Image 01 Image 03

Politico Reveals IRS Leaks In Their Big “Scoop” That Republican Nikki Haley Is Getting Donations From Republicans

Politico Reveals IRS Leaks In Their Big “Scoop” That Republican Nikki Haley Is Getting Donations From Republicans

“Haley’s nonprofit policy advocacy group, Stand For America, Inc., has received major donations from people . . . the Internal Revenue Service filings reveal”

Some people on the right like and support Nikki Haley and others not so much, but regardless of where one stands, this Politico “bombshell” that a Republican has (gasp!) Republican donors is seriously problematic on an entirely different level.

Just how did Politico obtain “an unredacted tax return filed by Nikki Haley’s nonprofit”?  That’s the question.

And since we have been dealing with an increasing number of government agencies at both the federal and state level being weaponized against the right, I suppose the answer is not shocking.  Wrong, unjust, disgusting, and unethical, but not shocking.

Politico reports (archive link):

Many of the GOP’s biggest donors are among those who funneled anonymous contributions to former U.N ambassador Nikki Haley’s nonprofit as she lays the groundwork for a prospective 2024 presidential bid, according to previously unreported tax documents obtained by POLITICO.

Haley’s nonprofit policy advocacy group, Stand For America, Inc., has received major donations from people including New York hedge fund manager Paul Singer, investor Stanley Druckenmiller, and Miriam Adelson and her late husband, casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, the Internal Revenue Service filings reveal.

See? Heart-stopping scoop to end all scoops, Republican donors donate to Republican! Stop the presses!

Haley’s team reportedly and reasonably tried to stop the publication of the article through legal means because they are donors to her non-profit and their identities should be protected, but the scoop to end all scoops won the day.

Why do these leaks only go one way?

So where did this “previously unreported” and “unredacted” IRS tax filing come from?

Politico continues:

Like other nonprofits, Stand For America files an annual tax return with the IRS. While the agency and the nonprofit must make those filings available to the public, including the amounts of contributions to the group, such nonprofits do not have to disclose the identities of their donors.

However, the organization Documented, which describes itself as a nonpartisan government watchdog that investigates money in politics, obtained an unredacted copy of Stand For America’s 2019 filings, which it then shared with POLITICO. The group did not share the original source of the filing, but it bears a stamp from the charity office of the New York state attorney general.

Needless to say, Haley is not happy.

Here’s the screenshot of the tweet:

She’s not wrong here.  No one is shocked to learn or even cares that Republican donors donate to Republican politicians, the goal of this “bombshell leak” is to create a climate of distrust and to chill future donations by revealing the names of anonymous donors.

If you are a Republican or conservative non-profit, get out of any state that has state income taxes. Biden’s super-charged IRS can do all your leaking for you . . . without laundering it through the state.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


No it’s not the scoop that Republicans are filling her coffers, it’s big time Democrats

Cause SHE is a RINO Globalist!

Nikki Haley Charter Club Donors Leaked, Wall Street Hedge Funds, Multinationals and Affluent Democrats are Top Donors

August 27, 2022 | Sundance | 175 Comments
For a deep dive into the financial construct Nikki Haley put together {Go Here} reference the CTH archives from November 2019, when she registered the Stand For America SuperPAC. For an overall summary of what she has been doing {GO HERE} and see the internal citations assembled a few weeks ago. Haley’s superpac donor files have been leaked and the funding pattern is similar to Ron DeSantis, only Nikki Haley has more rich democrats

    henrybowman in reply to gonzotx. | August 27, 2022 at 6:31 pm

    At least one working link to any of these claims would have been nice.

        Milhouse in reply to gonzotx. | August 27, 2022 at 9:55 pm

        CTH is a reeking sewer of damned filthy lies, just like Gateway Pundit. It doesn’t surprise me at all that you drink up that poison and pretend that it’s the truth. NOTHING from that site is worth anything, and citing it is proof that you are not telling the truth, because anything that was actually true would be reported somewhere reliable.

