“Two Rogue Employees”, Eh?
Originally the current Administration blamed the ever-expanding IRS scandal on the actions of “two rogue employees”. Well, that number now appears to be just a little bit low.
CNN is reporting that the true number might well be much higher. Apparently the IRS has identified 88 employees who may have documents relevant to the unlawful selective targeting of conservative political groups based on ideological grounds. The IRS has advised these employees to preserve all such documents for investigative purposes. Disposition of such documents now will violate Federal records laws and could constitute obstruction of justice.
How many of these 88 employees were active participants in the conspiracy and how many may have merely received documents relating to same is not yet known. However, the sheer number of persons potentially involved – nearly 90 IRS employees, with perhaps more yet to be uncovered – is a strong indication that the original Administration position that the scandal was the result of the actions of “two rogue employees” is an utter canard.
The large scope of document collection efforts is now cited by the IRS as the reason for delay in turning over relevant documents concerning the scandal to the House Ways and Means Committee. The original deadline set by the Committee was May 21.
Stay tuned. This could get even more interesting.
Category: "Your Tax Dollars At Work", Crime, Politics
Yeah, it’s 88 employees today. Next week, after the next stone is turned over, who knows how many will be “involved”.
This number of people begs the question as to why it wasn’t known or acknowledged in a wider circle sooner. That many people can NOT keep a secret.
@Comanche,
It’s because Obama’s enablers in the press were running cover for him by purposely (in my opinion) ignoring the information right before their eyes.
@2 Good point. The truth will be and I believe is, that Obama has known about this long before it became public. His minions will take the heat but “2 rogues” becomes 88 which will become bigger as the truth comes out. You are right, that many people can’t keep a secret. As the heat goes up those 88 will start pointing fingers at another 88 and the list will be arms length before it’s over.
The plot thickens…
Can we just start impeaching people already? That means everyone in the POTUS hierarchy, the POTUS, VPOTUS, Speaker of the House, everyone on down until we get to someone who doesn’t suck to take over as POTUS.
More stuff to add to the IRS headache pile. MSNBC actually had a 5 min segment on IRS “dance” videos recently discovered…um, supposedly it was for training purposes.
New watchdog report details ‘excessive spending’ by IRS
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/31/new-watchdog-report-details-excessive-spending-by-irs/?hpid=z7
OMG
e.g., Obama MUST Go!
Many pundits are calling the IRS scandal the worst thing to happen to the government as it puts the ideology of government employees on display and opens them up to individual lawsuits.
I honestly believe that we are actually living through the death of liberalism where people finally understand what is going on in the world. Even low information voters will understand it when all their benefits are cut because Uncle Sugar is broke.
I’ll believe it when I see it, but I just wonder if it wasn’t divinely inspired for ovomit to be reelected.
SGT Friday to Ms. Lerner: Just the facts, ma’am.
Elliott Ness: I got Big Angelo, and I got Little Angelo. I got Nitti* and I got Capone*. What makes you think I can’t get you?
*He may have been exaggerating about this.
J. Edgar Hoover: You know, I have dossiers on everyone, including those creeps on Capitol Hill. I had ’em on the Kennedys. I even had one on the idiot writing this statement. Yeah, Lerner, I have a dossier on you, too, and all your little friends.
IRS: The dumb Democrats’ jobs program for partisan wannabe-tyrants who enkoy making people’s lives miserable– now running your healthcare in 2014!
Sparks, Obama has minions?????
Well, but…. well, what am I gonna do?
@2: I admit I haven’t followed this too closely, but I’d wager the reason is because it’s not seen as a scandal. I mean, from what I’ve read, not a single ‘Tea Party’ group lost its tax exempt status, they simply went through extra scrutiny and in some cases that tax exempt status was delayed, correct?
Now, while targeting Tea Party groups for *political* reasons is certainly not good, it isn’t entirely clear that’s what happened. Or, at the very least, it’s a blurry line. If ‘Tea Party’ groups applying for tax exempt status are specifically and entirely about political efforts, isn’t this in violation of the nature of ‘tax exempt’ organizations? And thus deserving of extra scrutiny? And since the IRS only has limited resources (believe it or not!), focusing on groups which have an association with a stated goal of changing our politics would certainly ‘flag’ you for careful inspection.
