Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 19:59:53
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
dogma wrote: whembly wrote:
Read the whole thing... they even argues why they believe she waived her 5th.
Still sounds like a witch-hunt to me, and her counsel still disputes the notion she waived her 5th amendment rights.
Of course... he's her counsel. Duh.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 20:36:32
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
Why, in this case, is Lois Lerner's counsel less trustworthy than the assembled counsel that produced the report? Because they were "assembled counsel"? Or is it, perhaps, because they were employed by politicians on your side of this debate?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/11 20:37:36
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 20:56:29
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
dogma wrote:
Why, in this case, is Lois Lerner's counsel less trustworthy than the assembled counsel that produced the report? Because they were "assembled counsel"? Or is it, perhaps, because they were employed by politicians on your side of this debate?
Irrelevant...
My point is he's her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment.
Again... duh!
It looks like they're at an impass... because what will holding her in contempt really do? It's not like they'll throw her in the congressional jail.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 21:35:53
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard
Catskills in NYS
|
I'm trying to imagine what congressional jail would look like. Probably a room filled with their constituents, Ted Cruz, Joe Biden, and lobbyists who want their money back.
|
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote:Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote:Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens BaronIveagh wrote:Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 21:45:10
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor
Gathering the Informations.
|
whembly wrote: dogma wrote:
Why, in this case, is Lois Lerner's counsel less trustworthy than the assembled counsel that produced the report? Because they were "assembled counsel"? Or is it, perhaps, because they were employed by politicians on your side of this debate?
Irrelevant...
That does not mean what you think it means. Saying "irrelevant" does not mean that this simply goes away, Whembly.
My point is he's her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment.
And Dogma's point is that the counsel that produced the report should be viewed in the same light. Both sides have an agenda to support. So why are you acting as though there is some kind of difference?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 23:01:34
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Kanluwen wrote: whembly wrote: dogma wrote:
Why, in this case, is Lois Lerner's counsel less trustworthy than the assembled counsel that produced the report? Because they were "assembled counsel"? Or is it, perhaps, because they were employed by politicians on your side of this debate?
Irrelevant...
That does not mean what you think it means. Saying "irrelevant" does not mean that this simply goes away, Whembly.
My point is he's her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment.
And Dogma's point is that the counsel that produced the report should be viewed in the same light. Both sides have an agenda to support. So why are you acting as though there is some kind of difference?
Huh... you misunderstand.
I'm not ignoring the defense... dogma is trying to assert that somehow one side has less credence than the other.
I've said nothing of that sort.
That's why I said it's a bit of a stalemate. At this point, the only thing Congress can do is hold her in contempt. Unless they try to charge her in federal court for breaking email/secrecy laws.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/11 23:07:08
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor
Gathering the Informations.
|
You made the point that it the lawyer is "her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment".
Not Dogma. That's on you. If you're going to act as though that somehow tarnishes his credibility(which is not an unreasonable inference from the statement of "he is her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment"), then you need to apply the same level of skepticism to the team of assembled counsel that are working for Congress.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/12 04:09:53
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Kanluwen wrote:You made the point that it the lawyer is "her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment".
Not Dogma. That's on you. If you're going to act as though that somehow tarnishes his credibility(which is not an unreasonable inference from the statement of "he is her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment"), then you need to apply the same level of skepticism to the team of assembled counsel that are working for Congress.
Wait... wut?
How does the lawyer is "her defense counsel and of course he's saying she did not revoke her 5th amendment" statement "somehow tarnishes his credibility"?
You're readying waaay too much in this man. Automatically Appended Next Post: A decent read....
http://www.providencejournal.com/opinion/commentary/20140308-robert-romano-can-congress-compel-irs-chief-to-testify.ece
A lot has happened since former Internal Revenue Service Exempt Organizations head Lois Lerner refused to testify in May 2013 about the agency’s targeting of the Tea Party and other 501(c)4 organizations, asserting her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
For starters, it turns out the scandal goes much higher than was originally stated.
