Issa notes that the Committee's position is that Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights by testifying up to a point before invoking her privilege and assures us that they have not given her immunity in exchange for her testimony. Conceivably, she has come to accept that the privilege has been waived and that she needs to testify or be held in contempt.
The Fox News moderator, Chris Wallace, quoted the report by the Republicans on Issa's committee, which said that Lerner "was keenly aware of acute political pressure to crack down on conservative-leaning organizations." Who put this pressure on Lerner?
ISSA: That's one of our questions. She says things like they put pressure. So e-mails indicate that there was pressure. We don't know whether it was the president shaking his fingers at the House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court over Citizens United or whether it was...Shouts? Wallace leaned hard on that. And I put it in boldface. (That's me shouting.) I think it must mean that it was a political project and they were hard at work figuring out how to make it not look like what she knew it was. That's a smoking gun. Here's how Issa put it:
WALLACE: During the State of the Union Address?
ISSA: During the State of the Union, where she felt the pressure. Only she can tell us where she thought that pressure was.
WALLACE: The report also cites a newly discovered e-mail from September 16th, 2010, in which Lerner discusses how to check whether groups seeking tax exempt status are engaged in improper political activity. This is an e-mail to other people in the IRS. And she says, quote, "We need to have a plan. We need to be caution so it isn't a per se political project." What do you think that e-mail shouts?
ISSA: It's a series of e-mails. And when you read them in context, what you realize is she's trying to walk back any kind of ability for someone to look at the record and say, aha, this was political targeting. And, yet, it clearly is political targeting.
Posts
88 comments:
Emails?
Put them all online, let's see what's there.
Gee, I wonder who was behind all this?
They'll be online after Wednesday. I doubt the DoJ will prosecute anyone and Obama will pardon her, along with a lot of other crooks.
The next election will be even more crucial than 2012. I don;t think 2012 was stolen but the next one may well be. They have to keep control to avoid a wholesale purge of the lefties. This is partly the consequence of Bush leaving the lefties alone in DoJ in 2001.
If they hadn't taken down Ted Stevens, we wouldn't have Obamacare.
Unless she's offered immunity, Lerner will stonewall, and lie when she can get away with it. The White House must feel that they've sanitized things sufficiently to allow her to testify. I don't expect anything earth shaking from this unless Issa has a big surprise. He might.
There are more emails than the ones released. Release them all.
Keep sending them to jail in contempt until they get the message.
Or it could be like when a health inspector warns a new business, before an inspection, not to offer him anything because that would be considered a bribe.
Stating an awareness of the rules isn't a crime,...
Here's what's going on under this administration --- Obama & the gang at the top are terrible leaders & managers. Into this vacuum, second, third, & sometimes even fourth tier political appointees have had two choices 1) do nothing because they have no direction on what to do, or 2) come up with their own direction & charge straight ahead.
Many of these appointees are MUCH more hardass lefty than the WH (e.g. Dept of Justice, and its spawn like Sec. of Labor, Tom Perez). I suspect that we will find that the IRS assault on conservative organizations was just such a campaign dreamed up by some third tier appointee that just took on a life of its own in the vacuum.
This is just my anecdotal experience from my business contacts & many friends who work in the "company town" business of the DC area, the Fed. Gov. YMMV.
If she had said "We need to be caution so it doesn't LOOK LIKE a political project" they'd have her.
She said "We need to be caution so IT ISN'T a political project."
Not the same thing.
Conservatives have to stop engaging in this paranoid conspiracy theory-based scandal chasing.
There's a real fight to be had out there,...
I just can't wait to see more of the committee democrats close their eyes, cover their ears, stamp their feet, and shout "Nanananananana!"
She said "We need to be caution [sic] so it isn't a per se political project."
Why "per se"?
That's what struck me.
A per se political project would be something completely blatant (and it might be a technical term). To me, that says they needed a cover story, deniability for what they knew was plainly wrong.
What makes anyone think pressure was required? I'll bet she was eager to crack down on teabaggers.
The Federal bureaucracy is a one-party state.
so she has been hard at work the last 10 months getting her story straight, and the IRS has taken the last 10 months to make sure the documents match her story. Can there be any doubt that is what is going on?
