"Mistakes Were Made"

[DC Tom]

Seriously: do you have to ruin every single F'ing thing?

 

Sorry. I default to "you're an idiot" automatically here.

[B-Man]

What’s That Now?

 

By Jonah Goldberg

 

Brad Woodhouse, Communications Director for the DNC, seems a bit overwhelmed. In what I gather is an attempt to change the narrative (man, do we need a new word for that) into a story of GOP “overreach” he tweeted out the following:

 

 

 

Brad Woodhouse @woodhouseb

 

So the @GOP has FOIAed the IRS. How original. And political. So much for a bipartisan inquiry. Typical #GOPOverreach

9:03 AM - 22 May 2013



 

 

 

I keep staring at this tweet like one of those posters with the hidden flying saucer in it. Maybe if I just relax my eyes enough, the outlines of his argument will come through?

 

From what I can gather, FOIing the IRS is outrageous because doing so doesn’t include the Democrats in the inquiry. Of course FOIing the IRS will only result in getting facts, which are not partisan either way. But according to Woodhouse getting facts is “political” and a sign of GOP overreach which is “typical” i.e. bad (hiding the facts, meanwhile, seems to be the essence of good government according to this administration).

 

Also, using the Freedom of Information act is unoriginal, which is also bad because apparently the GOP should use really clever and novel ways of getting the facts, or something.

 

I think Woodhouse needs to sit out the next few plays.

 

 

.

Edited May 22, 2013 by B-Man

[Gary M]

What’s That Now?

 

By Jonah Goldberg

 

Brad Woodhouse, Communications Director for the DNC, seems a bit overwhelmed. In what I gather is an attempt to change the narrative (man, do we need a new word for that) into a story of GOP “overreach” he tweeted out the following:

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

I keep staring at this tweet like one of those posters with the hidden flying saucer in it. Maybe if I just relax my eyes enough, the outlines of his argument will come through?

 

From what I can gather, FOIing the IRS is outrageous because doing so doesn’t include the Democrats in the inquiry. Of course FOIing the IRS will only result in getting facts, which are not partisan either way. But according to Woodhouse getting facts is “political” and a sign of GOP overreach which is “typical” i.e. bad (hiding the facts, meanwhile, seems to be the essence of good government according to this administration).

 

Also, using the Freedom of Information act is unoriginal, which is also bad because apparently the GOP should use really clever and novel ways of getting the facts, or something.

 

I think Woodhouse needs to sit out the next few plays.

 

 

.

 

Maybe Woodhouse thinks the GOP should just set up an illegal wire tap?

[B-Man]

TAXPROF: Roundup: The IRS Scandal, Day 13.

 

 

 

UPDATE: Cincinnati Fox19: The claim that the ongoing IRS scandal is limited to low level employees is falling apart.

 

 

The six Cincinnati workers we have identified, who sent scrutinizing letters to conservative groups with words including “patriot, liberty, tea party or 9-12″ in their names are Mitchel Steele, Carly Young, Joseph Herr, Stephen Seok, Liz Hofacre and a woman identified only as Ms. Richards.

 

But was all of this done at the hands of a small group of Cincinnati employees working together? During Friday’s congressional hearing, that appeared to be the theme. Now, that explanation just became less likely.

 

Thanks to two FOX19 sources connected to the IRS, we now understand the chain of command for these workers.

 

Mitchel Steele, Carly Young, Joseph Herr and Liz Hofacre are IRS agents. Stephen Seok is a supervisor IRS agent.

But according to the IRS employee directory that FOX19 has obtained exclusively, each of these agents has a different manager and then above them a different territory manager.

 

That is important because while it may sound reasonable to the average person that these workers began targeting groups on their own, the IRS structure is designed to prevent that

 

 

 

 

 

........and in the other part of the IRS scandal.............................the selective leaking of documents to aid the Obama Campaign

 

Marco Rubio files amendment to punish IRS agents who leak taxpayer docs.

 

.

[TheMadCap]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/22/irs-tea-party-oversight-hearing/2350269/

 

I plead the fif! Plead the fif! one, two, three, four, FIF!

[B-Man]

"You don't get to tell your side of the story and then refuse to answer questions. -Rep Gowdy (R-SC), a former prosecutor

 

 

 

Well, actually you do, Congressman..................but by the same token, there is no reason to accept her "version" at face value.