Holly Paz, managing director at the D.C.-based IRS technical office, has testified that, in February 2010, “a case was identified where there was potential for political campaign activity, and that was when they reached out to Washington and the case was transferred to Washington.”
Paz said she then forwarded it to agency tax specialist and lawyer Carter Hull, who developed many of the invasive follow-up questions that attempted to probe just how political groups intended to be.
Michael Seto, the head of Hull’s unit, said it was Lerner who ordered that the Tea Party applications be subjected to special scrutiny.
In addition, Hull said that when he met with Lerner’s senior adviser, he was told that his recommendations on the Tea Party applications would be first reviewed by the IRS general counsel William Wilkins, only one of two political appointments in the agency besides the commissioner.
Hull’s supervisor Ronald Shoemaker told investigators that the counsel’s office wanted information about the applicants’ political activities leading up to the 2010 election.
So, what began as a scandal with supposedly “low-level” employees in Cincinnati actually goes all the way to Washington, with the then-head of Exempt Organizations and the agency’s general counsel not only aware of the targeting but coordinating its decision-making process.
And yet, the targeting might not have been criminal after all, or so says the Department of Justice, which according to The Wall Street Journal is not planning on filing charges.
Giving the benefit of the doubt — that there is nothing in the U.S. Code that prohibits the sort of targeting that took place, even though one of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon was “to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner” — then why did Lois Lerner even bother pleading the Fifth back in May and again this week?
If there was no criminal activity, in principle, then Lerner cannot incriminate herself. Lerner said it herself before the House Oversight Committee: “I have not broken any laws.” ...
Lerner is running out of excuses. So maybe she just needs to come clean, fess up and be done with it. Or be found in contempt of Congress and face even more consequences.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/12 15:26:02
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/13 15:19:52
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
I'd like to circle back on something that's kinda been bothering me...
If you accept the arguments (as I do) that the government targets organizations for IRS scrutiny because of their political views, then in a way, you'd really support Lerner's actions in taking the 5th.
Here's why...
You take the Fifth because the government can't be trusted. (corollary, who's trust'n the IRS now?)
Not surprising that "moi" would believe that... eh?
Anyhoo...you take the Fifth because what the truth is, and what the government thinks the truth is, are two very different things. If you didn't do anything wrong... your statements can STILL be used as building blocks in dishonest, or malicious, or politically motivated prosecutions against you. Because... truthfully the government may still decide that you are lying and prosecute you for lying. Textbook example of this is Scooter Libby (he did lie after all).
So... Lerner is embroiled in a contentious scandal. She's following sound advice from her lawyer... which is to "SHUT UP!".
Besides, the arguments regarding whether or not she waived her 5th is actually fuzzy. There are numerous case laws supporting both side's claims, such that it'll likely require a judge's ruling.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/25 13:47:17
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
From the Q&A session of Panel #3: Tax Reform in a Time of Crisis: Institutional Perspectives (begins at 1:01:30 on the video) at Friday's Pepperdine/Tax Analysts Symposium on Tax Reform in a Time of Crisis:
Some excerpts:
Question: On a scale of 1-10, 1 being no damage and 10 being permanent long range damage, how much have the IRS and tax administration been damaged by the current IRS scandal? (And I would append to that the question: was it a scandal?)
Donald Korb (Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell; former IRS Chief Counsel): I think it is incredibly damaging. Frankly, I see it as one of the seeds of the next tax shelter era. ... And in terms of scandal, I don't think we really know. We have not been permitted to understand exactly what happened. So, who knows.
George Yin (Edwin S. Cohen Distinguished Professor of Law and Taxation, Virginia; former Chief of Staff, Joint Committee on Taxation): I think there has been tremendous damage. Almost without regard to what actually happened. And I actually despair of finding out what actually happened. ...
Donald Tobin (Frank E. and Virginia H. Bazler Designated Professor in Business Law, Ohio State): I think it is awful. I agree with Don and George. 7 or 8. I think this is ultimately going to have huge implications. ...