I think there should be an email dump. All of them.
This is partly the consequence of Bush leaving the lefties alone in DoJ in 2001.
But it's much worse, from the savagely biased hiring binge by Holder's DOJ after 2008, in which every single hire in the voting rights section was made from radical leftist organizations courtesy of the said Tom Perez.
I would like to see what Lerner's lawyer proffered Issa for her immunity.
She heard the dog whistle during the SOTU
Ann Althouse said...
She said "We need to be caution [sic] so it isn't a per se political project."
Why "per se"?
For the very reason I stated - that would make it illegal.
Too much wiggle room = "phony scandal"
There's a line where the populace loses all faith in their government and starts shooting them.
I wonder where it is? Feels like we're getting closer to it.
Issa may be getting set to downgrade the committee's charges against Lois Lerner, since he slipped that in there about her always having been of the opinion that the 501.c.(4)'s should be required to disclose their donors.
However, I do not see how her IRS minions got from that to feeling justified in asking these organizations if they sang hymns at their meetings, and if so, how many were actually singing and how many were just humming along.
And I am completely non-plussed at the general concentration on the haraasment of the "conservative" c.(4)'s, and the total silence about the outright criminal activities that have come to light, such as transmitting tax return information to outside organizations, and alerting other federal agencies to the identitied of individuals contributing to the GOP or GOP oriented organizations and suggesting that they see what they can do to harass these people.
Seriously - I'm curious where that line is for the rest of you. What would it take to "reset" the government?
Things like firing *all* federal employees and replacing them (to rid us of the systemic corruption). Breaking up the politician/lobbyist revolving door. What could be done about the MSM, other than lining them all up before firing sqauds?
I suspect that whoever wrote that email thought "per se" means "obviously".
The Obama gang's method is always cloaked in a theory of obeying a law so most Americans give them a pass
Lerner was told to enforce a strict interpretation of law against the conservative sounding applicants. She did so. As did the Feds on Denesh D"Souza on a penny ante bundling bust.
The criminal politics is a conspiracy that only liberal redistribution Dems are given passes and favors instead of law enforcement.
It's like all Interstate traffic goes 85 in a 65 speed zone but only the conservatives (as tagged by NSA digital tricks) gets tickets and arrests.
LarsPorsena said, "The Federal bureaucracy is a one-party state."
That one party is neither Dem nor GOP. It's Bureaucratic. That party's goals are not aligned with lefties, righties, or citizens. Their goals are power and money for themselves.
Seriously - I'm curious where that line is for the rest of you. What would it take to "reset" the government?
Eliminate all personal and corporate income taxes. Replace them with consumption taxes.
Eliminate the bogus crime of "money laundering."
Vigorously enforce antitrust laws.
That one party is neither Dem nor GOP. It's Bureaucratic.
The Establishment Party (E)
"Seriously - I'm curious where that line is for the rest of you. What would it take to "reset" the government?"
Not exactly sure where that line is, but Gov. Walker and his crew keeps getting closer to it every day. This latest round of anti-consumer laws has resulted in quite a few of my right-leaning friends pissing and moaning about how the Republicans are screwing over the average person.
And seriously, weren't you one of the guys acting all butt-hurt about citizens singing in the state capitol as a form of protest, yet now you're advocating for armed rebellion against our elected officials? Did something happen to change your mind or is it just a double standard?
Fen - when I saw Harry Reid call the Obamacare victims liars, I wished someone had grabbed him and thrown off a high balcny and then turned around and asked "Now who wants to be next?"
What could be done about the MSM, other than lining them all up before firing squads?
Stop watching? Stop reading? Establish more counter programming?
Guess I've been radicalized by the radicals. These people aren't liberals, they are Leftists.
They're going to wind up using force against us anyway (as they always have done historically), so why wait? Why not act pre-emptively?
"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." --Chesterton
Blogger Bob Ellison said...
LarsPorsena said, "The Federal bureaucracy is a one-party state."
That one party is neither Dem nor GOP. It's Bureaucratic. That party's goals are not aligned with lefties, righties, or citizens. Their goals are power and money for themselves.
3/2/14, 2:18 PM
___________________________________
No. The Federal bureaucracy votes D and lends material support in the same proportion as the NEA or ABA.