        Remember CTH is the site that made up the lie that Little Saint Trayvon’s last shopping trip was for the ingredients of “lean”, except that nothing he bought is usually used for that, and the active ingredient isn’t even obtainable legally in this country, and there’s no evidence that he had it from elsewhere. CTH simply made that garbage up, and fools like you soaked it up and repeated it everywhere as gospel.

          c0cac0la in reply to Milhouse. | August 28, 2022 at 6:01 am

          Says the disguised troll. It’s obvious that you do not read CTH. If you did, you would not write such drivel, if you are intellectually honest. While you put up a good front. such outbursts like these really gives your game away.

          diver64 in reply to Milhouse. | August 28, 2022 at 6:50 am

          “Lean” can be made entirely with over the counter ingredients. The active ingredient that I’m aware of is cough syrup. What do you think is in it? My understanding is not that St Trayvon was after that but rather a cigar to make a blunt. Hadn’t heard the Lean angle but I don’t go to CTH either.

          Gee, and here I thought he just wanted to get a bag of Skittles before stomping on Zimmerman’s head. (also don’t read CTH)

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | August 28, 2022 at 9:43 am

          diver64, as I understand it the active ingredient in Lean is cough syrup with codeine, which in the USA is not available legally without a prescription. Also, while one can use Arizona™ Watermelon Drink and Skittles™ as the inactive ingredients, those are not the usual ones. Far more typical is Sprite™ and Jolly Rancher™.

          The point is that the Conservative Nuthouse looked at what Martin bought: watermelon drink and a packet of Skittles, and said “Aha! Those are precisely what you need for Purple Drank! This is proof that that is what he wanted those things for, and the reason that the evil leftist media are all reporting the drink as an “iced tea” is that they’re deliberately covering up this incriminating evidence!”

          In fact, of course, one can just as easily make Lean (or Purple Drank) with iced tea as with watermelon drink. Either one would be substituting for Sprite. So the fact that he did buy watermelon drink rather than iced tea means absolutely nothing at all.

          And of course there’s no reason Skittles couldn’t substitute for Jolly Rancher. But those aren’t the standard ingredients, which was the entire basis for CTH’s “scoop”. Not “these could be substituted for the inactive ingredients of Lean”, but “these are what you make Lean out of, and nobody would buy them in combination except to make Lean”. Which is stupid and dishonest. And the whole right-wing swamp repeated this “scoop” and quoted each other, till it became accepted lore in that swamp and people like our gonzotx, Free Report, etc. just accept it as established Truth™

          The fact is the Skittles were for his little brother, who specifically told reporters that he had asked for them. CTH just ignored that. And by far the most reasonable reason why he bought the watermelon drink was simply that he liked it. He might have intended to use it for Lean, but there is literally nothing to indicate it.

          That’s when I stopped reading CTH.

          alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | August 28, 2022 at 1:35 pm


          “Euphoric effects and a dissociation of the mind from the body at high doses are the effects that make Robitussin a popular drug for abuse, according to Dartmouth College. ”

          Secondly, Travon’s recipe was one texted to him by a friend That was the recipe he was following. Thirdly, the autopsy showed liver changes seen with long term use of lean.

          After all of the coverage of the Zimmerman trial.. and this???

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | August 28, 2022 at 7:31 pm

          1. Where is this alleged text message to be found? None of the text messages a web search reveals say anything about this.

          2. Even if it’s true, that doesn’t change anything. The whole point of the CTH story was that the news industry was “covering up” by misreporting the drink as an iced tea, when in fact it was a watermelon drink!!!!!!!!!!!! And the significance of this coverup was that watermelon drink is the specific ingredient used in “purple drank” (a/k/a “lean”), so misreporting it was an attempt to draw attention away from his drug use and make him out to be an innocent kid. But even if he had a personal idiosyncratic recipe that called for this drink (which remains to be shown), that would not have been public knowledge, so the whole “MSM coverup” story would still be bullshit.

        diver64 in reply to gonzotx. | August 28, 2022 at 6:45 am

        Bro…I trust Conservative Treehouse as much as Zerohedge. You might want to expand your reading list a little

      Henry, she’s swamp bullsh*t, not less than Jeb! and his handlers. She needs to follow all of us, not lead any of us. She can’t be trusted any more than McConnell or Romney.

