www.3atalk.com

I was informed, by someone I have never met before, but I would consider a reliable source, that the IRS agent who did the investigation was terminated for doing it with out just cause.

Perhaps that is why Fran has not heard back from that person.

Does anyone else have knowledge of that?

Stan wrote:I was informed, by someone I have never met before, but I would consider a reliable source, that the IRS agent who did the investigation was terminated for doing it with out just cause.

Perhaps that is why Fran has not heard back from that person.

Does anyone else have knowledge of that?

What is different about your "reliable source" and Bob and Gailon's reliable source??
Second and third hand information is not gospel no matter who says it. It is simply repeating gossip or many say it is.

How likely is this to be true when according to what I have read the IRS did not issue a letter,and only asked if the documents were wanted back or destroyed. There also was posted the "facts" on adventtalk that the IRS told DS and 3ABN not to discuss the case with anyone. Also that they issued an apology. Now how would that become knowledge if there were no confirmation, no letter to show etc.
Someone would have to know this IRS agent or they may be repeating gossip as well.

Very unlikely one agent pursued this for what,months or years and only at resolution it was decided to fire him as he conducted this audit without cause

Do you honestly believe this was done without the approval or knowledge of others and that it only required one agent going off on his own?
It takes more than a spiteful complaint to move the IRS to begin a criminal investigation. Something in that complaint would have to trigger a red flag.

Doing only a cusory review of the information the IRS makes available on their web site in regards to their whistleblower program it is possible that the reason Fran McDonald has heard nothing is that they are not required to call her and tell her the current status or disposition of a particular case:

Disclosure of taxpayer information

* Once a claim is submitted, the informant may be told only the status and disposition of the claim – not the action taken
in the taxpayer case.
* We can say whether the claim is still open or has been closed. If closed we can say that a claim is payable (and the
amount) or that the claim is denied.
* A claim can be denied if:
- the IRS already had the information from another source,
- an audit or investigation is conducted but leads to no finding of taxpayer liability,
- A finding or liability is made but the taxpayer is successful in an administrative or judicial appeal,
- Or a finding of liability is made and sustained but there is no collection because the taxpayer has no known assets
that we can collect against.
* All of that information about the taxpayer is covered by privacy laws which impose strict limits on what we can disclose.

You will notice that the terms are phased in terms of the whistleblower calling and requesting information. If Fran has such deep contacts in the IRS, as she claims, then it seems a simple call on her part should clear things up. Has she called? She has insinuated that she has been in contact on occasion - yet she has never gotten an answer. Is she telling the truth? Does she really have such direct contacts? Is she misleading others by pretending there has been no response ergo the investigation continues . . . would she lie like that? Additionally, the information below, also taken from the IRS website, does not say anywhere that an IRS agent will call a whistleblower and inform them of anything.

Tax Treatment of Awards

* Prior to issuing an award check, the IRS will verify the informant's mailing address.
* All awards will be subject to current federal tax reporting and withholding requirements.
* Whistleblower will receive a Form 1099 or other form as may be prescribed by law, regulation, or publication.

Appeal Rights

* The Whistleblower Office will communicate the final claim determination, in writing to the claimant. Final
determinations regarding awards under 7623(b) may, within 30 days of such determination, be appealed to the United
States Tax Court.
* Decisions under section 7623(a) may not be appealed to the Tax Court.

Again it would appear that there is no communication if there is no recovery. Fran McDonald may be waiting by the phone for a very long time . . . There is a constant and desperate attempt by Fran McDonald and her leader Robert Pickle to keep people believing that the IRS has not disposed with the case.

It would appear that we have another instance of misdirection, misinformation, and what - if this were a court case - would qualify as perjury on the part of GAJ/RP, Inc. Can they tell the truth, the complete, unaltered, unmanipulated truth . . . the record doesn't look promising.

- prof


http://www.irs.gov/compliance/article/0 ... 90,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/compliance/article/0 ... 90,00.html

Yes, there must have been some severe disappointment when the anticipated rewards didn’t materialize. Hopefully those that were counting on this financial windfall had a Plan B to meet their needs.