In other words, if they were targeted because they were of an adversarial alignment to the current administration, that’s ‘bad’.. in quotes because, well, it’s unfair targeting, but these groups still shouldn’t get tax-exempt status under the law (even though they all do, including liberal ones). If they were targeted because it’s simply the most effective way to get the most likely groups flaunting the law, that’s just being efficient.
The irony of all of this is that it’s basically profiling — usually the politics are switched entirely on this sort of thing.
What am I missing? Have any conservative groups lost their tax-exempt status from this?
Keep wondering just what people thought the hundreds of thousands of thugs and the dozens of “czars” he hired were doing. All those folks were well trained in what we normal people would call terrorist tactics and did not need any specific orders to do what they do/did. They all knew what was expected of them when they were hired.
It’s not the corruption itself which has come to light that is so shocking, or potentially damaging to the lefty agenda. After all, there is always some level of corruption among any group of people. That fact is a very good reason to keep government small so that all of us can keep the inevitable corruption in check.
The problem for the lefty agenda here is the scale of the corruption. When you have hundreds of thousands of independent operators all having been schooled in ways to cause problems for those opposing them plus those specifically tasked to harass those on the enemies lists, it is the sheer number of the abuses and the overlapping of them that is shocking.
It almost looks as if even the media is getting the idea that the lefties are now eating their young. Not counting on them seeing reality, but they are getting very uncomfortable with their roll of obfuscation of reality on this scale, especially now that their rights are also being violated.
@12 Lets see, there is the POTUS, the VPOTUS, then…minions, whatever their title.
Just remember the head of the IRS, Lois Lerner, essentially said when called before Congress to account for all of this “I have done nothing wrong” and then refused to answer any further questions.
Try that next time you get audited.
Anonymous #12-the delay is kind of the point though, in that it hindered those groups in being able to operate leading up to the election. Meanwhile Lerner herself approved a tax exempt application from Obama’s half brother in Kenya (for the “donations” he receives from the U.S.) and back dated it for 2 1/2 years (which she did not have the authority to do).
http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/
Sorry-meant to address Anonymous #13 in previous post.
Anonymous. Wow! You really don’t see a problem with this? You really think it’s OK to subject a group to extra scrutiny because of the political leanings of the group in question? You really wouldn’t complain if it were a Republican president subjecting liberal groups to this sort of scrutiny? You really think it’s just conservatives trying to get tax free status illegally, “flaunting the law” as you put it? You really think that conservatives are the “most likely” groups to be scamming the system? If you think that any of this is ok then you are a partisan hack with no respect for our country of Constitution or the rule of law.
@16: Thanks for the info – the stuff surrounding President Obama’s half-brother clearly seems pretty messed up at first glance and I hadn’t heard that before. I can’t really generate much sympathy for most of the 501(c) groups being unable to participate in the elections, though, since I believe such groups aren’t supposed to be involved in those sorts of things anyway. Yes, again, it’s bad if the conservative ones were targeted for being conservative (as opposed to for being political), but it’s still against the intention of the law.
I guess, ultimately, if the GOP focused on the concrete examples like the half-brother’s case, they’d get more traction, albeit on a smaller ‘scandal’, than they do by trying to claim a huge scandal when, ultimately, it just seems like political groups which aren’t supposed to be granted 501(c) status were granted it anyway, just after jumping through a few extra hoops. I mean, sure, that’s bad – but it’s bad because they were granted it to begin with!
@Anonymous:
You really do need to stop drinking that kool-aid. The IRS targeted conservative groups both to harass them, and to keep them from being an effective counter to Obama’s reelection campaign. The IRS targeted conservative groups as a means of opposition research, and that is intuitively obvious to the most casual of observers based solely upon the questions the IRS was asking.
There is no possible way that this was done without the full knowledge and direct orders of the President and his staff.