Ellen Aprill (John E. Anderson Chair in Tax Law, Loyola-L.A.): I agree with all of that. I have myself avoided the word "scandal" because I just don't know. And some of the people I know personally. I don't think that was their political motivation. So I've used "controversy" and "brouhaha" and everything but tried not to go all the way to scandal. ...
Korb: ... This is very, very damaging. Maybe we are at a 9.5
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 02:26:32
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
O.o
Wo...
Dude!?!?!??!
BREAKING: Emails Show Lois Lerner Fed True the Vote Tax Information to Democrat Elijah Cummings
New IRS emails released by the House Oversight Committee show staff working for Democratic Ranking Member Elijah Cummings communicated with the IRS multiple times between 2012 and 2013 about voter fraud prevention group True the Vote. True the Vote was targeted by the IRS after applying for tax exempt status more than two years ago. Further, information shows the IRS and Cummings' staff asked for nearly identical information from True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht about her organization, indicating coordination and improper sharing of confidential taxpayer information.
Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Darrell Issa, along with five Subcommittee Chairmen are demanding Cummings provide an explanation for the staff inquiries to the IRS about True the Vote and for his denial that his staff ever contacted the IRS about the group.
“Although you have previously denied that your staff made inquiries to the IRS about conservative organization True the Vote that may have led to additional agency scrutiny, communication records between your staff and IRS officials – which you did not disclose to Majority Members or staff – indicates otherwise,” the letter to Cummings states. “As the Committee is scheduled to consider a resolution holding Ms. Lerner, a participant in responding to your communications that you failed to disclose, in contempt of Congress, you have an obligation to fully explain your staff’s undisclosed contacts with the IRS.”
The first contact between the IRS and Cummings' staffers about True the Vote happened in August 2012. In January 2013, staff asked for more information from the IRS about the group. Former head of tax exempt groups at the IRS Lois Lerner went out of her way to try and get information to Cummings' office.The information Cummings received was not shared with Majority Members on the Committee.
On January 28, three days after staffers requested more information, Lerner wrote an email to her deputy Holly Paz, who has since been put on administrative leave, asking, “Did we find anything?” Paz responded immediately by saying information had not been found yet, to which Lerner replied, “Thanks, check tomorrow please.”
On January 31, Paz sent True the Vote's 990 forms to Cumming's staff.
Up until this point, Rep. Cummings has denied his staff ever contacted the IRS about True the Vote and their activities during Oversight hearings. In fact, on February 6, 2014 during a Subcommittee hearing where Engelbrecht testified, Cummings vehemently denied having any contact or coordination in targeting True the Vote when attorney Cleta Mitchell, who is representing the group, indicated staff on the Committee had been involved in communication with the IRS. This was the exchange:
Ms. Mitchell: We want to get to the bottom of how these coincidences happened, and we’re going to try to figure out whether any – if there was any staff of this committee that might have been involved in putting True the Vote on the radar screen of some of these Federal agencies. We don’t know that, but we – we’re going to do everything we can do to try to get to the bottom of how did this all happen.
Mr. Cummings. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Meadows. Yes.
Mr. Cummings. I want to thank the gentleman for his courtesy. What she just said is absolutely incorrect and not true.
After the hearing, Engelbrecht filed an ethics complaint against Cummings for his targeting and intimidation of her organization.
Rep. Cummings has described the investigation into IRS targeting of conservative groups as a "witch hunt," and has tried multiple times to put the investigation on hold.
"These documents, indicating involvement of IRS officials at the center of the targeting scandal responding to your requests, raise serious questions about your actions and motivations for trying to bring this investigation to a premature end. If the Committee, as you publicly suggested in June 2013,'wrap[ped] this case up and moved on' at that time, the Committee may have never seen documents raising questions about your possible coordination with the IRS in communications that excluded the Committee Majority," the letter sent by Issa and the Chairmen further states. "As the Committee continues to investigate the IRS's wrongdoing and to gather all relevant testimonial and documentary evidence, the American people deserve to know the full truth. They deserve to know why the Ranking Member and Minority staff of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform surreptitiously contacted the IRS about an individual organization without informing the Majority Staff and even failed to disclose the contact after it became an issue during a subcommittee proceeding...We ask that you explain the full extent of you and your staff's communications with the IRS and why you chose to keep communications with the IRS from Majority Members and staff even after it became a subject of controversy."