The Red Baron wrote:Yes, there must have been some severe disappointment when the anticipated rewards didn’t materialize. Hopefully those that were counting on this financial windfall had a Plan B to meet their needs.

This really doesn't have anything to do with "a reliable source" told me and I am repeating it here.


Or how the "reliable source" and the refusal to name such reliable source is any different than what Bob and Gailon do

odie1962 wrote: This really doesn't have anything to do with "a reliable source" told me and I am repeating it here.

Or how the "reliable source" and the refusal to name such reliable source is any different than what Bob and Gailon do

Odie - I agree with you about referring to unnamed "reliable sources."

What Stan has posted does provide a (plausible?) reason as to why Fran and etc may not have received a reply from their IRS contact.

But this has gone on long enough. I believe it when 3ABN states that the IRS investigation is over. [1] 3ABN has never outright lied - that is, made a statement knowing that it was not true. There is no reason to lie about this - they would keep quiet as long as the investigation was ongoing. [2] It would be foolhardy to state that the investigation is over, if it were not true, and post it on the internet for the world and the IRS to see. That could make for a much worse situation with the IRS.

Back to watching, listening to and being blessed by 3ABN for me!

Odie - I agree with you about referring to unnamed "reliable sources."

What Stan has posted does provide a (plausible?) reason as to why Fran and etc may not have received a reply from their IRS contact.

But this has gone on long enough. I believe it when 3ABN states that the IRS investigation is over. [1] 3ABN has never outright lied - that is, made a statement knowing that it was not true. There is no reason to lie about this - they would keep quiet as long as the investigation was ongoing. [2] It would be foolhardy to state that the investigation is over, if it were not true, and post it on the internet for the world and the IRS to see. That could make for a much worse situation with the IRS.

Back to watching, listening to and being blessed by 3ABN for me!

Sorry,I don't think that is plausible. I do believe a resolution was reached. I don't believe the hype surrounding it.
For an IRS agent to be terminated AFTER the length of time this has been ongoing because it was without just cause doesn't even make sense.
To order,demand,pickup many thousands of pages of documents does not happen with one overzealous agent. The intensive investigation would have had to capture someone's notice and brought to a halt for doing so without just cause.

To be honest, I really don't care one way or the other whether an IRS agent was terminated. The IRS is not to blame for starting a massive investigation - unfortunately based on false allegations. The "we-only-want-to-cleanse-the-ministry-not-get-money-for-ourselves" group is clearly disappointed that not a single thing turned up. Does anyone seriously believe that a proclamation of total innocence would be made on the 3abn website if this were not so? All efforts by PickledJoy to prove the contrary remain totally fruitless.

odie1962 wrote: Sorry,I don't think that is plausible. I do believe a resolution was reached. I don't believe the hype surrounding it.
For an IRS agent to be terminated AFTER the length of time this has been ongoing because it was without just cause doesn't even make sense.

Stan,

As I was also wondering about what you posted in the OP of this thread, I decided to quote the post you made here over at Advent Talk.

Here is the link to my post there:

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... l#msg18341

You will find some interesting replies to my post in that thread.

PS - If it is against the rules here to link to my post over there, feel free to remove the link from my post here.

Thanks Daryl, but we don't have a problem with links here.

I don't recall hearing anything about any IRS agent being fired....

As far as Fran not hearing from the IRS goes, and why she keeps waiting and posting updates about that... well, that really doesn't make sense to me. Other than that she and others can't seem to understand or accept that their assumptions and conclusions in regards to 3ABN and DS's finances were wrong. I can elaborate with several different examples of what and why if any one is interested


The investigation is over, and according to the IRS manual they will only contact you if your info is legit and leads to them finding something.... Obviously they did not. Therefore, Fran has not yet, and never will hear from them first.

But as Prof Faber pointed out she herself, as an informant, can contact them and at least be told the status and disposition of the claim, and whether the claim is still open or has been closed. Why she doesn't is anyone's guess.

Daryl Fawcett wrote:Stan,

As I was also wondering about what you posted in the OP of this thread, I decided to quote the post you made here over at Advent Talk.

Here is the link to my post there:

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... l#msg18341

You will find some interesting replies to my post in that thread.

PS - If it is against the rules here to link to my post over there, feel free to remove the link from my post here.