"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yeild, and government to gain ground."
- Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, Paris, May 27, 1788
There are so many angles on the whole IRS scandal that I cannot possibly keep up with every single story. Rather than present my take on the whole situation right now, I will post a slew of stories from various
***
IRS ACCUSED OF STEALING 60 MILLION MEDICAL RECORDS THAT COULD INCLUDE EVERY CALIF. STATE JUDGE AND HOLLYWOOD EXECS
Yesterday, the founder of one of the conservative groups targeted by the IRS brought up his concerns regarding if the agency could be trusted to handle health care information under Obamacare if it is known already to disclose information that it wasn’t legally allowed.
(Photo: Shutterstock.com)
At the same time, the IRS is already being presented with a case from a company that claims it stole more than 60 million medical records of more than 10 million Americans.
The complaint filed by John Doe Company against 15 John Doe IRS agents (this is how the plaintiff and defendants are identified) states that these records could include those of every California state judge, state court employees, members of the Screen Actor’s Guild and the Directors Guild, and “prominent citizens in the world of entertainment, business and government, from all walks of life.”
Court House News reported that the records were obtained while the IRS was investigating a tax matter with a warrant for a former employee of the company. The warrant authorized the IRS to obtain financial records of the employee in question, “not seizure of any health care or medical record of any persons, least of all third parties completely unrelated to the matter.”
“[...] none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search,” the complaint stated. The amount of records seized in March 2011 is “roughly one out of every twenty-five adult American citizens.”
***
BUSINESS
INCREDIBLE: OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF IRS OFFICE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSERVATIVE TARGETING NOW HEADS AGENCY’S OBAMACARE OFFICE
Well, this can’t be good.
It appears that the official who oversaw the Internal Revenue Service office responsible for targeting conservative groups has moved on from that post and now heads the agency’s Obamacare division.
From ABC News:
The Internal Revenue Service official in charge of the tax-exempt organizations at the time when the unit targeted tea party groups now runs the IRS office responsible for the health care legislation.Sarah Hall Ingram served as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. But Ingram has since left that part of the IRS and isnow the director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act office, the IRS confirmed to ABC News today.Her successor, Joseph Grant, is taking the fall for misdeeds at the scandal-plagued unit between 2010 and 2012. During at least part of that time, Grant served as deputy commissioner of the tax-exempt unit.
Grant said Thursday he would resign as commissioner of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division on June 3, TheBlaze reported. He was appointed to the post just eight days ago.
Here’s a May 8 press release announcing his extremely short-lived promotion:
But here’s something really interesting: Ingram received more than $100,000 in bonuses between 2009 and 2012, slightly before and well after her office started targeting conservatives, theWashington Examiner’s Mark Tapscott reports.
“Ingram received a $7,000 bonus in 2009,” the Examiner report adds, “then a $34,440 bonus in 2010, $35,400 in 2011 and $26,550 last year for a total of $103,390. Her annual salary went from $172,500 to $177,000 during the same period.”
News that the IRS official heading the agency’s Obamacare office used to run the division responsible for conservative discrimination comes on the heels of House Speaker John Boehner calling for a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act.
“Fully repealing ObamaCare will help us build a stronger, healthier economy, and will clear the way for patient-centered reforms that lower health care costs and protect jobs,” Boehner said shortly after the House passed a “repeal Obamacare” measure.
“Obamacare empowers the agency that just violated the public’s trust by secretly targeting conservative groups,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-In.) added. “Even by Washington’s standards, that’s unacceptable.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his reaction to the Ingram revelation: “stunning, just stunning.”
–
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
Featured image C-SPAN. This post has been updated.
***
GOVERNMENT
HOW TO TELL IF THE IRS IS EYEING YOU FOR A TAX AUDIT
[Editor’s note: The following is a cross post by Kelley Holland that originally appeared onCNBC.com]
You consider yourself a law abiding citizen, and you are not starting a nonprofit organization with conservative ties.
Even so, you may be a candidate for a tax audit—and you may have no clue what you have done to warrant the attention of the IRS.
The nation’s tax collectors have long made it a practice to look for discrepancies, omissions and suspicious activity to uncover tax evasion and fraud. And lately, the IRS has expanded its monitoring to include social media.
The agency now keeps an eye out for online discussions about nonpayment or underpayment of taxes, and even sale prices of goods on sites like eBay that don’t match what taxpayers report.
In a world where companies like Amazon can keep tabs on consumers’ online activities, the shift by the IRS is reasonable, says Edward Zelinsky, a law professor at Cardozo Law School. “This was always known to people in the tax community that the IRS, like everybody else in the 21st century, was monitoring online.”
But Zelinsky is just one expert concerned about the lack of transparency around the IRS’ practices. The agency “is so secretive about what is going on that that really erodes public confidence,” he said.
(Read More: IRS Mess Could Yield Tax Reform: Baucus)
The American Civil Liberties Union has also expressed qualms about IRS secrecy. That group filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents explaining whether the IRS always obtains search warrants to read email and other electronic communications. “Unfortunately, while the documents we have obtained do not answer this question point blank, they suggest otherwise,” wrote Nathan Freed Wessler, a staff attorney at the ACLU.
***
GOVERNMENT
SURPRISED? OUTGOING IRS HEAD TESTIFIES THAT QUESTION REVEALING IRS SCANDAL LAST WEEK WAS PLANTED
Did Lois Lerner’s admission last week that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted conservative groups come from a planted question?
During testimony today, outgoing IRS head Steven Miller seemingly admitted that the inquiry, posed by tax attorney Celia Roady, was, indeed, plotted. When asked, ”Was Ms. Roady’s question to Ms. Lerner about targeting conservative group’s planned in advance?,” the embattled former IRS leader answered affirmatively.
“I believe that, uh, we talked about that, yes,” Miller said.
National Review has more about the supposed plant:
Ousted IRS commissioner Steven Miller told the House Ways and Means Committee today that the revelation of the IRS’s targeting of Tea Party groups came from a planted question, and that Lois Lerner, the IRS official who managed the exempt organizations division, may have planted it.Lerner disclosed the information last Friday while speaking at a tax conference organized by the American Bar Association. Asked about the incident, she said only that she answered honestly a question that was posed to her. The question, however, was posed to Lerner by Celia Roady, a Washington, D.C. tax lawyer who sits on the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities.Miller indicated today that Roady was in fact instructed by the IRS to ask the question, and the Lerner knew about the question in advance.