The House Oversight Committee will vote tomorrow about whether to hold Lerner in contempt of Congress.
Why does a Senator from Maryland (Cummings) need information of Texa's Truth to Vote in the first place?
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 02:33:12
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Isn't the oversight committee responsible for such?
I have to admit, I'm not 100% clear on that discussion. That little snippet of conversation doesn't exactly say what the rest of the article says it does.
Did Elijah Cummings actually fail to disclose that they had been in contact with the IRS when asked such?
Does he have no legitimate purpose in doing so? I know he is on an oversight committee.
Was confidential taxpayer information actually produced (or requested, even)? If so, is this something the oversight committee cannot do?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/10 02:39:57
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 03:00:35
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ouze wrote:Isn't the oversight committee responsible for such?
I honestly don't believe so... I'm trying to clarify that as well...
I have to admit, I'm not 100% clear on that discussion. That little snippet of conversation doesn't exactly say what the rest of the article says it does.
Did Elijah Cummings actually fail to disclose that they had been in contact with the IRS when asked such?
Yes... or, at least didn't offer up that information.
Does he have no legitimate purpose in doing so? I know he is on an oversight committee.
I don't believe so....
Was confidential taxpayer information actually produced (or requested, even)? If so, is this something the oversight committee cannot do?
Whatever is in that form 990, which does contain sensitive stuff. However, I'm not so sure that it was illegal... it's highly unusual.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 03:13:41
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Well, this is a potentially interesting avenue. If he asked for something he shouldn't have had, and then lied about it, that would certainly be a plot twist as far as Rep. Cummings wanting the investigation shut down. Those facts are to be determined though it seems.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 11:23:10
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Ouze wrote:Isn't the oversight committee responsible for such?
I have to admit, I'm not 100% clear on that discussion. That little snippet of conversation doesn't exactly say what the rest of the article says it does.
Did Elijah Cummings actually fail to disclose that they had been in contact with the IRS when asked such?
Does he have no legitimate purpose in doing so? I know he is on an oversight committee.
Was confidential taxpayer information actually produced (or requested, even)? If so, is this something the oversight committee cannot do?
I saw this.
Can Congress or their staff get tax information about people?
If so, why?
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/10 12:05:57
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Frazzled wrote:Can Congress or their staff get tax information about people?
If so, why?
And this is going to be an important question.
As an aside look which government department is making the news again;
https://www.osc.gov/documents/press/2014/pr14_06.pdf
Yesterday, OSC filed a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) seeking disciplinary action
against an IRS customer service representative who engaged in activity prohibited by the Hatch Act. OSC’s
investigation found evidence that the IRS employee used his authority and influence as a customer service
representative for a political purpose and engaged in prohibited political activity while in the IRS workplace.
Specifically, OSC’s complaint charges that, when fielding taxpayers’ questions from an IRS customer service help
line, the employee urged taxpayers to reelect President Obama in 2012 by repeatedly reciting a chant based on
the spelling of his last name. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the employee’s Hatch Act knowledge,
OSC is seeking significant disciplinary action.
• A tax advisory specialist in Kentucky will serve a 14-day suspension for promoting her partisan political views to
a taxpayer she was assisting during the 2012 Presidential election season. OSC received a recorded conversation
in which the employee told a taxpayer she was “for” the Democrats because “Republicans already [sic] trying to
cap my pension and . . . they’re going to take women back 40 years.” She continued to explain that her mom
always said, “‘If you vote for a Republican, the rich are going to get richer and the poor are going to get poorer.’