@18: Again, it depends on if the extra scrutiny was applied *because* they were of an opposing political alignment or because they were targeted because they were ‘more likely’ (by some metric — their name, in this case) to be political in nature, and thus deserving of extra scrutiny. I don’t think ANY political group, liberal or conservative, should be given tax-exempt status. From my point of view, it seems like there’s been a large increase in such groups, especially on the conservative side, in the past few years. If you form a group and the very name of that group indicates a particularly partisan flavor -of either side!- and there are a lot of similar groups, sure, I think you’d pay extra attention to them. My ‘feeling’ (I don’t have data to back it up) that there were far more conservative groups forming in recent years just seems like how we, as a country, react to our elections. In the lead-up to 2008, the liberals stepped up .. conservatives had the Presidency for 8 years and thus liberals went grass-roots. In 2012, it happened the other way around. This is pretty natural. If we get a Republican president in 2016, I’m sure come 2019 there will be even more liberal groups sprouting up and if they try to form 501(c) organizations with some name like, ‘Elect Our Liberal Guy 2020!’, I *hope* the IRS pays extra attention to them, yes. I don’t think conservatives are the ‘most likely’ groups to be scamming the system, no. I simply think, as above, there have been many more conservative groups registering for this status than liberal ones lately, at least in terms of names specifically associated with politics – eg, ‘tea party’-such and such. If I’m wrong, I’m happy to see data to the contrary, I have nothing against conservatives. I also don’t know if ‘scamming the system’ is the best way to put it – our system allows this, even though it isn’t supposed to, and I simply don’t like the sheer amount of money put into these sorts of things… Read more »
@20:
I don’t think I’m drinking any Kool-Aid. I have no great love for this administration. But I don’t hate it either.
IF the IRS did this to harass these groups and keep them from being a counter to the President’s re-election campaign then that’s clearly bad and people should be fired. IF it can be shown that the President ordered this, and it was done for political reasons, then sure, this is a scandal. Neither of those statements have been shown to be true, though.
If you can send me a link to the questions the IRS was asking I’ll take a look, but at this point in time, I simply don’t see this as a scandal. Potential scandal? Sure. Unfortunately, though, the willingness of the GOP to ‘cry wolf’ on Obama -much like the liberals did to Bush- makes me hesitant to trust the hysterics without ample evidence. Sure, I know, that makes me a commie to some here, but I defended Bush in similar fashion from things liberals screamed.
Give me sufficient evidence and I’ll see it as a scandal. Maybe not a huge one, since I don’t think these groups -any of them- should be tax-exempt, but still a scandal.
Someone’s been living under a rock.
Even though everyone is entitled to an opinion, it is tiresome when those opinions are ill formed based upon partial, at best, information.
So, you want to condemn all 501c’s based upon your lack of knowledge of the different types that exist, or the requirements for those different types? Well, there you go!
But if you want your opinion to be taken seriously, you might want to research the difference between a (c)3 and a (c)4 as a starting point.
Willful ignorance is perhaps the worst sort of ignorance. Seriously. If by now you have not heard about the multitude of outrageous and invasive questions that were asked only of groups on the hit list, then you simply have not been paying attention. If you do not know about the multitude of private companies in business for decades suddenly being audited, among other surprise inspections from alphabet city, again, you have not been paying attention.
Abuse of power is a horrible thing. Willful ignorance is what allows the abuse of power.
@24: I’m certainly not an expert on 501(c)’s, but I do know of the general difference between 3’s and 4’s — hence why I said when they *primarily* engage I’m politics, this is against the spirit of the law. How many of these are actually doing ‘social welfare’ work? A conservative may feel that getting rid of a President they don’t like IS improving the ‘social welfare’ of the nation, but I don’t think it works that way legally. Perhaps I’m wrong, maybe Hondo can correct on this? And, again, I’m talking of the spirit of the law, not the actual, loop-hole filled implementation.
To recap, my understanding is that these organizations (501(c)4’s) can get tax-exempt status IF their primary efforts go towards social welfare. They are still prohibited from participating in elections – either on behalf of or against any specific candidate.
As for the private businesses being audited, again, I have a hard time paying attention to articles where there are immediate, glaring hysterics about the ‘worst thing ever’ that the administration has done this week. So, yes, I tune out sometimes. I did read the article below, though, which calls into question the one previous article I had seen about specific targeting of conservatives & their businesses. As pointed out in the article, this doesn’t rule it out, but there needs to be sufficient evidence, not just, ‘here’s a few places it happened.. watergate-squared!’