Later, Miller was asked additional questions about the question. Texas Rep. Kenny Merchant, a Republican, inquired who told Roady to ask the inquiry about IRS targeting.
“I don’t know, actually, I’m not sure, might have been Lois Lerner, but I really am not sure,” the former agency head answered.
Miller continued, saying that he didn’t have conversations with Roady about the question beforehand. As a result, he didn’t have additional information to give to the committee surrounding the matter, National Review notes.
If it was, indeed, Lerner who asked Roady to deliver the question, some curiosities arise. Just how much did the IRS leader know about the targeting, if anything at all?
Earlier today, TheBlaze’s Mike Opelka also asked: Was Lois Lerner, the director of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations Division lying when she denied knowing about the IRS policy of targeting 9/12 groups, local Tea Parties and other small government supporters?
TheBlaze published letters that seem to call into question whether Lerner knew about the targeting before reading about it in media outlets (although there are some factors, as Opelka notes, that make it difficult to discern whether she’s hedging). He explains:
In a media conference call from last Friday afternoon, Lerner said she was made aware of the scrutiny by media reports about it. Granted, she does not specifically state the exact date when she learned about the scandal. However, TheBlaze first started covering the scandal in early February of 2012. A second story that featured the specific group that received two letters from the administrator was published on TheBlaze before the end of February.
National Review’s Kevin Williamson provides a list of some lies that Lerner purportedly told. It’s worth checking them out, especially with new questions arising about who might have planted the question.
***
POLITICS
DID THE IRS SCANDAL AFFECT THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION? IT’S MUCH WORSE THAN DEMOCRATS WILL ADMIT
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and President Barack Obama hold press conference at the White House May 16, 2013 (Photo: Saul Loeb / AFP / Getty Images)
The IRS scandal is just getting started.
We were told days ago it was the fault of rogue revenue agents in Cincinnati, but the D.C. office and others are now implicated too. What initially affected 75 conservative groups has ballooned to include hundreds, with more to come. IRS officials may also have leaked confidential tax data to wound the Romney campaign in 2012, and certain Romney donors were aggressively audited.
This is already an egregious breach of the public trust, and it’s going to get a lot worse before the dust settles.
Most Americans recognize this IRS abuse as a scandal, but it is much more damaging, and damning, than Obama and the progressive Left will ever admit. This isn’t a failure within an imperfect system; it is an indictment of that entire system.
Our government is too big and powerful, and what inevitably follows from that is what we see now: corruption.
The IRS targeting of conservatives is a manifestation of that reality. It reminds us why our Founders were concerned, first and foremost, with limiting government power. Stifling corruption before it begins is much easier than rooting it out once it has taken hold. With the IRS now exposed as partisan speech police, we must find how far the rot has spread.
The IRS debacle also puts on full display the dangers posed by the progressive authoritarianism that is the foundation for President Obama’s political philosophy and agenda. He wanted a government so large it would be unaccountable to the people it serves. Well, he got it.
While the IRS overreach is breathtakingly blatant, it was also somewhat predictable. The president’s demonization of his political opponents and self-deluding solipsism has created a climate where beating the opposition matters more than protecting our core shared principles. Disdain for the other side of the aisle flowed from the top down.
And since we are being honest, I’ve got a question for you:
When are we allowed to point out that the IRS intimidation had to have some impact on the 2012 Presidential election?
A note of warning: raise this issue in public at your peril. The mere suggestion that Obama’s victory over Romney was tainted in even the slightest way is certain to earn you the scorn of his partisans. If they don’t hurt you physically, they may well find another way to silence you.
Of course, I’m not saying the election was fraudulent. But I am putting the IRS’s offense against our democracy in the proper context. This was all about stifling conservative ideas during a national debate specifically about those ideas.
It is obvious that the intent of some in the IRS was to harm Republicans and benefit the Obama campaign. If we’re going to fully understand how this went wrong, the motive and its impact of the transgression have to be fair game.
By way of contrast, if this were an issue of voter suppression—a favorite bogeyman of the progressive left in recent elections—and it supposedly favored Republicans, media outlets would cover it with wild-eyed rage. They certainly did in 2000, with endless denunciations of a “stolen election,” despite all the subsequent recounts and judicial scrutiny to the contrary.
The fact is that the IRS suppressed free speech. That is not in dispute. Our most conspicuously authoritarian institution influenced political organizations in an election year, including swing states like Ohio. Maybe it was irrelevant. But the Tea Party was less potent in 2012 than 2010, and perhaps now we know why– they were busy filling out IRS paperwork.
When you are talking about hindering and threatening hundreds of political groups, how can one quantify that electoral impact? How many donors or activists stood down for fear that they would be next? We will never know.
CHICAGO, IL – NOVEMBER 06: U.S. President Barack Obama delivers his victory speech after being reelected for a second term at McCormick Place November 6, 2012 in Chicago, Illinois. (Credit: Getty Images)
So will anyone at the top be held accountable?
Probably not, and conservatives should brace themselves, as a senior-level smoking gun in the IRS scandal will almost certainly not be found. One phone call, from one senior advisor, could have created this unofficial IRS policy of harassing conservative political groups. Nobody will own up to that, and nobody will be able to prove it.
That’s not to say there won’t be sacrificial lambs. President Obama has already asked acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller to step down. Apparently, Obama’s view of justice is firing the guy who wasn’t in charge during the misconduct a couple of weeks before he was going to quit anyway (hardly an expulsion to Siberia).
Other low-level officials may be disciplined, which probably means losing an automatic pay increase before it is restored in a year or so. Oh, the humanity.
For any talk of impeachment to be serious, there would have to be incontrovertible proof of direct Obama involvement. It has not been found. Even if it were, impeachment would be an uphill fight in Congress, and the Senate would never remove the president from office anyway.
Let none of that distract from other big picture problems unearthed in this IRS scandal. This is all a fight about the size and scope of government, and its role in our daily lives.