        And I wonder who appointed and put her forward for confirmation? Would it be the same guy who appointed Chris Wray?

        There were a lot of bad decisions made as to appointments back in 2017 forward. DJT trusted the likes of Chris Christie and C Rice (along with questionable family members) to fill important places in the administration which caused great harm to America.
        No one other than “The Donald” are truly perfect according to some posters around here, but we all have sinned and fallen short. I respect and agree with most all of his foreign policy and demanding respect on the international stage. He was good at that. But his decisions, like Nikki Haley and other matters on the home front, fell well short of what America needed.

        henrybowman in reply to | August 29, 2022 at 2:23 am

        Oh, that’s my impression as well. I’m not defending her.

        My response was to a posting of extraordinary claims with no corresponding extraordinary evidence… right down to two invocations of the phrase “(go here)” that went nowhere. Now, I love me a good artful rant, but mindless regurgitation of text found in some unspecified mine shaft on the Internet is… negatively compelling. Serious and novel accusations require some attempt at proof other than the poster’s own say-so. Even a link to CTH is better than zero links at all. At least then we can evaluate the chain of evidence for ourselves.

    Danny in reply to gonzotx. | August 28, 2022 at 12:23 pm

    The names revealed by these files are Republicans. We are not a unified party; and instead of castigating anyone who backs a different candidate as a RINO how about some engagement?

    Want to know why people want DeSantis? Try looking at and comparing the way DeSantis uses government power, seeks and takes any legislation he could get and works hard to shift culture and fight to the fact that the only legislation Trump sought while he had a chance was tax cuts and early release from prison (and he got both). Unlike DeSantis who presents legislation he knows can’t pass immediately and builds support for it in and out of the state house.

    Want to know why some big donors are backing Nikki Haley? Well she on paper (although not in practice) is a great candidate.

    Trump is someone with 100% name recognition and even now with the economy completely in the toilet, catastrophe in foreign policy he can’t get the coveted 50%+1 in a poll, and unlike everyone else he can’t claim people haven’t heard of me.

    He got 46.5% of the vote twice.

    He made many catastrophic blunders in office ranging from his horrendous interview about the James Comey firing that triggered the special counsel (He literally just had to say “Read Rod Rosenstein brief for the case for firing him I will say nothing else about it”), he appointed Christopher Wray, he didn’t consider censorship an issue until ten minutes before the 2020 election, he didn’t seek any major legislation and he worked horribly with congress.

    If you want people who don’t think Trump 2024 is a good idea to see it as a great idea show when Trump has shown he has learned something from his critical blunders, what he intends to do differently and how he intends to actually win a majority of voters this time.

    Until then stop calling people RINOs for not wanting a Trump nomination.

      Danny in reply to Danny. | August 28, 2022 at 12:26 pm

      This isn’t to say supporting Trump makes you a RINO it is to say there are fantastic reasons to not want him 2024 and if you want to claim someone is a RINO for thinking he can’t win that election prove them wrong; preferably with something showing Trump has learned from his mistakes instead of insults.

“Appalling. There’s got to start being consequences for people that keep leaking government info.”

The point is that it is NOT “government” info, any more than tax coffers are “government” money.
It’s citizens’ PRIVATE info, in government filing cabinets.

Until leakers start losing their pensions, nothing will change. Even if they were to fired (highly unlikely) they would just be picked up by another agency or an aligned nonprofit.

Laws are meaningless when unenforced, and tyrannical when selectively enforced.