Folks in bureaucracies always know the rules of the bureaucracy. The know what communications are subject to records requests. So they thinking very carefully about how they can accomplish a political goal without it appearing political. It appears Lerner was not a very good learner in this case.
A good part of the urging was done in wide open public. Trace the statement of Democrat members of the House and Senate, and the President, on the illegitimacy of the conservative organizations. The Senators were very clear and direct in calling for the IRS to change their approach.
Citizens United ya know. So evil.
Anyway, people like Lerner do not need express direction. They know what they are supposed to do.
Them being the average person?
Trad guy, then they give u a ticket for slowing down traffic.
In Germany it was called "working towards the Fuhrer". In Stalin's time it was "following the general line." There doesn't have to be specific instructions. I'd be astonished if there were specific instructions. There was no need. People knew what they needed to do.
In Germany it was called "working towards the Fuhrer". In Stalin's time it was "following the general line." There doesn't have to be specific instructions. I'd be astonished if there were specific instructions. There was no need. People knew what they needed to do.
Cutting the lemon law filing from 6 to 3 years?
Is this like the Lily Ledbetter law?
Fen:
The conservative standard is with cause (e.g. self-defense). Don't let the Ass wag the tail.
I know, I know. I'm mainly curious at what point people will make a stand (for example, its obvious there will be zero consequences for Left using the IRS to target their political opponents).
I think we're the frog in the pot gradually being warmed up. By the time we realize we need to take action, it will be too late.
"The Federal bureaucracy votes D"
The largest bureaucracy in the Federal government is the Department of Defense.
If the GOP has lost the defense workers then they truly are a dying party.
It's all about the greenbacks.
Good apparatchiks always know what the party requires.
They don't need to be told.
And seriously, weren't you one of the guys acting all butt-hurt...
homophobe!
Thomas Jefferson's solution: "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms"; "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"; "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants".
Madisonfella said:
"If the GOP has lost the defense workers then they truly are a dying party."
This would suggest a different reality
"That one party is neither Dem nor GOP. It's Bureaucratic. That party's goals are not aligned with lefties, righties, or citizens. Their goals are power and money for themselves."
However, the Tea Party wing of the GOP is opposed to the bureaucracy and is therefor the enemy of all bureaucrats.
"This would suggest a different reality"
Kind of thought that LarsPorsena's 3/2/14 2:44 PM statement was incorrect, but wanted to give the benefit of doubt. Thanks for pointing out that a whole lot of bureaucrats vote Republican.
@madisonfella,
Thanks for pointing out that a whole lot of bureaucrats vote Republican.
I can see that you live in Madison, Wis, and not in the DC area.
What Phil linked to is indicative of the the world of Federal contractors & not of Federal employees.
While the two may often work side by side, they live in very different professional worlds. The contractor comes & goes with the contract, while the federal employee is as permanent as an employee can be. Contractors have absolutely no employment guarantees & can be dismissed from a Federal contract site for any & every reason short of blatant & obvious racial discrimination. Federal employees can't be dismissed for anything short of serious felonies, and even then they'd get a hearing.
In Germany it was called "working towards the Fuhrer". In Stalin's time it was "following the general line." There doesn't have to be specific instructions. I'd be astonished if there were specific instructions. There was no need. People knew what they needed to do.
I think that this is about right, and, as a result, don't think that anyone will find a smoking gun, leading to the White House. But, I also think that it is likely that Lerner, et al. were listening when all those Dem Senators, led by Chuckie Schumer, went on the air, and sent letters, urging them to do exactly what they did, which was to crack down on granting tax exempt status to Tea Party organizations. My understanding is that IRS employees, and, in particular, their union, are some of the hardest leftists working for the federal govt. (excluding the attorneys hired in Holder's DoJ). A lot of them are probably team players, esp. when it comes to hitting Red team members below the belt, when the ref isn't looking.
We need to be caution so it isn't a per se political project.
Isn't that what the IRS is doing now, by codifying the crack-down in regulations?
"[T]rying to walk back any kind of ability for someone to look at the record and say, aha, this was political targeting."
Connecting the Dots in the IRS Scandal
She won't say anything worth a damn.