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/new-audit-allegations-show-flawed-statistical-thinking/
Both sides get partial information – I tend to think I get both. I am on conservative blogs far more than liberal ones, come to think of it. The latest information I got (from a conservative friend) was about Shulman’s 157 visits to the White House. Taken with the impression he gave, wow, that IS shocking – the IRS commissioner, meeting with Obama 157 times?! Scandal! Except then I saw this – most of the meetings weren’t:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/the-fake-story-about-the-irs-commissioner-and-the-white-house/276399/
Both sides push information that’s partial to their side. I read both when I can.
Anon–regardless of whether or not you FEEL political 501(c)(3)’s should exist–and funny how I can tell you’re a liberal based on how you FEEL rather than FACT, they can and do exist.
Oh, and if you think there are more conservative 501(c)3 or 527 groups than liberal ones, BZZZZZZZTTTT!!!! Wrong answer, sonny!
Even the left-leaning McPaper calls bullshit on your line:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/14/irs-tea-party-progressive-groups/2158831/
Personally, I think this whole scandal is the result of a YouTube video about Muhammad, or some shit like that.
Anon–if you don’t think 501(c) groups are primarily political in nature, I have a bridge to sell you. Look at the original legislation passed in 1976 and tell me that.
“Two Rogue Employees” Yep, I think it is still the work of two:
President Obama – “Employee” of the American People.
IRS Commissioner – Employee of Obama, doing his dirty work, whether Obama “knows” it or not…
OWB–he links to the NYTimes blog, the Atlantic, and Slate. Yeah, real fuckin “moderate” there.
Now it turns out that former IRS Chief Schulman’s wife works for a liberal lobby outfit, Public Campaign. They believe in taking “big corporate” money out of elections. The head of this outfit thinks that its just fine that conservative groups were targeted for harassment.
Sparky – just giving it an opportunity to prove that being taken seriously was never what the troll wanted.
Funny how this works – when liberal 501 whatevers get big bucks from individuals and corporations to advance their political agenda and political candidates, it is overlooked, but when those horrible conservatives gather in groups, contributing a few bucks from a lot of individuals, suddenly, those 501 whatevers have a “spirit” which must be adhered to, but only by conservatives.
Guess all that “fairness” malarkey goes out the window when using situational ethics directed at your enemies list.
OWB: what else would you expect from someone posting from New Haven, CT?
Anonymous once more demonstrating what a fruitless waste of time it is to try and debate people like him/her
Doubles down on a pathetically ill-informed *opinion* instead of standing up and saying- Hey- you know what? You’re right…I don’t know much about this so I might want to do more research and try again when I actually know jack and shit about the topic I’m prattling on about.
You’re an embarrassment. GTFO the internet, or at the very least, stop disgracing yourself on this topic. If you can’t get on board with the danger that exists with this kind of abuse of power, regardless of which side is in charge and perpetrating it or whether the target is on the right or left, you’re a hopeless ideologue.
@NHSparky: I’ll read that link later tonight when I get a chance. If I’m wrong on the number of liberal vs. conservative groups, I have no problem admitting that. As for being a liberal, well, I guess we’re all liberals here. Everyone seems to ‘feel’ that Obama is directly connected to this despite holding no evidence (facts!) to indicate that.
And from what I understand, and yes, I said I could be wrong, 501(c)3’s and 4’s that are primarily political SHOULDN’T exist, even though it’s clearly true that they do. So? Shouldn’t we aim to rectify that problem? And I linked to Nate Silver’s statistics blog at NYT, which is worth a read. If I were on a liberal site I’d probably link to conservative news sites, since usually it’s the opposing media that reveals inaccuracy in their competition.
@OWB: I don’t know how this is considered trolling. I voiced my view of things, with explanations for why. Clearly I have different opinions than most here, but find a place where I’ve been rude, insulting, harassing or any of the other things typically associated with trolling and I’ll gladly apologize for them.
I’m just as frustrated with liberal 501’s getting tax exempt status — it’s just that clearly they’re not the focus right now. I’m an independent voter, having supported both R’s and D’s in the past, and likely will do so in the future.