Put aside a few (or many) bad apples at the IRS– our tax code itself is woefully unfair. For anyone without the resources to pay expensive lawyers, it is essentially a 70,000-page monument to legalized graft. The tax code is the most effective tool the statist has to strike fear in average citizens and brand them criminals at whim.
It’s time for us to toss it out. If we must have an income tax at all, it should fit on one page, and be intelligible to anyone who can read. There should be no need for a massive bureaucracy to enforce it. Anything else is political gamesmanship.
For that to happen, conservatives must refocus the national conversation on smaller government. And right now they have an opening to do it.
While some will never abandon the Obama administration, it has lost the faith and trust of many who were once ardent supporters. To paraphrase Talleyrand, the IRS scandal is worse than a crime, it’s a blunder. Obama’s whole second term agenda is in peril.
Between the IRS, Benghazi and the AP phone records seizures, the American people have come to know the unseemly character of this administration.
We will see if, this time, they act on that knowledge, and begin to dismantle the federal leviathan that threatens the liberty we once held so dear.
***
POLITICS
WATCH OUTGOING IRS HEAD’S ACTUAL EXCUSE FOR TARGETING OF CONSERVATIVES
Ousted IRS chief Steven Miller testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, May 17, 2013, before the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the extra scrutiny the IRS gave Tea Party and other conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status. Credit: AP
The targeting of conservatives by the IRS was “intolerable” but simply the result of agents trying to be more “efficient” and wasn’t an act of partisanship, fired (or retiring early) acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller testified to Congress on Friday.
Miller was grilled by a House committee after the admission last week that the IRS was singling out those with names like “Tea Party” in their names for extra scrutiny while applying for tax exempt 501(c)(4) status.
“I think that what happened here was that foolish mistakes were made by people trying to be more efficient in their workload selection,” Miller said. He went on to add that while that is “intolerable,” it was a “mistake” and not an act of partisanship.
Miller assured that the IRS has “learned its lesson,” this “won’t happen again,” and that “management will take appropriate action with respect to those responsible.”
But members of the House were not satisfied by Miller’s testimony.
Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) played video of former IRS Commissioner Douglas Schulman testifying on March 22, 2012 that there was “absolutely no targeting” of conservative groups after TheBlaze had started reporting those accusations in February of that year. Boustany grilled Miller on whether Schulman’s testimony was truthful given what we know now.
“Um, it was incorrect, but whether it was untruthful or not– ,” he said before interrupting himself and then trying to explain why the groups were targeted and building on his previous argument that the whole thing was an attempt to be more efficient.
He started by calling the word “targeted” a” pejorative term” and explaining that “people in Cincinnati decided let’s start grouping these case, let’s centralize these cases. The way they centralized it: troublesome. The concept of centralization: not. We’re not targeting these people in that sense.”
He went on to say that he did not think Schulman was aware of the practice despite press reports at the time and Congressional interest in the matter:
***
DID ‘REPUBLICANS’ RELEASE ALTERED VERSIONS OF THE BENGHAZI E-MAILS? CBS RELEASES NEW ALLEGATION
TheBlaze’s Jon Seidl contributed to this report.
A new report by CBS’s Major Garrett is circulating claiming that “Republicans” specifically leaked a set of emails about the Benghazi talking points that included some altered text.
Garrett’s point seems to be that Republicans misled the public by releasing a version of the Benghazi talking points emails that includes inaccurate or incomplete information. But the situation may be more convoluted than the article and television stories explain. Without a doubt, there are discrepancies between previous reports about the talking points and the emails that were released by the White House, however there are some important points and distinctions worth making.
The discrepancies
Garrett pinpoints two key differences in his CBS News report about the email exchanges. When comparing the quotes, the text in the White House version is noticeably different from the version that was previously highlighted.
Garrett notes that one of the quotes in question belonged to national security adviser Ben Rhodes. The official’s comment in the email purportedly leaked (presumably to ABC’s Jon Karl) read, ”We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.” But the wording in the White House version said, ”We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.”
The words “State Department” were not present in this latter text.
Is there an explanation?
As TheBlaze reported earlier this week, this story isn’t new; disparities between the e-mails were already highlighted by CNN’s Jake Tapper earlier this week, as the host also noted that Rhodes didn’t mention the State Department in his official Benghazi correspondence.
While a possible explanation is not mentioned in Garrett’s report, TheBlaze previously highlighted one possible reason for the difference in wording. Here’s a portion of our previous report, which provides some context:
Tapper, who previously worked at ABC, reports that “whoever provided those accounts seemingly invented the notion that Rhodes wanted the concerns of the State Department specifically addressed.” ABC’s Jonathan Karl responded to Tapper’s report Tuesday by saying he quoted verbatim a source who had seen the original emails but was not permitted to make copies of them.Karl said he contacted his source, who said that Rhodes’ reply “was after a long chain of email about State Dept concerns. So when WH emailer says, take into account all equities, he is talking about the State equities, since that is what the email chain was about.”
To review: The so-called GOP version of the emails consisted of someone reading the talking points to ABC News. This does not dismiss the differences, but it does add some more context to the scenario in helping to explain why the texts vary in the first place. And it certainly doesn’t implicate any obvious Republican source.
So that makes Garrett’s charge that it was “Republicans” who altered the emails much more curious. In fact, Garrett claims that there is a “Republican version” of the emails that was previously released and that this text is apparently inaccurate compared to the emails that were finally released by the White House this week. Throughout his report, Garrett even mentions this “Republican version.”
On Friday, Republicans leaked what they said was a quote from Rhodes: “We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.”But it turns out that in the actual email, Rhodes did not mention the State Department.
But that is a new charge. While it is entirely possible GOP members leaked the e-mails, there has been no admission of that publicly, and Garrett doesn’t cite sources.
So where does this all leave us? First, there’s no denying that there are discrepancies. But is it true that it was Republicans who either altered them or were behind intentionally misleading the public? As the CBS report stands, that allegation has not been proven.
(H/T: Huffington Post)
***
BUSINESS
KRAUTHAMMER’S IMPRESSED WITH OBAMA’S IRS ANSWERS: HE MAKES BILL CLINTON’S PARSING LOOK UNSOPHISTICATED
President Barack Obama during a press conference on Thursday addressed the recent scandal involving the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups.
But his remarks left much to be desired.
“Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your Counsel’s Office found out on April 22nd?” a reporter asked the president.