But there is something there. The director of the IRS visited the White House over 100 times, but Obama doesn't remember ever talking to him. So why did he go? Did he just really like the tour? I'm not saying this was his main reason for going, but it had to come up at some point.
Obama is surrounded by a crafty cabal that shields him from everything so he doesn't get blamed for anything. Hence he never knows what's going on until the news is on. Jarrett, Plouffe, Axelrod, Messina; get one of them to talk if you could. I don't doubt that one or more them made just such an unwritten, unrecorded directive to the IRS.
If Obama were Republican this would've spawned the second coming of Woodward and Bernstein.
Scott- The news story said that Issa wouldn't even discuss immunity,which implies that he never asked for a proffer from Lerner's attorney. That would be shoddy legal work on the committee's part, if true, but not surprising.
Guess I've been radicalized by the radicals. These people aren't liberals, they are Leftists.
These radical leftists that were targeting leftist PACs? I mean, I think righties know the IRS were targeting them, but they just make believe they didn't because otherwise their world view makes no sense?
Leaving aside for the moment the question of the Lerner emails, we do know (as in "facts not in dispute") that the IRS has engaged in flatly illegal activities (release of records, for example). Can the country really afford the appearance of an IRS that is remotely politicized? The only thing more destabilizing would be the military blatantly committing illegal acts designed to favor one part over another.
It seems that the bureaucrats in the government are playing brinksmanship games with the country. Considering how well they run things, it's a reasonable bet that they're incompetent at this as well (incompetent people tend to overestimate their abilities and skills). If it all comes crashing down, they'll be the last to notice and the last to wonder why. They clearly assume we're all a bunch of idiots who don't see what they're doing. They rate the chance of suffering consequences pretty low, when in actuality they are handling snakes.
I think this might be more indicative of where fed employees lean towards http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000061&cycle=2012
AFSCME
I just caught a bit on Fox News that said the latest is that Lois Lerner will appear before the committee on Wednesday, but only to request a week's delay.
"These radical leftists that were targeting leftist PACs? I mean, I think righties know the IRS were targeting them, but they just make believe they didn't because otherwise their world view makes no sense?"
The problem with this line of argument is that it is put forth in ignorance of how this all broke (sorry if your news sources see fit to tell you the truth, just not all of it). Lerner volunteered an apology (in response to a planted question) for the IRS having inappropriately targeted not simply right-oriented groups; but rather TEA party, "patriots," and other organizations using dog whistle words (or, at least, what cats imagine dog whistles sounding like). Why did she confess to something you claim didn't happen? She said nothing whatsoever about your alleged harassment of the poor downtrodden leftward groups.
She said nothing whatsoever about your alleged harassment of the poor downtrodden leftward groups.
But we know it happened. And you couldn't give a fuck less. Not that targeting a group is wrong, just that YOUR group was targeted. Because it's all about me me me!
So why did she feel the need to apologize about one but not the other? It makes no sense, which is why I think the alleged targeting of left groups is a red herring. I can wield Occam's Razor, it's quite helpful in figuring out what happened when people involved are desperately attempting to cover up their own misdeeds.
And why was all of this initially attributed to rogue employees in the Cincy office? Caught in that lie, they made up another, caught in that one, another. Lather, rinse, repeat. Except this won't ever wash clean.
But let me stipulate that you are correct, and it was done in an evenhanded manner. Won't you then join me in calling for the IRS to be disbanded and replaced by an organization that would at least initially be above reproach? Because the IRS is currently way below reproach (remember now, this goes beyond the question of scrutinizing groups; the IRS has illegally released confidential information on more than one occasion). And this republic can't long endure when such an immensely powerful and all-pervasive component of it is clearly out of all control and rampaging as they please.
Garage: I would not be surprised to see the IRS targeting lefties as well, but not in the same numbers. Either way, the IRS has no fucking business in this game and the govt. should butt out of legislating campaign contributions from either side.
Won't you then join me in calling for the IRS to be disbanded and replaced by an organization that would at least initially be above reproach?
No. Every single one of these groups should be denied tax exempt status instead.
Garage is on to something. Let's start with unions losing their tax exempt status followed by all ad icy groups as well.