 

 

 

[DC Tom]

"You don't get to tell your side of the story and then refuse to answer questions. -Rep Gowdy (R-SC), a former prosecutor

 

Well, actually you do, Congressman..................but by the same token, there is no reason to accept her "version" at face value.

 

And the reason you do, Congressman, is because jackasses like you want to play "gotcha" with the issues so you can pontificate to the cameras about "perjury". Thus the reason she pleaded the fifth to begin with.

[B-Man]

LOL.............regarding the DNC quote in post # 162

 

 

Political Operative Says the Politicization of Politics Has Become Hopelessly Political

 

By Mark Steyn

 

Jonah, re that Tweet from that DNC Communications guy, aside from the general flouncey huffiness of it, like a bitchy waiter when you send back the monkfish drizzled with aubergine coulis on a bed of organic Belgian endives, his point is just ridiculous:

@

GOP

has FOIAed the IRS. How original. And political.

 

 

Ooh, Obama critics are politicizing everything, aren’t they? You can just about credit the same old lame old when it comes to, say, Benghazi. The death of a US ambassador and three other Americans oughtn’t to be “political”: It’s a national security disgrace, and an international humiliation.

 

 

But the IRS stuff is about the Government of the United States treating American citizens differently according to whether they’re conservative or liberal.

 

If that’s not “political”, what is?

Edited May 22, 2013 by B-Man

[IDBillzFan]

Looks like she's headed back.

 

http://www.politico....55.html?hp=t3_3

 

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa said embattled IRS official Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights and will be hauled back to appear before his panel again.

 

The California Republican said Lerner’s Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination was voided when she gave an opening statement this morning denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.

[meazza]

Looks like she's headed back.

 

http://www.politico....55.html?hp=t3_3

 

[/background]

 

Could someone get a constitutional lawyer on the phone?

[OCinBuffalo]

Sorry. I default to "you're an idiot" automatically here.

I'm not the idiot here, Tom you are. You ought to know better by now. Do we really need to go back over why, since 2005 when I got here, I do what I do?

 

You do you, and I'm gonna do me, fair enough? Nobody stops you from having your fun, I see no reason why you have to prevent me from having mine.

And the reason you do, Congressman, is because jackasses like you want to play "gotcha" with the issues so you can pontificate to the cameras about "perjury". Thus the reason she pleaded the fifth to begin with.

So there's no chance at all that, she's actually pleading the 5th...because she is actually refusing to incriminate herself?

 

How did you arrive at that?

 

I'm not saying you're wrong I just want to understand your thinking here.

[B-Man]

Sounds like Lois is headed under Obama's bus....................................

 

 

JOURN-O-LIST UPDATE: Ezra Klein and Josh Marshall, Who Got a VIP Briefing at the White House Yesterday, Are Curiously on the Same Page Today.

 

“What I glean from this is that the previous White House position — nothing more needs be done, this is all a ‘partisan fishing expedition’ — is now inoperative, and a new defense — fire Lois Lerner and then claim that nothing more needs be done, this is all now just a partisan fishing expedition, again — is now in effect.”

 

 

The synchronicity is striking.

 

It’s also an indication of just how worried the White House is, and how it intends to contain the scandal.

 

First, get reliably friendly bloggers and columnists on board with a story that focuses attention away from the White House.

 

Then, isolate and target someone who has already become a central figure in the scandal and, more importantly, who does not work directly for the White House.

 

Finally, make it appear as if these reliably friendly bloggers actually take the IRS scandal seriously, so they become voices in the larger media advocating for a strong response — just strong enough to look decisive, while keeping the White House outside the main storyline.

 

 

 

 

“Asked why he visited WH 118 times, Former IRS Commish Doug Shulman, cited the Easter Egg Roll as one reason.” ..........That's believable

 

 

 

 

.

[Cinga]

Looks like she's headed back.

 

http://www.politico....55.html?hp=t3_3

 

[/background]

 

When she gave her opening statement, declaring herself within the law, she voided ANY right to declare the 5th. She should never have been allowed to leave the chamber except in cuffs...

[B-Man]

The Real Voter Suppression of 2012 ...........................Voter ID didn’t reduce turnout, but the IRS may have.

 

By John Fund

 

The 2012 election season was filled with angry cries of “voter suppression,” almost all of them regarding attempts by states to require voter ID and otherwise improve ballot integrity. Bill Clinton warned that “there has never been — in my lifetime, since we got rid of the poll tax and all the other Jim Crow burdens on voting — the determined effort to limit the franchise that we see today.” Democratic-party chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said “photo-ID laws, we think, are very similar to a poll tax.”