“I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press,” the president said.
Well, she didn’t actually ask about the inspector general’s report. Come to think of it, he didn’t even answer for the White House. He only answered for himself.
And we’re not the only ones who think the president’s answer was overly cautious and lacking in substance.
Conservative columnist and commentator Charles Krauthammer thinks the president’s rhetorical handling of the IRS scandal makes even Bill Clinton (the same man who famously said “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”) look unsophisticated.
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
Featured image AP photo.
***
POLITICS
SEE PAUL RYAN’S TENSE EXCHANGE WITH IRS HEAD ON WHY HE WITHHELD TARGETING INFO IN JULY DESPITE KNOWING ABOUT IT
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., questions ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller and J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, as they testify during a hearing at the House Ways and Means Committee on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Friday, May 17, 2013. Credit: AP
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) hammered outgoing IRS interim head Steven Miller on Friday, demanding to know why Miller did not reveal details about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups in a July hearing despite having known about it since at least last May and despite having been asked specifically about it in Capitol Hill two months later.
“The law … requires you to not only tell the truth, but to tell the whole truth,” an annoyed Ryan said. “You ‘cannot conceal or cover up, by any trick scheme or device, any material fact.’ How was that not misleading this committee? You knew the targeting was taking place. You know the terms ‘Tea Party’ [and] ‘Patriots’ were being used. You just acknowledged a minute ago they were outrageous. And then when you were asked about this after you were briefed about this, that was the answer you gave us? How can we not conclude that you mislead this committee?”
Miller’s July answer included a general response that “we did group these organization together to ensure consistency, to ensure quality.”
“Sir, that was a lot of questions, sir,” Miller responded to Ryan on Friday.
“It’s one,” Ryan shot back. “How can we conclude that you did not mislead this committee?”
“I did not mislead the committee. I stand by my answer then, I stand by my answer now. Harassment discussion that was part of that question implies political motivation. Um, there is a discussion going on. There is no political motivation.”
“Let me ask it again,” Ryan said.
“Can I answer the question, sir?” Miller interrupted.
“I’m going to help you and give you some clarity here,” Ryan responded to chuckles from the gallery.
“… My understanding of that question was the treatment of the cases, because all of the letters.” Miller replied after Ryan read back the question from last year. “I’m hearing that people were complaining about letters. My response was to that.”
That didn’t suffice for Ryan.
“You knew of our concerns of this targeting. You knew of the allegations that had been reported to this committee. We brought you here to talk about it. You received a briefing that this targeting was taking place. But you did not divulge that to this committee when we were asking questions about this.”
“I answered the question truthfully,” an exhausted-looking Miller responded.
Watch the tense exchange below:
That comes on the heels of the NBC News reporting Friday morning that the commissioner knew about the controversial IRS actions “for a year”:
***
FAITH
YOU CRITICIZED OBAMA: FAMED CHRISTIAN RADIO HOST ALLEGES OUTRAGEOUS IRS INTIMIDATION
May. 17, 2013 5:56pm
Dr. James Dobson, a well-known Christian author and radio host, has come forward to discuss the disturbing details of his alleged run-in with the Internal Revenue Service.
It all started when he decided to create a 501(c)(4) for his radio ministry, Family Talk. TheBlaze interviewed his son, Ryan Dobson, about the 18-month debacle.
The organization, according to Dobson, submitted its application to the IRS on September 2, 2011.
Despite having what he called a “good attorney” who has been working in the industry for 26 years and who has never had an application denied, the IRS allegedly made the process needlessly difficult — at one point threatening to refuse approval.
Problems began shortly after the application was first submitted.
Dobson said Family Talk didn’t hear back from the government for six months. And when they finally did hear back, the IRS allegedly flooded them with odd questions.
“There were all kinds of questions — ones we’ve never seen before,” Ryan told TheBlaze, adding that the agency asked for their political opinions and for copies of past broadcasts and transcripts.
Despite meeting the IRS’ latter demand, Dobson said they didn’t hear back from the agency for another six months. Finally, the attorney for Family Talk contacted the IRS, asking for additional information.
Again, silence.
It wasn’t until March 19 of this year — 18 months after the time-frame of the original application — that the IRS appeared ready to discuss the group’s application.
“We inquired about our status and [the agent] said she was probably going to recommend that our application not be [granted],” Dobson told TheBlaze. “She said we were political and we had criticized President Obama … and she said we did it when he was a candidate.”
Dobson found this particularly odd, as he noted that his father has been in radio for 36 years and has worked under both 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) regulations.
“He explicitly understands [IRS law]. He does not cross that line,” Dobson said. “So to accuse us of something like that, it makes your hair curl.”
Equally troubling, Dobson said that the agent told Family Talk that they sounded like a partisan, right-wing group and that, because the organization doesn’t represent all viewpoints, it cannot be considered educational.
The agent, according to Dobson, asked the organization if it would like to revise its application, supposedly to fix the purported issues that were presented. Family Talk declined and threatened to take the IRS to court if the delays continued. Nine days later, the application was apparently approved.
While Dobson said the group isn’t currently planning to take any legal action, its members are speaking out about what unfolded.
“I have to be honest. It’s a very scary time for a nation right now. We’re kind of at a watershed moment,” he told TheBlaze. “We’re just trampling the Constitution. It’s bulling. It’s just a straight bully tactic. … that’s not the country our forefathers foresaw.”
Dobson made an interesting point — that not everyone would have had the means or patience to push back against the IRS. Considering how long it took Family Talk to secure its status, he wonders how many other groups simply gave up in the midst of government push-back.
As for political opinions being sought by the IRS, Dobson was perplexed. Family Talk was interested in addressing policy issues — something that couldn’t be adequately done under their 501(c)(3) status, which is why they were seeking out the 501(c)(4) application.
“What are our political opinions in the implications of what we do as a ministry?” he asked. “Again, those questions have no bearing on a 501(c)(4) application whatsoever.”
He called the questions “inappropriate.” While Dobson declined to quote his attorney directly, he made it clear that the lawyer had never been treated in such a manner in his entire career.
This is not the first faith group to come forward, alleging IRS intimidation. As the situation unfolds, it seems more individuals and organizations are coming forward with similar claims.