@ Hondo: Again, if I’m doing something to harass people, let me know and I’ll stop. I’m not sure why disagreeing with people leads to posting where my ISP is based and how that speaks to my views.
@33: This all started with my explanation of why I don’t see it as a big thing, and thus why it hasn’t been acknowledged in a wider circle yet, in response to a question about that. I never claimed to be an expert on this matter, and admitted I haven’t been following it closely — I was, rather, sharing an explanation of how someone COULD think that it doesn’t matter much.
More to the point, I already stated that IF this was done for political purposes, that’s clearly a bad, bad thing and an abuse of power. However, there exist non-political reasons for doing this – it’s a form of profiling, for better or worse, and when an organization like the IRS has limited resources, that’s a common approach. Focus on the groups which have a higher likelihood of being political.
Do you have proof that it happened one way or another? No? Neither do I, so I’m refraining from judgement until more is known. Somehow, that makes me the spawn of Satan here.
It’s a product of the frustration some of us feel that instead of OPENING UP YOUR EYES you’re more interested in quibbling about the 501s…that is just the tip of the iceberg.
What should chill you to the core is how this naked abuse of power can destroy this country if continued unchecked.
This is not a right vs. left, 501 groups ought to be put in check type of thing. Disappointing that instead of taking on the real issues, you seem to be down in the weeds..arguing about the minutiae of this case when the crux of the IRS behavior is a much larger issue.
What other evidence are you waiting for??? By God, man (or woman)- You can’t be this seriously obtuse!
The groups are coming out of the woodwork with endless letters of inappropriate questioning…individuals not only being audited multiple times by the IRS when they had never been prior to filing for their 501 status…multiple agencies (FBI, ATF, ICE) pig-piling on same individuals at same time…initial outright denials of just a few “misguided” IRS agents now ballooning to 88 involved…an official taking the 5th on the stand after stating categorically that she “did nothing wrong”? What else do you need other than a signed confession? Oh, it’s coming…but if you aren’t outraged by this now, then I suspect you won’t ever be truly outraged at this blatant overreach.
Good Lord- do you really mean to tell me that if this news had broken during George W. Bush’s administration you would be advocating for a measured, “wait-and-see” approach to the evidence?
I give up.
@38: Where we agree is that unchecked targeting of political groups of a particular alignment is a threat to the country, absolutely. Forgive me for inaccurately putting words in your mouth here, but it *seems* that where we disagree is that you (or at least many) would say that this IS happening, for political purposes, and IS done with the direct involvement of the President.
I’m simply saying I don’t see evidence of that connection at the present. Oh, sure, I see the possibility for it, sure, but no proof. There’s also the possibility that it happened, but was done solely by politically-affiliated IRS officials without POTUS involvement. There’s also the possibility that it was simply ‘profiling’ in order to increase the likelihood of targeting groups which technically shouldn’t hold that sort of tax-exempt status.
Me personally? I’m leaning towards a combination of the second and third options — that people in IRS targeted some groups because they were conservative, and also that it was just natural to go after groups with certain keywords in their title. The latter part of that I understand, the first part is clearly bad and people should be fired. There’s no excuse for that sort of behavior at the IRS, none.
I agree it’s not left vs. right — my *personal* opinion is that neither side’s groups should get tax-exempt status, and I voiced that, but the key issue here isn’t that, it’s who did what. And I don’t yet see any evidence linking POTUS to this ‘scandal’. We have plenty of idiot bureaucrats that do stupid things all the time – fire ’em, ensure there are checks to the system that it doesn’t happen often, and move on.
Considering there is still the EPA, FCC, SEC, HHS, DVA, DOS, DOJ, DoD, and the agencies of the blue and purple states.
88? Try over 8,800.
And considering the government worked in collaboration with Prognazi organizations, try 88,000.
Anonymous, perhaps you should look at the other IRS-related posts. They weren’t simply targeting groups, they were also targeting individuals as well as Jewish groups and people.
None of this is random, none of this has any correspondence to anything other than attempts to intimidate and harrass people.