 

All of this proved to be twaddle. An August 2012 Washington Post poll showed nearly two-thirds of African-Americans and Hispanics backing photo ID. The Census Bureau has found that the rate of voter turnout for blacks exceeded that of whites for the first time in the 2012 election.

 

But it now turns out there may have suppression of the vote after all. “It looks like a lot of tea-party groups were less active or never got off the ground because of the IRS actions,” Wisconsin governor Scott Walker told me. “Sure seems like people were discouraged by it.”

 

Indeed, several conservative groups I talked with said they were directly impacted by having their non-profit status delayed by either IRS inaction or burdensome and intrusive questioning. At least two donors told me they didn’t contribute to True the Vote, a group formed to combat voter fraud, because after three years of waiting the group still didn’t have its status granted at the time of the 2012 election. (While many of the targeted tea-party groups were seeking to become 501©(4)s, donations to which are not tax-deductible, True the Vote sought to become a 501©(3).) This week, True the Vote sued the IRS in federal court, asking a judge to enjoin the agency from targeting anyone in the future.

Edited May 23, 2013 by B-Man

[BillsFanM.D.]

When she gave her opening statement, declaring herself within the law, she voided ANY right to declare the 5th. She should never have been allowed to leave the chamber except in cuffs...

 

I'm no lawyer but I heard on the news several times last night that this 'point' is debatable and will be somewhat of a subjective interpretation. I.e. maybe it was a waiver...maybe not.

 

Alan Dershowitz said it's a no brainer and she can be held in contempt. "The law is as clear as could be, that once you open up an area of inquiry, you can't shut off the spigot – that's the metaphor that the Supreme Court has used."

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/lerner-irs-held-contempt/2013/05/22/id/505922#ixzz2U7YvIGBG

 

The S.C. Rep (Gowdy) who challenged her immediately in the hearing said last night (on Fox) that if she does the same today (5th amendment approach)....they would proceed with a contempt charge.

[3rdnlng]

IRS Goes Biblical on Franklin Graham

By Michael Reagan

We already know that up until last year’s presidential election the IRS was busy judging books by their cover. If your organization had a name that included “patriot” or “tea party” or “9/12” chances are your application for tax-exempt status was not going to be granted in a timely fashion. Unless one is accustomed to employing geologic time in their everyday life.

But now we learn the IRS was also busy judging the theology of some Christian groups.

 

Franklin Graham, president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, points out that IRS intimidation was not limited to President Obama’s political opponents. The IRS also singled out opponents of the president’s social issue advocacy.

In a letter to President Obama, Graham points out that during the election in 2012 the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association — based in North Carolina — ran a series of newspaper ads in that state that, in Graham’s words, supported “the Marriage Amendment in North Carolina.” Later the ministry ran ads “encouraging voters to cast our ballots for candidates who base their decisions on biblical principles and support the nation of Israel.”

Graham’s ads concluded with the request that voters “Vote for biblical values this November 6, and pray with me (Billy Graham) that America will remain one nation under God.”

At no time did the ads violate IRS rules by mentioning candidates by name or urge voters to vote for or against specified candidates. What’s more, the ads were purchased “with designated funds given by friends of our ministry for this purpose.” Again in complete compliance with IRS rules.

What Graham failed to comply with was Obama’s cafeteria-style Christianity that only obeys selected portions of the Bible.

If you are an Obama-supporting IRS bureaucrat this is heresy on two fronts: opposition to homosexual marriage and strong support for Israel. When the president “evolves” he expects America to molt, too.

Although the IRS is slow to approve conservative organizations, it is quick to anger when existing organizations don’t toe the line. On September 6, Samaritan’s Purse, part of the association, received a letter from the IRS notifying Graham the group would have its 2010 tax return audited. Then on October 15 an IRS agent arrived to investigate Samaritan’s Purse and a few days later another agent showed up to audit the evangelistic association.

Both visits just happened to be timed to cause maximum intimidation before the election in November.

This is a scandal. These actions are an abuse of power that targets democratic and Christian opposition to the president’s misguided policies. This intimidation is something one would expect in Russia, Venezuela, or Iran. But never in the United States.

It’s time for Obama to either start acting like a president and take control of an out-of-control bureaucracy; or admit that he’s just been a passenger on the ship of state for the last five years.