–
Follow Billy Hallowell on Twitter @BillyHallowell
This post has been updated.
***
POLITICS
POLITICS
OBAMA SUGGESTS IRS, BENGHAZI, AP PHONE SCANDAL ARE JUST ‘POLITICS’
AP
Coming off one of the most turbulent weeks of his administration, President Barack Obama implied that the trifecta of controversies — the Internal Revenue Service, Benghazi and the Associated Press phone records — are just “politics.”
In his weekly address, Obama touted his proposals to reinvigorate the economy and expand the middle class, referencing his recent travel to Baltimore and Austin, Texas to push his ideas.
“That’s why I like getting out of the Washington echo chamber whenever I can – because too often, our politics aren’t focused on the same things you are. Working hard. Supporting your family and your community. Making sure your kids have every chance in life,” Obama said.
While he didn’t make explicit reference to any of the controversies, the White House was on defense much of the week, particularly as details about the IRS giving extra scrutiny to conservative groups, and the Justice Department obtaining two months of phone records from AP journalists, came to light.
***
POLITICS
THE SCATHING SPEECH THAT JUST GOT A STANDING OVATION DURING THE IRS HEARING
Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., questions ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller and J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, as they testify during a hearing at the House Ways and Means Committee on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Friday, May 17, 2013. Credit: AP
The gallery at the House Ways and Means Committee Friday had to be called to order after it burst into applause and some gave a standing ovation following an impassioned diatribe against the IRS by Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Mike Kelly.
Kelly took his time during the hearing on the IRS’s targeting of conservatives to lambaste outgoing head Steven Miller, reminding Miller that while the IRS would like to chalk the organization’s recent actions up to a mistake, regular Americans do not get that luxury when dealing with the IRS.
“If you think it’s uncomfortable sitting over there you ought to be a private individual when the IRS is across from you asking you questions,” Kelly began, and that set the tone for the subsequent four minutes.
Some of the highlights:
• “I have a grandson who’s afraid to get out of bed at night because he thinks there’s someone under the bed that’s going to grab him. And I think most Americans feel that way about the IRS.”
• “This kind of reconfirms that, you know what, they [the IRS] can do almost anything they want to anybody they want, anytime they want. This is very chilling for the American people.”
• “This is a Pandora’s Box that has been opened and I don’t think we can get the lid back on it.”
• “I don’t believe the White House just found out about this in a news report.”
• “I got to tell you, where you’re sitting, you should be outraged — and you’re not. The American people should be outraged, and they are.”
• “This reconfirms everything the American public believes! This is a huge blow to the faith and trust the American people have in their government!”
• “Is there any limit to the scope of where you folks can go?”
• “It’s sure as hell intimidating. And I don’t’ know that I got any answers from you today.”
• “I am more concerned today than I was before. The fact that you all can do just about anything you want to anybody. You know, you can put anybody out of business that you want anytime you want.”
• “And when the IRS comes in, you’re not allowed to be shoddy, you’re not allowed to be run horribly, you’re not allowed to make mistakes, you’re not allowed to do one damn thing that doesn’t come in compliance. If you do, you’re held responsible right then.”
• “This is absolutely an overreach and this is an outrage for all America!”
• “This kind of reconfirms that, you know what, they [the IRS] can do almost anything they want to anybody they want, anytime they want. This is very chilling for the American people.”
• “This is a Pandora’s Box that has been opened and I don’t think we can get the lid back on it.”
• “I don’t believe the White House just found out about this in a news report.”
• “I got to tell you, where you’re sitting, you should be outraged — and you’re not. The American people should be outraged, and they are.”
• “This reconfirms everything the American public believes! This is a huge blow to the faith and trust the American people have in their government!”
• “Is there any limit to the scope of where you folks can go?”
• “It’s sure as hell intimidating. And I don’t’ know that I got any answers from you today.”
• “I am more concerned today than I was before. The fact that you all can do just about anything you want to anybody. You know, you can put anybody out of business that you want anytime you want.”
• “And when the IRS comes in, you’re not allowed to be shoddy, you’re not allowed to be run horribly, you’re not allowed to make mistakes, you’re not allowed to do one damn thing that doesn’t come in compliance. If you do, you’re held responsible right then.”
• “This is absolutely an overreach and this is an outrage for all America!”
Audience members applaud after Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., not pictured, questioned ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller as he testified on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Friday, May 17, 2013, before the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings. Credit: AP
Members of the audience stand and applaud after Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., criticized Steven Miller, the ousted chief of the Internal Revenue Service, as the House Ways and Means Committee focused on the extra scrutiny the IRS gave Tea Party and other conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, May 17, 2013. Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin sits at front left. Credit: AP
The committee chairman eventually got the crowd to settle down.
–
Related:
***
BUSINESS
THESE ARE THE 4 MOST IMPORTANT TAKEAWAYS FROM TODAY’S IRS HEARING
Ousted Internal Revenue Service’s interim head Steven Miller appeared before the House Ways and Means Committee Friday to testify on his agency’s targeting of conservative groups.
And although a slightly bored-looking Miller spent most of the four-hour interrogation doing his best U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder impersonation (i.e. playing the “I don’t know” game), some important facts came to light today.
Here are the top four most important takeaways from Friday’s hearing [in no particular order]:
4. PLANT CONFIRMATION
Lois Lerner, head of the IRS’ tax-exempt organizations division.
The question that prompted IRS official Lois Lerner to apologize last week for IRS misconduct was planted, National Review Online’s Kevin Williamson theorized Tuesday.
He explains:
The question at the ABA conference came from Washington-based tax lawyer Celia Roady, a lobbyist in the firm of Morgan Lewis.Roady is certainly well-versed in the issue at hand: She was named to the influential Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities in 2010 by Douglas Shulman, at that time commissioner of the IRS. Lerner is the director for tax-exempt organizations at the IRS.Roady was serving on the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities while tea-party groups and other conservative organizations were being targeted by the IRS. Not exactly a question out of the blue — Capitol Hill sources described the question as “planted” and say the IRS has informally admitted as much.