You don’t believe me? My sister has never been audited in her entire working life. She took a tourist trip to Israel last year. This year, she’s being audited. It’s not a coincidence, it has happened to other people. The questions IRS employees have asked are inappropriate (e.g.,what kind of prayers do your group members speak) and have nothing to do with taxes. None of this is a coincidence, it has been recorded and reported. It is malicious and intentional.
You need to wake up.
In case, Anon, you think I’m making this up, go here:
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=35670
and here:
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=35687
People like Anonymous is the reason that there is a distinct disconnect between the Pols in D.C. and the rest of the country. They rely on people to think the best of the powerful and never scratch the surface. They rely on people to stay uninformed. Let’s not question the Obama administration… I mean he couldn’t be involved when one of his departments used their power to harrass his enemies, right? It just benefited him, but he’s innocent. How frickin naive can you possibly be?
Try looking into Frank Vandersloot whose business was audited a month after he was outted by the Obama campaign as a big Romney donor. He was not only audited by the IRS but the DOL as well.. Nope, no collusion there..
Anon–Nearly 40 years ago, Nixon resigned and people went to prison for less than this. The media were relentless in their pursuit of the story and to find out who knew what when.
Fast forward to today, and the media can’t cover for Obama and his sycophants quickly enough.
BTW, here is the link about Frank Vandersloot..
http://nation.foxnews.com/irs/2013/05/13/flashback-romney-donor-vilified-obama-campaign-then-subjected-2-audits
Anonymous: your location reveals a bias in your worldview you may not even be aware of. Northern NJ/NYC/Conn/RI/MA is probably the most generally liberal part of the US outside of the beltway and (possibly) SF/LA/Seattle/Portland. You’re living in a liberal “echo chamber”. What you see as “moderate” the rest of the country sees as leftist/progressive.
Why? Because virtually all the folks around you are leftist/liberal. That single item alone skews your worldview regarding what is left/center/right.
I agree with you that that this most certainly appears to be a case of “profiling”. The profiling criteria appear to have been as follows: “Is the individual or organization applying conservative? If so, delay/obfuscate/ask for ridiculous amounts of irrelevant information until they go away. If they’re neutral, process normally. If they’re liberal or ‘connected’, expedite.”
In short: this appears to be nothing less than a resurrection of a Presidential “enemies list” for IRS action. And in case you’ve forgotten: one of the things for which Nixon was facing impeachment was his use of the IRS to screw political enemies.
It was wrong as hell 40+ years ago, and it’s wrong as hell today.
Yeah, but melle1228- we don’t really have any evidence of collusion between the IRS & DOL, do we??? I mean, it’s my *personal opinion* that it could be a total coincidence!
I weep for this country when the willfully blind are confronted with the ugly truth of something like this, and all they can do is play small ball over 501 status and attack the real victims for simply trying to benefit from the same advantages many other groups leverage to their benefit.
Instead of being outraged, they want & wait for more evidence in what is unmistakably a wide-ranging practice that seems pretty clear is not just the work of a few “idiot bureaucats” (though I don’t disagree with that characterization based on the testimonies of Schulman, Miller and Lerner).
As the Church Lady used to say… “How conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient!”
@47 And what anonymous doesn’t realize is that audits cost money; even if you are innocent of everything. A moderate to large business can spend an easy 6 figures on an IRS audit. People are scared to get audited, and the IRS made sure that they went after a lot of groups that didn’t have unlimited funds to fight the delays and audits. They were essentially at this administration and his IRS minions mercy.
And they didn’t just target these groups; the targeted their frickin donor lists- many who were audited after the groups were forced to give the names to the IRS.
This is nothing new. Recall what happened to “Joe the Plumber” after his Q&A session with then-Senator Obama in 2008. After Senator Obama spoke of “spreading the wealth around”, the media and the local Ohio government went after “Joe the Plumber”.
This is what liberals in power do. And they do it, because they know they can do it without any consequences of the law, because the media will protect them.
Just look back at the New Black Panthers and the DOJ letting them off the hook.
This is Chicago thug politics with the full cooperation of the liberal media.
It’s disgusting. Even more disgusting that we have a public full of people like “Anonymous” who see nothing wrong… yet those same people blamed Bush for anything and everything. Pathetic.