And I went, ‘You’re right.’ I found that out.” The employee’s supervisor had advised her about the Hatch Act’s
restrictions just weeks before the conversation. The employee told the taxpayer, “I’m not supposed to voice my
opinion, so you didn’t hear me saying that.” Following OSC’s investigation, the employee entered into a
settlement agreement with OSC in April 2014. In the agreement, she admitted to violating the Hatch Act’s
restrictions against engaging in political activity while on duty and in the workplace and using her official
authority or influence to affect the result of an election.
• OSC received allegations that employees working in the IRS Taxpayer Assistance Center in Dallas, Texas, violated
the Hatch Act by wearing pro-Obama political stickers, buttons, and clothing to work and displaying pro-Obama
screensavers on their IRS computers. It could not be determined whether these materials were displayed prior
to the November 2012 election or only afterwards. However, since the information OSC received alleged that
these items were commonplace throughout the office, OSC issued cautionary guidance to all IRS employees in
the Dallas Taxpayer Assistance Center that they cannot wear or display any items advocating for or against a
political party, partisan political group, or partisan candidate in the workplace.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/11 15:07:59
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
The IRS Scandal Comes Into Focus
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp lays out damning evidence of Lois Lerner's targeting of conservative groups.
Nearly a year into the IRS scandal, we still don't know exactly what happened—though we are finally getting an inkling. That's thanks to the letter House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp sent this week to the Justice Department recommending a criminal probe of Lois Lerner.
The average citizen might be dizzied by the torrent of confusing terms—BOLO lists, Tigta, 501(c)(4)—and the array of accusations that have made up this IRS investigation. Mr. Camp's letter takes a step back to remind us why this matters, even as it provides compelling new information that goes to motive and method—and clarifies some of the curious behavior of Democrats during the investigation.
Motive: Republicans began this investigation looking for a direct link between the White House and IRS targeting. The more probable explanation all along was that Ms. Lerner felt emboldened by Democratic attacks against conservative groups to do what came naturally to her. We know from the record that she disdained money in politics. And we know from her prior tenure at the Federal Election Commission that she had a particular animus against conservative organizations.
As the illuminating timeline accompanying the Camp letter shows, Ms. Lerner's focus on shutting down Crossroads GPS came only after Obama adviser David Axelrod listed Crossroads among "front groups for foreign-controlled companies"; only after Senate Democrats Dick Durbin, Carl Levin, Chuck Schumer and others demanded the IRS investigate Crossroads; only after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched a website to "expose donors" of Crossroads; and only after Obama's campaign lawyer, Bob Bauer, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission about Crossroads.
The information in Mr. Camp's letter shows that Ms. Lerner sprang to action following a January 2013 meeting with Democracy 21, a campaign-finance outfit petitioning for a crackdown on Crossroads and the liberal big-dollar Priorities USA. (She never touched Priorities, run by former Obama aides.) The Camp outline suggests cause and effect, and that's new.
Method: The general prohibition on releasing taxpayer information has meant that—up until Ways and Means voted Wednesday to release this info—it was impossible to know what precise actions Ms. Lerner had taken against whom. We now know that she took it upon herself to track down the status of Crossroads, to give grief to an IRS unit for not having audited it, to apparently direct another unit to deny it tax-exempt status, and to try to influence the appeals process.
We know, too, that Ms. Lerner did some of this in contravention of IRS policy, for instance involving herself in an audit decision that was supposed to be left to a special review committee. We have the story of a powerful bureaucrat targeting an organization and circumventing IRS safeguards against political or personal bias. That ought to mortify all members of Congress. That Democrats seem not to care gets to another point.
Aftermath: Democrats quickly dropped any feigned outrage over IRS targeting and circled the wagons around the agency. Why? The targeting was outrageous, the public was fuming, and nobody likes the IRS. Joining with Republicans would have only been right and popular.