    Never happen. Our country is done. Toast. Over. We have to start over again.

    I did have a thought: shy of sucession, states could renegotiate further indepence from the federal government.

    It’s our only way out of this mess the GOP got us into.

      healthguyfsu in reply to | August 28, 2022 at 12:55 pm

      I can give you one guess how those negotiations would go.

      Such negotiations to even be close to reasonable would have to happen when at least some conservatives are in power, and what politician of any stripe wants to associate their lead with the recorded fracturing of the country (I say recorded because we know many politicians actually revel in fracturing the country, but those some slimeballs wouldn’t be caught dead with their names in the record of actually doing so)

The leakers are the ones that need to be investigated.

Nikki Haley is a Rino and has passed her “use by” date. She is of little use to the Republican party.

And I wonder if Facebook is reporting their donations to Democrats. Over 30 posts on my feed in the last two days, most of them from ActBlue, on why I should support a particular Democrat. Hey- Admiral Mike Franken- a liberal is a liberal even if he wore a uniform. As a retired CPO- I’m not sending you contributions. I hope Chuck Grassley rips you a new A-hole on electi0n day..

We already knew the IRS has been weaponized, by The
One, against Republicans.

So other than providing further evidence of that fact and noting this info is supposed to be confidential — only if you’re a Dem, evidently — what’s the surprise?

Did one of the rabid low IQ Dem supporting Lois Lerner admiring IRS bureaucrats think we didn’t already know Haley is getting donations from GOPe/RINO/NeverTrump (and some Dem) supporting donors? What was he/she/it/they/whatever thinking?

    My guess is that they are trying to rile up discord in the GOP. But even that is stupid since all big-money donors (to both parties) spread out their donations among numerous candidates early on (and it’s 2022, so very early for the ’24 presidential election.).

    Ultimately, I think the goal here is to make donors think twice about donating to Republicans. But even that is dumb because . . . who the heck cares who gives what to whom? Dems obsess about that (unless it shines a light on their grift or pay-to-play scandals), but Republican voters don’t care that Republican donors donate to Republican candidates.

    Politico (and the Biden admin partisan hacks at the IRS) don’t care about that “revelation.” They want to stop future anonymous donations to GOP candidates. That’s the only thing that makes sense here. And that is partisan hackery that the IRS should never engage in, but we’ve known for years they are far gone.

      Jeb! in 2024 – for dog catcher.

      The Lois Lerner fiasco in 2012 undoubtedly discouraged conservative donors. No significant penalties.
      As Harry Reid said on a different topic: “We won, didn’t we?”

      CommoChief in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | August 28, 2022 at 10:09 am

      Yep. The goal is to:
      1. Create a Deterrence effect for potential donors
      2. Demonstrate that the cooperation between those in govt who disclose, the media which prints the disclosure and social media which amplifies the disclosure continues to exist and cuts in one direction

      IOW, the party in power, their media allies, tech companies and most importantly the partisan bureaucracy of Federal and State govt are sticking their finger in our eye secure in the knowledge that they can continue to act with impunity despite the many protestations that these govt employees, media, tech companies are impartial and above reproach.

        henrybowman in reply to CommoChief. | August 29, 2022 at 2:27 am

        Meh. Open Secrets already posts every one of our political contributions, to anyone who cares to ask them. You think I’m deterred any further by this selective horseshit?

      We forget how many billions was wasted trying to get Hillary elected in the 2016 election which was already heavily rigged for her to win. As I keep saying, selling cancer is very, very expensive.

      But even that is dumb because . . . who the heck cares who gives what to whom?
      They’re hoping for cancellation and the fear thereof. If they can rile a Twit mob into making these people back off, they win.

Not a lawyer, but why wouldn’t Politico theoretically be vulnerable as being in receipt of stolen property?

    r2468 in reply to jb4. | August 27, 2022 at 7:43 pm

    Because they are Democrats?