 

Michael Reagan is the son of former President Ronald Reagan. He is chairman of the League of American Voters and founder and chairman of The Reagan Group. His blog appears on reaganreports.com

[B-Man]

Lerner Too Clever By Half

 

By Andrew C. McCarthy

 

Former Senator Fred Thompson, who was a tremendous trial lawyer long before he played one on TV, has an excellent column on the home-page this morning about Lois Lerner’s gamesmanship yesterday — first testifying to her fully exculpatory version of events in the IRS’s scandalous targeting of conservative activists, then refusing to answer the House oversight committee’s questions.

 

Fred observes that committee chairman Darrell Issa had never seen anyone pull that stunt before, and neither had Fred. But as I noted in my post, it happens from time to time — which, of course, is why the “selectivity” rule that Fred describes exists. As it happens, I’ve not only seen it happen, I’ve prosecuted someone for doing it.

 

In the “Pizza Connection” case of the mid-eighties (at 17 months, still the longest federal criminal trial in history, I believe), our lead defendant, Gaetano Badalamenti (the boss of the Sicilian mafia), gave direct testimony that was fully exculpatory with regard to the drug and racketeering charges against him. At the conclusion of his direct, he indicated that he would not answer questions about various subjects (in particular, the mafia) on cross. A court otder striking his direct testimony would not have been a realistic remedy under the circumstances – the jury had heard the testimony, paying it the rapt attention one would expect in a case of this nature. Declaring a mistrial was also not a practical option at that point — we were in the 14th month of trial, I think. Instead, the judge properly found that Badalamenti had waived his privilege against self-incrimination by offering a self-serving, exculpatory version of events on direct. He was then cross-examined at length (by the lead prosecutor on our team, Louie Freeh, later the FBI director). Badalamenti persisted in refusing to answer over 75 questions, despite repeatedly being directed to answer by the judge — each refusal being a contempt of court.

 

{snip}

 

Like Fred, I think Ms. Lerner has waived her privilege to refuse to answer questions. If the committee calls her back, and she persists in refusing to answer questions, I believe she would could properly be held in contempt of Congress.

[DC Tom]

Lerner Too Clever By Half

 

By Andrew C. McCarthy

 

Former Senator Fred Thompson, who was a tremendous trial lawyer long before he played one on TV, has an excellent column on the home-page this morning about Lois Lerner’s gamesmanship yesterday — first testifying to her fully exculpatory version of events in the IRS’s scandalous targeting of conservative activists, then refusing to answer the House oversight committee’s questions.

 

Fred observes that committee chairman Darrell Issa had never seen anyone pull that stunt before, and neither had Fred. But as I noted in my post, it happens from time to time — which, of course, is why the “selectivity” rule that Fred describes exists. As it happens, I’ve not only seen it happen, I’ve prosecuted someone for doing it.

 

In the “Pizza Connection” case of the mid-eighties (at 17 months, still the longest federal criminal trial in history, I believe), our lead defendant, Gaetano Badalamenti (the boss of the Sicilian mafia), gave direct testimony that was fully exculpatory with regard to the drug and racketeering charges against him. At the conclusion of his direct, he indicated that he would not answer questions about various subjects (in particular, the mafia) on cross. A court otder striking his direct testimony would not have been a realistic remedy under the circumstances – the jury had heard the testimony, paying it the rapt attention one would expect in a case of this nature. Declaring a mistrial was also not a practical option at that point — we were in the 14th month of trial, I think. Instead, the judge properly found that Badalamenti had waived his privilege against self-incrimination by offering a self-serving, exculpatory version of events on direct. He was then cross-examined at length (by the lead prosecutor on our team, Louie Freeh, later the FBI director). Badalamenti persisted in refusing to answer over 75 questions, despite repeatedly being directed to answer by the judge — each refusal being a contempt of court.

 

{snip}

 

Like Fred, I think Ms. Lerner has waived her privilege to refuse to answer questions. If the committee calls her back, and she persists in refusing to answer questions, I believe she would could properly be held in contempt of Congress.

 

Personally, I think anyone who holds Congress in contempt should be lauded, not punished.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Personally, I think anyone who holds Congress in contempt should be lauded, not punished.

I agree with this perspective as it pertains to non-government employee citizens. I disagree strongly when the the contempt arises from a government employee's official government obligations.

[B-Man]

Heh.

 

It’s as if having to testify before Congress is just so beneath her.

 

 

Wonder where she gets that from?

 

 

 

 

 

 

How could the #IRS thing happen? Just look to Lois Lerner: a toxic mix of hubris and idiocy. -- Tom Anderson