Corporations are People So Their Money Is Equal to Free Speech

 

Supreme Court Decrees that unlimited amounts of money from
Corporations and Unions is considered Free Speech and can be given to "Super Pacs".

 

Stephen Colbert Testifies Before FEC - Super Pac is Formed (Part 2 of 2)

How the SuperPAC hides its donors.

Carl Rove’s Crossroads GPS is a 501c4 organization that does not have to disclose its donors.
Crossroads GPS can then transfer donations to the Americans Crossroads SuperPAC and the original donors remain secret. "Clearly, these c4s have created an unprecedented, unaccountable, untraceable cash tsunami that will infect every corner of the next election," Colbert noted. "And I feel like an idiot for not having one."

With the help of former McCain campaign attorney Trevor Potter, Colbert created an anonymous shell corporation and a 501c4 organization.

 

How to Form an Annonymous Shell Corporation Registered in Delaware

2013 The IRS is investigated because requests for 501C4 haven't been approved in a timely manner.

pppMay 20, 2013 Trevor Potter Featured on The Colbert Report Regarding 501(c)(4) Groups
The Colbert Report regarding Stephen Colbert's application for tax exempt status of his 501(c)(4) organization. Mr. Potter explained that "there is no legal requirement that you file with the IRS an application for exemption" and confirmed a 501(c)(4) organization can be formed without actually asking the IRS to form one. To view the full feature, please visit The Colbert Report's website 12:58
Colbert learned that his PAC, a 501(c)(4), was never granted tax exempt status by the IRS because the Colbert Super PAC SHH never filed for it, even though it is a registered Delaware corporation and hundreds of thousands of dollars have passed through it.

“Your lawyers advised you that there is no legal requirement that you file with the IRS an application for exemption,” Potter explained.

“Wait a second,” Colbert replied. “You can form a 501(c)(4) without asking to form one? These tea party anti- big government organizations didn’t have to ask big government for permission but they did anyway?”

“Right,” Potter replied.

Colbert Super PAC - Strict Separation January 16, 2012
Because of the strict FEC separation of super PAC and candidate, Jon will have to determine what to do with all of Colbert Super PAC's money on his own.

Stephen Colbert Super Pac

Get all of the details behind this groundbreaking achievement. Find out what a Super PAC is, watch Stephen's journey to start his own PAC, view the FEC's Advisory Opinion that made it official

 

November 12, 2012 http://ow.ly/ljY6C

Super Pac money stays in their pocket after the election and it's perfectly legal.
Secret Money -- 501c4 - Colbert's LawyerTrevor Potter
Stephen Colbert learns how to give Colbert Super PAC money to himself and thereby hide it forever from all eyes and use it in a way that he wishes.
Superpac --> 501C4 -->Agency Letter --> Anonymous 501C4-- >

To Transfer the money from the superpac over to your 501c4 create an "Agency Letter" that tells the C4 that he is going to create a whole new and annonymous C4 and then the FIRST one transfers the money to the second one- and then the second one which Stephen Colbert will also run then disperses it - into his own pocket if he wants. And we are sure that no one will be able to trace it.

Doesn't the IRS know about the money?

The Agency Leter legal fiction is the C4 never received the money and never spent it so the NEW Anonymous 501C4 will send a postcard to the IRS with it's tax return on it and there are no numbers on it. You don't have to tell the IRS anything.

May 20, 2013 Trevor Potter Featured on The Colbert Report Regarding 501(c)(4) Groups
The Colbert Report regarding Stephen Colbert's application for tax exempt status of his 501(c)(4) organization.
Mr. Potter explained that "there is no legal requirement that you file with the IRS an application for exemption" and confirmed a 501(c)(4) organization can be formed without actually asking the IRS to form one.The Colbert Report's website 12:58

Colbert learned that his PAC, a 501(c)(4), was never granted tax exempt status by the IRS because the Colbert Super PAC SHH never filed for it, even though it is a registered Delaware corporation and hundreds of thousands of dollars have passed through it.

“Your lawyers advised you that there is no legal requirement that you file with the IRS an application for exemption,” Potter explained.

“Wait a second,” Colbert replied. “You can form a 501(c)(4) without asking to form one? These tea party anti- big government organizations didn’t have to ask big government for permission but they did anyway?”

“Right,” Potter replied.

 

The Origin Of 'The World's Dumbest Idea':
Milton Friedman

by Steve Denning

No popular idea ever has a single origin.

But the idea that the sole purpose of a firm is to make money for its shareholders got going in a major way with an article by Milton Friedman in the New York Times on September 13, 1970. Sadly, as often happens with bad ideas that make some people a lot of money, shareholder value caught on and became the conventional wisdom. The shareholder value theory thus failed even on its own narrow terms: making money. The supposed management dynamic of maximizing shareholder value was to make money, by whatever means are available.  Self-interest reigned supreme.

As the leader of the Chicago school of economics, and the winner of Nobel Prize in Economics in 1976, Friedman has been described by The Economist as “the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century…possibly of all of it”. The impact of the NYT article contributed to George Will calling him “the most consequential public intellectual of the 20th century.”

Friedman’s article was ferocious. Any business executives who pursued a goal other than making money were, he said, “unwitting pup­pets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.” They were guilty of “analytical looseness and lack of rigor.” They had even turned themselves into “unelected government officials” who were illegally taxing employers and customers.
 

How did the Nobel-prize winner arrive at these conclusions? It’s curious that a paper which accuses others of “analytical looseness and lack of rigor” assumes its conclusion before it begins. “In a free-enterprise, private-property sys­tem,” the article states flatly at the outset as an obvious truth requiring no justification or proof, “a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business,” namely the shareholders.

Come again? If anyone familiar with even the rudiments of the law were to be asked whether a corporate executive is an employee of the shareholders, the answer would be: clearly not. The executive is an employee of the corporation.
How did the corporation’s money somehow become the shareholder’s money? Simple. That is the article’s starting assumption. By assuming away the existence of the corporation as a mere “legal fiction”, hey presto! the corporation’s money magically becomes the stockholders’ money. But the conceptual sleight of hand doesn’t stop there. <snip>