    Paddy M in reply to jb4. | August 27, 2022 at 8:24 pm

    Because we don’t live in a nation of laws anymore.

    Milhouse in reply to jb4. | August 27, 2022 at 10:04 pm

    Because information is not property, and it was not “stolen”. Illegally disclosed, but not physically stolen.

    It’s long-established black-letter law that no matter how illegally information was obtained, once it has been leaked to someone who was not involved in any crime that person has the absolute right to publish it, and no court has the authority to prevent it.

    Think back to the couple who illegally intercepted and recorded a phone conversation involving Newt Gingrich, and gave it to a Dem congressman who gave it to reporters. The end result was that the couple who broke the law got some sort of fine, but the congressman and the reporters were off the hook because they had been within their first amendment rights.

      malclave in reply to Milhouse. | August 27, 2022 at 11:34 pm

      >> but the congressman and the reporters were off the hook because they had been within their first amendment rights

      And more importantly, were Democrats

        Milhouse in reply to malclave. | August 28, 2022 at 12:17 am

        They’d have been off the hook even if they’d been Republicans. But a R congressman would probably not have given it to the reporters. He’d have done the responsible thing and reported it to the FBI. No more. So long as Democrats don’t behave responsibly Republicans must fight them using their own standards.

      henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | August 29, 2022 at 2:28 am

      “Because information is not property, and it was not “stolen”.
      You need to bone up on DMCA. Information is property.

        Milhouse in reply to henrybowman. | August 29, 2022 at 4:54 pm

        No, it isn’t. Even if you count a copyright as a kind of property, information is not subject to copyright; only a specific expression of it can be, if it shows some spark of creativity.

        In addition, “intellectual property” is not really property, it just acts like it in some ways; if you break it you are sued for breach of copyright, not charged with theft. None of the elements of theft are fulfilled by breach of copyright.

Haley is a snake in the grass, and constitutionally she is not eligible to be President

It’s written in the constitution and because of Obama, God how many fake birth certificates did he bring out, it’s ok?

    TheOldZombie in reply to gonzotx. | August 28, 2022 at 2:45 pm

    Unless I missed something South Carolina is an American state and being born there makes her eligible to run for POTUS.

    That doesn’t mean she’s good enough to actually be POTUS just that she could run for the office.

I thought Twitter had a rule against hacked or stolen information?

How is she not qualified? She was born in Bamburg SC! And yes she is a globalist, along with 65-70% of the current republican party. Mitch McConnell anyone.

    Barry in reply to jfker6. | August 28, 2022 at 2:29 am

    “How is she not qualified? ”

    She is definitely not qualified, eligible yes, qualified no.

    “eligible” is the word used in the constitution.

    scooterjay in reply to jfker6. | August 28, 2022 at 9:42 am

    Nimrata Randhawa of Bamberg, SC.

    Milhouse in reply to jfker6. | August 28, 2022 at 8:37 pm

    She is “not eligible” according to gonzotx, because gonzotx subscribes to the extreme fringe theory that “natural born citizen” as that term is used in the constitution means someone both of whose parents were US citizens when she was born. Since Haley’s parents were not US citizens when she was born, gonzotx and her fellow lunatics insist she is not eligible for the presidency.

    This theory is based on a line by Vattel. His book was certainly available in America at the time the constitution was written, and it’s likely that at least some delegates in Philadelphia had read it, but there’s no evidence that it was very influential on them; but there is no doubt that they were heavily influenced by Blackstone, who gives a very different definition, so it’s very likely that his is the definition they had in mind. The current consensus of constitutional scholars is like neither Vattel nor Blackstone; it is that “natural born citizen means “citizen at birth”. Haley is eligible both under that definition and that of Blackstone.

Ponder how much more pervasive and severe lawlessness and mischief the IRS apparatchiks can engage in, brazenly and unabashedly, with 87,000 new, goose-stepping hires and an additional $80-plus billion in funding. With the victims exclusively being conservatives, naturally.