Somebody better than I at googling check this out, please, but I distinctly remember seeing something about a couple of dozen (?) "left-leaning" organizations being placed on the "BOLO" list in order to provide "balance" (vs. several hundred "right-leaning"), but that these only were cursorily questioned and quickly got their approval letters.
Garage is not being honest.
----That one party is neither Dem nor GOP. It's Bureaucratic.
Untrue. I was shocked to learn that the IRS workforce is unionized. There is no chance that it is not Democratic. Department of Labor? Department of Education?
You're going to have to look hard for a non-Democrat in the borg.
---Garage is not being honest.
Phew, I thought there was a disturbance in the Force and for a moment he was being honest.
It hasn't stopped either Garage. The troopers are on the move.
Yesterday, the New York Times reported that a fiercely private group of conservatives in Hollywood, known as “Friends of Abe,” is undergoing a painstaking review by the IRS after requesting tax-exempt status.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/23/us/politics/leaning-right-in-hollywood-under-a-lens.html?_r=1
garage mahal said...
She said nothing whatsoever about your alleged harassment of the poor downtrodden leftward groups.
But we know it happened. And you couldn't give a fuck less. Not that targeting a group is wrong, just that YOUR group was targeted. Because it's all about me me me!
You are such a useful idiot. All the spinning, twisting, fabricating, manipulating and "Squirreling!" by the Lying Left isn't enough this time.
100% of at least 300++ conservative groups caught in the BOLO lists were subjected to months of paperwork asking for illegal data like donor lists, contents of prayers, every social media post by officers and their family members. Every single one of these groups applications were delayed an average of 28 months and they got zero approvals until after the 2012 election; some are still waiting over 4 years later. Donations dried up prior to the elections due to the donors' fear of retribution from the IRS.
But only 30% of the 20 lefty groups supposedly caught in BOLOs were subjected to additional queries, yet despite the noise being made about this scandal, it took 6 weeks to find the first one.
Why is that? If they really were harassed too, they would have been screaming within hours, and leftists and the MSM should have immediately showcased them to prove it was neutrally applied.
The rightwing groups gave detailed accounts of the harassment, but I have yet to see one on the left detail the onerous burdens they were made to bear, probably because they just needed to dot a few "i's" on their paperwork and then sailed through. One application was denied because it was blatantly political, but none of the others had their apps delayed longer than 6 weeks.
Lois Lerner herself illegally backdated the approval of Obama's brother's group in Kenya after it was illegally collecting donations for two years, and Obama's own converted campaign operation was approved in a couple weeks, and it has done nothing but political activity since.
And a study by a couple Harvard researchers estimated that Romney may have lost 5-8.5 MILLION votes because the Tea Parties were stymied by the IRS. It would have taken only an additional several hundred thousand votes in 4-5 swing states to tip the electoral college to Romney. Most of the groups delayed were in swing states.
That's why James Taranto of the WSJ now calls Obama the Asterisk* President, because he may have won by cheating.
And what do the new rules say these groups can no longer do? Get out the vote drives and voter registration even if no candidates are mentioned. Why? Because the leftling groups like ACORN have for decades already been packing the registration lists with the dead, the illegals, the felons, their pets, the totally ficticious and Disney cartoon characters.
They desperately don't want the Tea Parties to start registering the silent majority of conservatives who always just go about taking care of their families, paying the taxes used to fund the leeches on the left, and try to ignore politics. Here's hoping that upcoming several score of millions of ObamaCare cancellations make them silent no more.
"Too much wiggle room = 'phony scandal'"
You mean deniable scandal.
I'm trying to understand the logic behind "They targeted leftist groups too!"
How can you defend the IRS "targeting" any group? Just what the fuck is their function anyway? Is that really the most intelligent defense of a runaway agency? Don't you people use your brains for anything?
Also, as Crimso pointed out, if the IRS had targeted leftist groups, why didn't she say so from the beginning? And how can you say that the IRS targeted leftist groups anyway, you folks always say that you're mainstream.
LOL! geokstr just bitch-slapped Garage into the next room.
Good times!
"No. Every single one of these groups should be denied tax exempt status instead. "
Unions, too ?