That is, unless Democrats are worried. As the Camp timeline and details show, the IRS responded to liberal calls to go after conservative groups. Democrats weren't just sending letters. Little noticed in the immediate aftermath of the IRS scandal was a letter sent May 23, 2013, by Carl Levin and (Republican) John McCain to the new acting director of the IRS disguised as an expression of outrage over IRS targeting. Artfully hidden within it was Mr. Levin's acknowledgment that his subcommittee on investigations had for a full year been corresponding and meeting with IRS staff (including Ms. Lerner) to ask "why it was not enforcing the 501(c)(4) statute."
What was said in the course of that year? How much specific information was demanded on conservative groups, and how many demands dispensed on how to handle them? Good questions.
In 2012, both the IRS and Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings were targeting the group True the Vote. We now have email showing contact between a Cummings staffer and the IRS over that organization. How much more contact was there? It's one thing to write a public letter calling on a regulator to act. It's another to haul the regulator in front of your committee, or have your staff correspond with or pressure said regulator, with regard to ongoing actions. That's a no-no.
The final merit of Mr. Camp's letter is that he's called out Justice and Democrats. Mr. Camp was careful in laying out the ways Ms. Lerner may have broken the law, with powerful details. Democrats can't refute the facts, so instead they are howling about all manner of trivia—the release of names, the "secret" vote to release taxpayer information. But it remains that they are putting themselves on record in support of IRS officials who target groups, circumvent rules, and potentially break the law. That ought to go down well with voters.
Indeed...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/11 15:08:22
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/16 16:47:32
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
wo...
WO...
WO...
WO!!!!!
BREAKING: New Emails Show Lois Lerner Contacted DOJ About Prosecuting Tax Exempt Groups
“...
These new emails show that the day before she broke the news of the IRS scandal, Lois Lerner was talking to a top Obama Justice Department official about whether the DOJ could prosecute the very same organizations that the IRS had already improperly targeted,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The IRS emails show Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is now implicated and conflicted in the IRS scandal. No wonder we had to sue in federal court to get these documents...”
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/16 17:41:26
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Oh look, the DoJ. I was wondering when they would appear. Maybe that is something else that Holder can be held in contempt over, or perhaps Lerner was preempting getting his advice on being in contempt
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/16 17:45:38
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Interesting that the MSM is ignoring that DOJ thing. Thats a very big deal.
Its on thing to argue they shouldn't get tax gfree status (which i actually agree with for all of them). I ts quuite another to sick the DOJ on them. Thats Nixonian level.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/04/16 17:53:27
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Frazzled wrote:Interesting that the MSM is ignoring that DOJ thing. Thats a very big deal.
Its on thing to argue they shouldn't get tax gfree status (which i actually agree with for all of them). I ts quuite another to sick the DOJ on them. Thats Nixonian level.
Don't be preposterous. Nixon eventually took responsibility and resigned
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 00:43:01
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
We'll that escalated...
House approved H.Res. 565 requesting appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate Lerner's contempt during the IRS investigation. 250-168 with 26 Democrats voting yes (waaaaaaay more bi-partisan than the passage of the ACA  ).
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 06:28:27
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Most Glorious Grey Seer
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Frazzled wrote:Interesting that the MSM is ignoring that DOJ thing. Thats a very big deal. Its on thing to argue they shouldn't get tax gfree status (which i actually agree with for all of them). I ts quite another to sick the DOJ on them. Thats Nixonian level.
Don't be preposterous. Nixon eventually took responsibility and resigned 
I thought it was Eisenhower who used government agencies (the FBI via J. Edgar Hoover) to do his dirty work. Nixon just made lists. And recorded people. And got angry a lot.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/08 06:28:58
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 20:49:34
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Not even a smidgen of corruption?
Not even a tinsy-binsy amount?
House Republicans find 10% of tea party donors audited by IRS
Despite assurances to the contrary, the IRS didn’t destroy all of the donor lists scooped up in its tea party targeting — and a check of those lists reveals that the tax agency audited 10 percent of those donors, much higher than the audit rate for average Americans, House Republicans revealed Wednesday.
Republicans argue that the Internal Revenue Service still hasn’t come clean about the full extent of its targeting, which swept up dozens of conservative groups.