Haley is part of the swamp that people have had enough of. I wonder when that message is going to get through to people.

    guyjones in reply to diver64. | August 28, 2022 at 12:09 pm

    Irrespective of your opinion, the larger and more pressing issue, here, is the IRS’s continued, brazen vindictiveness and lawlessness against conservative citizens and non-profit organizations. Haley’s organization didn’t deserve to have its IRS filing leaked. This is a continuation of a pattern of IRS abuse against conservative citizens and organizations, dating back to narcissist-incompetent, Obama’s, wretched tenure in office.

      Danny in reply to guyjones. | August 28, 2022 at 12:30 pm

      This doesn’t often happen but I think you put the issue perfectly.

        guyjones in reply to Danny. | August 28, 2022 at 5:36 pm

        Curious what you mean by “this doesn’t often happen.” Frankly, it sounds like a needless and snide knock against my comments, which I feel are rational, substantive and on-point. I’m not seeking your or anyone else’s approbation on this or any other topic, at any rate, so, I won’t inquire what your petty beef is, because, I don’t give a damn. That’s not how I roll. Everyone here is entitled to their opinions — deal with it.

        If I’m mistaken in my construction, then I withdraw this comment. Cheers.

          Danny in reply to guyjones. | August 28, 2022 at 10:20 pm

          When someone who is usually at loggerheads with you points that out when praising you…… is a very simple point of rhetoric that is used all the time I didn’t expect an argument from it.

      r2468 in reply to guyjones. | August 29, 2022 at 3:19 pm

      Declaration of Independence 2.0. We haven’t formally organized or set a date yet but we have our grievances written down.

Nimrata has a bit of work ahead to shore up her bonafides. Seeing how she didn’t have kind words for Trump, she completely misses the vox populi.
I urge her to avoid Lindsay G.
Why is there a “back to top” button in the way?

    henrybowman in reply to scooterjay. | August 29, 2022 at 2:36 am

    On a mobile device, it’s always in the way. On the desktop, it’s so far offside that I never even notice it. How many people actually USE the silly thing? I’m all for removing it entirely. I know how to get back to the top of a page all by myself.

      I’m not sure if or how many use the “back to the top” button on LI. I never use it here, but there are sites that are laid out in such a way that click of the back to the top button is just easier than scrolling all the way up. I’m thinking here of sites that do deep-dive stuff and provide a table of contents with links to key sections. So I might click on one of the sections, then click back to the top after reading that, to click on a different section (thereby not scrolling down the whole thing when I want to read only two or three of ten or twenty sections on one page). I’m not sure it makes much sense to have it here at LI, but maybe the plan is to one day have longer posts of the sort I just described that would make the button not only helpful but welcome. 🙂

If your reaction to this is something other than horror at the IRS and FBI (by permitting this) doing this illegal act of intimidation directed at someone they perceive to be on our side you have completely and utterly lost the plot.

This isn’t a story about Nikki Haley, this isn’t a story about wealthy Republicans hedging their bets between DeSantis, Trump and people they see as potential candidates this is a story about the IRS and the FBI (which permits this garbage without even a pretense to an investigation).

    henrybowman in reply to Danny. | August 29, 2022 at 2:41 am

    I forgot where I read the quote, but a tyrant was describing the mechanics of oppression. It went something like, “When your victims are flailing and screaming their lungs out, you’re nowhere near the bone. You know you’ve finally gotten to the bone when they are barely whimpering and twitching.”

    Well, the IRS has committed this very same outrage so many times, it’s not worth any more than a whimper and a twitch now.

“Republicans have been too nice for too long. The buck stops here.”

You reckon, Nikki. Go away.

BierceAmbrose | August 29, 2022 at 4:11 pm

1 — Doxxing targets.

2 — Talking points for the next “dark money” and / or “election reform” spasm.

Of course, govt collecting info is safe n no risk. Not like gun ownership records have leaked, leading to doxxing and worse. Oh, wait.