Many misunderstand the "tax exempt" status of these organizations. Contributions are NOT tax exempt. It only applies to the tax status of the contributions AFTER the tax has been paid. The left would like the contributions to conservative groups to be taxed twice.
That's what it is all about.
Fen,
That may be. But what I see is geokstr having wasted his or her time and effort. This is hardly the first time garage has made this claim and been eventually slapped down in similar fashion.
All that will happen is garage will now disappear from this thread and reappear the next time Althouse posts on this subject making the same discredited claims as above. He is a dishonest person who posts in bad faith for no other reason than "squirrel."
Any time acknowledging him, much less responding to him is time wasted.
Geokstr: Awesome post, thank you
Geokstr: Awesome post, thank you
RecChief said...
I'm trying to understand the logic behind "They targeted leftist groups too!"
In fact leftists were not targeted. There were leftist groups on the initial list, but they were approved while the conservative groups were not. This discrepancy shows their inclusion is the cover Lois Lerner was looking for to provide excuses to propagandists like garage.
I wonder if the geniuses who wielded the IRS as a weapon against Tea Bag groups care they have tarnished the agencies already fragile reputation to the point it is now seen as an extension of the democratic party. Does anyone think these bums will get the funding they need to collect tax receipts? Did any of the IRS think there would be blow back that would strip their funding by an enraged republican party?
Missing: GOP (at least the "Taxed Enough Already" contingent) pushes for smaller tax burden and (obviously) smaller government, the Dem push for larger government (and obviously) larger It is not unreasonable for Fed Gov (even conservative) at least some sympathies lie with the party that stabilizes their paycheck.
Leading up to the so-called government shutdown I had contact with employees of a Fed agency. They had to reduce activities that cost money (mostly cancel some travel) and they considered the whole escapade as a stunt rather than an attempt to force some kind of change. In my observation, there is so much non-essential activity going on that the biggest cost in the shutdown was planning for the shutdown. Scaling back to essential activities had zero impact, hence the need to structure the shutdown in such a way as to have the biggest impact possible to the largest amount of people. It took a lot of time an effort to make that happen.
IMHO, the link by Michael The Magnificent, "Connecting the Dots in the IRS Scandal" (3/2/14, 5:34) provides court-of-law evidence that political influence was being exerted on IRS to target those exercising Constitutional rights.
Politicalization of civil service strikes at the heart of the purpose of the system. Given developments in civil service, something needs to be done to isolate it from politics. It is such a clear conflict of interest that maybe Fed Gov employees should not be allowed to votetax burden.
@Marshall -
Yes I know. Just pointing out the idiocy of people who make that argument.
Issa, as usual, will draw a big fat blank. His so-called "investigations" have been impotent. The results embarrassingly lacking.
Reminiscent of tilting at windmills.
At some point the people (the only organized midset I know know as an opposition party of any kind are Tea PArty folks - sorry) will rally to oust Issa as he is all talk and no bite.
He is a clearly compromised power broker in charge of so many Obama Administration scandals - Fast and Furious, NSA, IRS, Benghazi....and more.
And nothing EVER happens because he never employs the subpoena powers invested in his role And nothing will ever happen. It's rigged.
When the people - somehow they may gather and agree - that Issa is one of the main obstacles to not impeaching Obama (ridiculous idea) but discrediting him in a way that no other black or Latino or any other non-cauucasian, male or female candidate for POTUS (um....this includes the Dems and Hillary playing the Woman Card - you know - that bogus War on Women thing?) will ever again be allowed to play the race card or gender card or whatever the next victim card at hand is......
It's going to happen folks. Many millions of Americans have been spoonfed a media led whitewashing (sorry - can't think of a better word) for smearing anyone who criticizes the first African American president.
Can't wait for some brave university to use objective research protocols to produce a great article or book on the actual success of African American civic leaders in America in the last 40 years compared to the good old creepy white folks.
This would be a best seller if written well.
The Statue of limitations will not expire in 2 or 3 years. Let's get these people out of power and then let's go after them, legally and with all the power of the law, for abuse of power, for breaking the law, for ignoring the Constitution, for everything possible. Then throw away the keys to set an example for the next political hack that tries to do the same.
Post a Comment