that standard. Both the whistleblower complaint and the rough transcript of the phone call are in the public domain. The only correct verdict is that the whistleblower is reckless, if not outright dishonest, in putting forward this complaint. The political commentators are every bit as bad in drawing overwrought inferences by taking passages out of context or adding hostile inferences to innocuous texts. Worse, the quoted sentence from the whistleblower's letter reveals that his entire case relies on hearsay of multiple conversations to which he was not privy, so it is impossible to cross-examine either the whistleblower or any of his alleged sources. Sadly, reliance on this information led the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community to conclude that the report 'appears credible,' even though 'the ICIG's preliminary review identified some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.' No mention was made of who that candidate was, and what those indicia of bias included.

"Nonetheless, the Democrats are gearing up to impeach on double hearsay, even though the best evidence of what happened is the call itself, which does not contain a shred of evidence to support the inflammatory charge that Trump was pressuring Zelensky to 'dig up' dirt on Biden to improve the President's chances of reelection."

 
 
— Richard A. Epstein, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law, New York University Law School, and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago
— Richard A. Epstein, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law, New York University Law School, and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago
Posted October 01, 2019 • 08:14 am
 
Question of the Week   
The most recent U.S. Senator to be elected President of the United States was Barack Obama. Who was the first U.S. Senator to be elected President?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"It turns out that the most revealing aspect of the long-awaited Justice Department's inspector general's report on the origins of the Russia collusion hoax comes from Attorney General William Barr's damning assessment of it.In unmistakably terse language, Barr denounced 'a small group of now-former FBI officials' for their 'misconduct,' 'malfeasance and misfeasance,' and 'clear abuse of the FISA…[more]
 
 
—Gregg Jarrett, FOX News
— Gregg Jarrett, FOX News
 
Liberty Poll   

Should House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff be investigated for subpoenaing and publishing call log records (with no details or context) of another member of congress, the president's attorney, a journalist and others?