“The committee uncovered new information indicating that after groups provided the information to the IRS, nearly one in 10 donors were subject to audit,” Rep. Charles W. Boustany Jr., Louisiana Republican and chairman of the Ways and Means Committee’s oversight panel, told IRS Commissioner John Koskinen at a hearing Wednesday.
“The abuse of discretion and audit selection must be identified and stopped,” he said.
Mr. Koskinen didn’t specifically address the accusations during the hearing, and the IRS didn’t respond to a request for comment late Wednesday evening.[whembly:!!!!!]
The revelation was made on the same day that the House voted on a nonbinding resolution asking the Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS targeting.
Investigators last year reported that the IRS singled out tea party and other conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status and gave them special scrutiny, including asking inappropriate questions about their activities and membership. The request for donor lists was among the inappropriate activities.
The IRS initially denied to Congress that it was singling out tea party groups, despite vocal complaints from groups that had their applications delayed for years. But faced with the internal audit, the agency admitted it had been subjecting these groups to special scrutiny.
Still, Obama administration officials deny that the targeting was politically motivated, blaming confusion and a flood of applications from conservative groups after a 2010 Supreme Court ruling opened the door to broader political activity from outside interest groups.
Republicans said 24 conservative groups were asked for their donor lists. The IRS initially told Congress that those lists were destroyed, but when they went through their files they discovered three lists that weren’t destroyed.
Rep. Dave Camp, Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, asked the IRS to review the names on those lists to see whether any had been audited. The IRS reported back that 10 percent were audited — substantially higher than the average rate of 1 percent of average Americans who are audited each year.
Mr. Boustany said he has asked the Government Accountability Office, Congress‘ chief watchdog, to look at how the IRS Exempt Organizations Division decided whom to audit. He said the GAO review is underway and demanded that Mr. Koskinen offer investigators full cooperation.
“IRS has long insisted that Americans should not worry about political targeting at your agency because the IRS has layers of internal protections to guard against it. But in the course of our investigation, however, we found that Lois Lerner acted in defiance of these internal protections,” Mr. Boustany said.
Ms. Lerner ran the division overseeing nonprofit groups. She has since retired from the IRS but has refused to testify to Congress about her role in the targeting, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
The House voted Wednesday to hold her in contempt of Congress for refusing to talk.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 21:25:19
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
whembly wrote:Not even a smidgen of corruption?
Not even a tinsy-binsy amount?
Why have you chosen to trust House Republicans? I mean, they didn't unveil the "...new information..." they uncovered.
As to the destruction: we've done this dance before: some of the donor lists were lawfully collected.
|
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 21:41:50
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
This whole "scandal" is still about the IRS targeting Tea Party Groups, right? Not individual Tea Partiers?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/08 21:53:29
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
streamdragon wrote:This whole "scandal" is still about the IRS targeting Tea Party Groups, right? Not individual Tea Partiers?
Legally, it is about disclosure of political contributions; provided the contributors aren't sufficiently wealthy.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/08 21:57:16
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/09 01:15:51
Subject: Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
----- What you mean
---- My head
To say I haven't been following closely would be a bit of an understatement.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/09 14:56:00
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
dogma wrote: whembly wrote:Not even a smidgen of corruption?
Not even a tinsy-binsy amount?
Why have you chosen to trust House Republicans? I mean, they didn't unveil the "...new information..." they uncovered.
I've also chosen to believe Lerner when she herself broke that the IRS made a boo-boo.
Give that the IRS typically audits 1.11% of individuals. This relevation that nearly one in 10 donors were subjected to audit is very Nixonian.
If true... this is a big bleeping deal.
As to the destruction: we've done this dance before: some of the donor lists were lawfully collected.
Key word... some. Also they were publically disclosed.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/09 15:22:56
Subject: Re:Obama political donor leading Justice Department’s IRS investigation
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
And is not relevant to anything Lerner may, or may not, have done or said.
Do you know which ones were lawfully collected? Do you care? I suspect neither is true.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/09 15:27:51
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
|