It would appear, according to Miller himself, that Williamson’s suspicions were spot-on and that the question was indeed from a planted audience member:
It’s a good thing Miller answered the way he did (being under oath and all that), because in a statement obtained by Talking Points Memo, Roady said she was most absolutely a plant:
On May 9, I received a call from Lois Lerner, who told me that she wanted to address an issue after her prepared remarks at the ABA Tax Section’s Exempt Organizations Committee Meeting, and asked if I would pose a question to her after her remarks.I agreed to do so, and she then gave me the question that I asked at the meeting the next day. We had no discussion thereafter on the topic of the question, nor had we spoken about any of this before I received her call. She did not tell me, and I did not know, how she would answer the question.
Obviously, the fact that this was all started with by a rehearsed question from an audience member raises some serious questions.
“The planted question reveals coordination at high levels of the IRS with regard to the disclosure of the sensitive information,” NRO notes.
“Lerner and Miller testified before Congress two days before Lerner addressed the ABA, but said nothing about the IRS’s scrutiny of tea-party groups.”
3. TREASURY KNEW ABOUT THE AUDIT DURING THE 2012 ELECTION
J. Russell George (l) and Steven Miller (r). (Associated Press)
Treasury officials were informed in June 2012 that the Treasury Department’s inspector general was looking into the Internal Revenue Service’s process for screening “politically active” groups applying for tax exemptions.
This means that top Obama officials knew something was up during the 2012 presidential election.
However, some important clarifications need to be made. From the New York Times:
At the first Congressional hearing into the I.R.S. scandal, J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, told members of the House Ways and Means Committee that he informed the Treasury’s general counsel of his audit on June 4, and Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin “shortly thereafter.”[…]Mr. George told Treasury officials about the allegation as part of a routine briefing about ongoing audits he would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.
Audits are not that uncommon and, as George stressed, he did not reveal the results of the IG’s audit to Treasury officials. He merely informed them that his office was conducting an audit.
Still, the “revelation nonetheless raised a fresh set of questions about who was aware of the problem within the Obama administration,” the Wall Street Journal notes.
2. MORE INVESTIGATIONS ARE ON THE WAY
Getty Images.
If IRS officials think the IG report is all they have to deal with, they may be grossly mistaken.
“There are additional investigations coming down the pipeline that potentially could uncover [partisan behavior within the IRS], isn’t that correct?” asked Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY).
“That is an accurate statement, sir,” George replied.
Later, while Rep. Tim Griffin (R-Ark.) was speaking, George was asked whether his office is performing additional investigations into the IRS’ behavior.
“I’m not in a position, sir, to discuss whether or not –”
“That means you are!” Rep. Griffin interjected.
On a side note, if the IG is conducting additional investigations into the IRS’ partisan behavior and had planned on keeping it quiet, well, that was all undone today.
1. WHY DIDN’T IRS OFFICIALS SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS EARLIER?
George & Miller. (Getty Images)
Miller, who was appointed interim head on Nov. 9, 2012, knew of the conservative targeting in May of the same year.
However, during a congressional hearing in July 2012, he made no mention of the scandal.
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) was unimpressed with the disgraced IRS official’s non-disclosure.
“The law … requires you to not only tell the truth, but to tell the whole truth,” an annoyed Ryan said. “You ‘cannot conceal or cover up, by any trick scheme or device, any material fact.’ How was that not misleading this committee?” Rep. Ryan asked.
“You knew the targeting was taking place. You know the terms ‘Tea Party’ [and] ‘Patriots’ were being used. You just acknowledged a minute ago they were outrageous. And then when you were asked about this after you were briefed about this, that was the answer you gave us? How can we not conclude that you mislead this committee?” he added.
“I did not mislead the committee. I stand by my answer then, I stand by my answer now. Harassment discussion that was part of that question implies political motivation,” Miller responded. “Um, there is a discussion going on. There is no political motivation.”
“I answered the question truthfully,” he answered.
Miller’s “answer” is reminiscent of the excuse offered by Lerner when she was asked last week why the IRS decided now (of all times) to apologize for its behavior: No one ever asked.
–
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
Featured image Getty Images. This post has been updated.
***
GOVERNMENT
IRS CLAIMS RELEASE OF CONSERVATIVE GROUPS’ CONFIDENTIAL INFO TO SOROS-AFFILIATED MEDIA OUTLET ‘INADVERTENT AND UNINTENTIONAL’
The Internal Revenue Service claims thedisclosure of conservative groups’ confidential information toinvestigative journalism outfit ProPublica was “inadvertent and unintentional.”
After the IRS admitted to deliberately targeting conservative organizations that applied for tax-exempt status, ProPublica reported it had received nine still-pending applications as part of its request for information about 67 nonprofits last year. The pending applications should have remained confidential.
“When these two issues were previously raised concerning the potential unauthorized disclosures of 501(c)(4) application information, we immediately referred these cases to TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration] for a comprehensive review. In both instances, TIGTA found these instances to be inadvertent and unintentional disclosures by the employees involved,” read an IRS statement to ProPublica sent Friday.
ProPublica bills itself as an independent nonprofit investigative journalism outlet, but has been described as liberal by its detractors and is supported in part by George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.
***
POLITICS
‘SO SICK OF NO ANSWERS’: BLAZE READERS RESPOND TO OBAMA’S IRS DODGE
President Barack Obama skirted a reporter’s question Thursday about whether he or anyone else at the White House had known about the Internal Revenue Service’sdeliberately targeting conservative organizations that applied for tax-exempt status.
Instead of answering directly, Obama responded, “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press” — referring to an inspector general’s report, which he wasn’t asked about. Obama senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer subsequently said that no one in the White House, including the president, had been aware of what was happening.
Here’s what some of you had to say about Obama’s answer:
AvengerKI believe this is the first hint we have that Obama is hiding white house complicity in this debacle. Notice he didn’t answer the question? The question was: “Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the agency’s actions before your counsel’s office found out on April 22nd?”….Notice the answer? Obama says he didn’t know about the IG report until it was leaked. This is not an answer as to whether anyone in the white house knew about the IRS targetting before April 22nd. The question wasn’t “did you know about the IG report before April 22nd”. In fact he should have known the IG was investigating reports of abuses at the IRS. We need to get people under oath, this goes much, much further than some “rogue IRS agents” in Philly.
Love the kidsWhat’s even more concerning to me is that it is bad enough that he knew and let it happen, But I am even MORE WORRIED that an agency and under control of the White House can do something like this for years, report after report came out about it, and the MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD isn’t even informed by people what is going on. It makes you wonder who is REALLY running this country.Believe-ReceiveMr. Obama, you are the President of the United States. It’s your “job” to know what’s going on in the Government.OniKazeLOVE IT:On Benghazi: “I was not told…” (I don’t know) On Fast and Furious: “I was not involved, and it was started by Bush…” (I don’t know..) On IRS Scandle: “I just found out a few days ago…” ( I didn’t know) On ANY Issue: “I don’t know…”Ok… So the “smartest” president we have ever had, apparently knows NOTHING about all this stuff that he SHOULD know about… So my question to Obama is this….If you know nothing about ANY of this, What exactly DO YOU KNOW, Mr. President?? Because from this perspective it doesn’t seem like you will admit to knowing ANYTHING.???If you don’t know ANYTHING, how exactly are you qualified to be POTUS?JrFoyt44Let me see if I understand this. The self-proclaimed Emperor knew nothing about “Fast and Furious,” except to blame George W. Bush for (which he had nothing to do with). He also knew nothing about Benghazi where 4 American heroes died unnecessarily. As the father of two American soldiers, I find this beyond appalling. He also claims not to know about the IRS criminal acts, or the Associated Press violations. However, he does know about the Georgetown student who wants me to pay for her contraception and even has time to call her on the phone. And he also knows about the gay NBA basketball player and has time to call him on the phone. My question is, what the hell does this guy do all day?Theglockguy007Odumba was NOT asked about the I report, he was asked if anyone at the WH knew about the IRS selectively targeting conservative groups. If the answer is clearly NO, then he would have said NO, nobody at the WH had any knowledge of that activity. But he did not answer the question, instead he focused on the IG report and said he didn’t know anything about the IG report. A clear dodging of the question because he didn’t want to answer it and be on record when the truth comes out.ToomuchgovtSo again, yet another “we will look into it”. So sick of this, so sick of the senate rinos kissing his butt, so sick of no answers. If this was a republican pres. I would be just as outraged. Please stop comparing this Watergate or this president to Nixon or Bush, at least those president loved this country. I may not have agreed with either of them, but I don’t ever recall having this sick feeling. I refuse to watch anything, unless it is the impeachment hearing.SeawulfInteresting that what he said was that he was not aware of the IG’s report. His subsequent assertions of action almost sounded like he is going to find out who kept it from him that the IRS was being investigated and how it was hidden from him, and take actions to make sure that can never happen again. Not that the IRS actions cannot happen again, that he cannot be blind-sided again. If he was serious about this whole thing he would out Sarah Hall Ingram and address not only the current leaders of the IRS, but the ones that were in charge at the time of the incidents.GeoInSDYou can be pretty sure that when a politician replies to your question in a way that ignores or distorts the meaning of your original question that he/she is trying to mislead you. So from Obama’s answer to the question of whether anyone in the White House knew about the IRS’s actions before 4/22, I am very confident that they knew. The question was not whether they knew about the IG report, yet Obama made pretended the question about the IG report. HE KNEW before 4/22!!!! Come on people, including so-called liberals, you know it is a huge stretch of the imagination to believe he didn’t particularly in light of his answer to that question and how he answered it.Even though politicians lie, they still try to avoid lying, when possible, to save their *sses.
***
POLITICS
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: IRS SCANDAL COULD BE A ‘FATAL PROBLEM’ FOR OBAMA
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer on Friday said the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative organizations could be “fatal” for the Obama administration if it turns out that anyone in the White House was aware of it.
Appearing on Fox News’ “Hannity,” Krauthammer called the IRS situation “the one scandal that people have a visceral sense about” — it’s the one U.S. institution, besides the military, that can do very serious harm.
Going after conservative groups based on their politics is “a violation that everybody — left or right– understands,” he added.
Krauthammer urged that there’s no suggestion that Obama knew what was happening, “but if there’s any indication that there were people in the White House who knew, who orchestrated, who encouraged or whatever, then it can be a fatal problem.”
Obama ducked a direct question on Thursday about whether he or anyone else in the White House had known what was happening.
Krauthammer said he wasn’t comparing the current situation to Watergate, but pointed out that the second article of impeachment against Richard Nixon was abuse of the IRS.
“The one issue that can fell a presidency is the corruption of the IRS coming from on high,” Krauthammer said.
***
POLITICS
WHITE HOUSE INSISTS: OBAMA KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IRS SCANDAL
AP
WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — A top White House adviser insisted Sunday that President Barack Obama learned the Internal Revenue Service had targeted tea party groups only “when it came out in the news” while Republicans continued to press the administration for more answers.
Trying to move past a challenging week that put the White House on the defensive, senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer was scheduled to appear on five Sunday news shows to repeat the administration’s position that no senior officials were involved in the decision to give tea party groups extra scrutiny. Pfeiffer’s appearances were unlike to quiet GOP critics, who have seized on the revelations as proof that Obama used the IRS to go after his political enemies.
“The deputy secretary of the treasury was made aware of just the fact that the investigation was beginning last year,” Pfeiffer said. “But no one in the White House was aware.”
Pfeiffer’s assertion comes after Obama skirted a direct question last week on whether anyone in the White House knew anything about the agency’s actions.
Meanwhile, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., suggested there was a written policy to target conservative groups opposing the president, but when pressed could not provide details.
“I haven’t seen a policy statement, but I think we need to see that,” Paul said. “And when that comes forward, we need to know who wrote the policy and who approved the policy.”
Regardless of when the president first learned of the investigations, Pfeiffer said the president wanted to ensure such activities were not repeated.
“The activity was outrageous and inexcusable, and it was stopped and it needs to be fixed to ensure it never happens again,” Pfeiffer said.
A Treasury Department inspector’s report said this week that conservative and small-government tea party groups that were critical of Obama received extra scrutiny. IRS agents did not flag similar progressive or liberal groups, according to the watchdog.
The report concluded that a regional IRS office in Ohio improperly singled out tea party and other conservative groups for more than 18 months and took no action on many of their applications for tax-exempt status for long periods of time – hindering their fundraising for the 2010 and 2012 elections.
The new acting IRS commissioner is in the midst of a 30-day top-to-bottom review while Republicans continue to demand answers of Obama and his allies in government.
That’s not sufficient, said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio.
“I think a special counsel is going to wind up being necessary,” he added said.
That move is not needed, said Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J.
“I don’t see the point,” he said of a special counsel to investigate the scandal.
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said the IRS had stepped so far over its mandate that it asked book groups for reading lists and church groups about their prayers before granting them tax-exempt standing. It’s government over-reach, he said, and a reason why Republicans need to have their own investigation into the agency.
“This is about trust,” Price said.
But he stopped short of calling for a special counsel.
Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., said Republicans were using the incidents to embarrass the president.
“There is no Republican agenda other than to stop the president of the United States,” he said.
Pfeiffer was appearing Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” NBC’s “Meet the Press,” CBS’ “Face the Nation,” CNN’s “State of the Union” and “Fox News Sunday.” Portman, Menendez, Price and Rangel were on ABC. Paul was on CNN.
–
POLITICS
.
***
POLITICS
‘GO TO JAIL’: BOBBY JINDAL SAYS IRS OFFICIALS DESERVE PRISON FOR TARGETING CONSERVATIVES
“You cannot take the freedom of law-abiding Americans, whether you disagree with them or not, and keep your own freedom,” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal will tell delegates at the Virginia GOP convention today, according to remarks shared with Politico.
“When you do that, you go to jail.”
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal speaks at a Republican fundraiser on May 10, in Manchester, N.H. (Credit: AP)
Jindal, a 2016 presidential hopeful, is slated to speak to about 10,000 Republican in Richmond and say that a probe should “go from the top down.”
Of President Obama, Jindal will assert that “when you grow government this big, these kinds of scandals are inevitable, and he bears the responsibility for that.”
“The President of the United States must have the moral authority to go around the globe and call out tyranny when he sees it. He must be able to be freedom’s evangelist. He cannot do that if he tolerates basic constitutional violations right under his own nose.”
“It won’t do to have a few lower-level staffers in the Tucson field office lose their executive washroom privileges,” he’s reportedly planning on saying. “This is much bigger than that.”
Jindal is looking to couple the IRS scandal with the Benghazi terror attack, the Associated Press phone records flap, and Obamacare.
***
BUSINESS
CONGRESSMAN: IRS DEMANDED TO KNOW CONTENT OF PRO-LIFE GROUP’S PRAYERS
Illinois Congressman Aaron Schock during the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the IRS scandal on Friday made a shocking claim: the IRS once asked an Iowa-based pro-life group to reveal the content of their prayers.
“Their question, specifically asked from the IRS to the Coalition for Life of Iowa: ‘Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers,’” Rep. Schock said while grilling ousted IRS interim chief Steven Miller, .
“Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501(c)3 applicant?” the Republican congressman asked. “The content of one’s prayers?”
“It pains me to say I can’t speak to that one either,” Miller answered, adding later that her would be “surprised” if a question of that sort was asked of any conservative group.
The report Schock is referring to comes from Thomas More Society, a not-for-profit organization committed to fighting for religious liberties:
Coalition for Life of Iowa found itself in the IRS’s crosshairs when the group applied for tax exempt status in October 2008. Nearly ten months of interrogation about the group’s opposition to Planned Parenthood included a demand by a Ms. Richards from the IRS’ Cincinnati office unlawfully insisted that all board members sign a sworn declaration promising not to picket/protest Planned Parenthood. Further questioning by the IRS requested detailed information about the content of the group’s prayer meetings, educational seminars, and signs their members hold outside Planned Parenthood.
Here’s a complete copy of the Thomas More Society’s case:
***
GOVERNMENT
HEAD OF PRO-ISRAEL ORGANIZATION TARGETED BY IRS SPEAKS OUT
Details are unfolding about the Internal Revenue Source’s targeting of conservative and pro-Israel organizations. Earlier this week, TheBlaze reported that the pro-Israel educational group Z STREET was among those targeted.
Z STREET filed a lawsuit in 2010, claiming the organization’s attorney was told by an IRS agent that their tax exempt status application had to undergo additional scrutiny since their organization was “connected to Israel.”
The Z STREET attorney was also informed that groups supportive of Israel and that filed for tax exempt status were assigned to “a special unit in the D.C. office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.”
Lori Lowenthal Marcus, president of the pro-Israel group, appeared on the Glenn Beck Program to discuss her experience with the IRS.
“They asked a lot of questions about the board members and their affiliations,” Marcus said before adding that the IRS agents asked the questions repeatedly.
According to Marcus, the IRS agent assigned to their case in 2010 told Z STREET’s lawyer that they had to scrutinize their organization more carefully due to its ties with Israel.
The Jewish Press reported that at least one other Jewish religious organization claims it also endured a bizarre string of questioning by the IRS, saying it was asked “whether [it] supports the existence of the land of Israel” and for the organization to “describe [its] religious belief system toward the land of Israel.”
Z STREET’s first hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for July 2 in Washington, D.C..
***
*This the Son of Liberty here, the owner and author of this blog, now writing a little analytical piece. Our nation has reached a point whereby our people have become so accustomed to electing officials who would claim that if the American people would be willing to relinquish their rights collectively under the pretense that they, the Democrats, will take of them, that we have lost our way as a society. We are now just another nation, no longer great because of the tyranny our elected leaders have instituted on us. We no longer are free to say what we mean, mean what we say, join conservative non-profit interest groups, etc., because it opposes what the Democrats, most notably the Obama administration, not only are espousing, but what policies they choose to practice. As I posted in the previous blog entry regarding the AP scandal, Obama's most trusted Senior Adviser, Valarie Jarrett, said these comments prior to the president's reelection:
“After we win this election, it’s our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don’t forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go.” (Courtesy of United Liberty)
.
(Above: Picture of Valarie Jarrett, Senior Adviser to President Barack Obama, in a quote before the 2012 Presidential Election. Courtesy of Wikipedia.)
These are the most dangerous times in the in the modern history of the U.S. As my family members have stated, I am taking a great risk by maintaining this blog of being arrested by the Obama administration. He has several agencies now equipped to do so, most notably the IRS, the Justice Department, and Homeland Security. If the American people do not show up to the polls in 2014 and 2016 and vote the Democrats out of office, we are, as a nation, undone.
No comments:
Post a Comment