IRS: a Weapon in the Hands of the Left

Politico's exclusive report on its sympathetic interview of former IRS official Lois Lerner two days ago has been widely and justifiably criticized. The Washington Free Beacon dubbed it an "epic fail" in journalism. David Harsanyi, in "Sorry, Politico, But Lois Lerner is Not a Victim," pointed out, among other things, that Lois Lerner is already guilty of targeting conservative groups by her own admission and apology.

Lerner told Politico's interviewer:

“I didn’t do anything wrong,” Lerner said in her first press interview since the scandal broke 16 months ago. “I’m proud of my career and the job I did for this country.”

In an fair and unbiased world, this claim would be astounding, knowing what we now know of Lerner's acts and misdeeds.

But what if Lerner's world wasn't fair and unbiased?  What if the Internal Revenue Service where she worked for so long no longer treated all taxpayers equally, fairly or just?  What if Lerner is really saying, quite honestly, "I didn't do anything wrong" according to my coworkers in the heavily politicized left-leaning culture that now exists in the IRS?

Cleta Mitchell, who represents several conservative organizations targeted by the IRS, discusses why she believes that the IRS has become too corrupt to be saved and how it has become a bully of an agency and a weapon in the hands of the Democratic Party.


Ms. Mitchell's full remarks and rationale can be viewed here.

Judge Demands Answers from IRS After Contradictory Testimony

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (AP)

"U.S. District court Judge Emmet Sullivan Thursday ordered the Internal Revenue Service to come up with new answers after IRS employees contradicted sworn testimony about damage to Lois Lerner's hard drive," reports the Daily Caller.

Sullivan ruled that “the IRS is hereby ORDERED to file a sworn Declaration, by an official with the authority to speak under oath for the Agency, by no later than August 22, 2014″ on four issues: the IRS’ attempted recovery of Lerner’s lost emails after her computer allegedly crashed, bar codes that could have been on the hard drive, IRS policies on hard drive destruction, and information about an outside vendor who worked on IRS hard drives.

Recent documents from nonprofit group Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the IRS, which Sullivan is presiding over, showed that IRS technology officials contradicted sworn testimony about damage to Lerner’s hard drive.

Aaron Signor, an IRS technician that looked at Lerner’s hard drive in June 2011, said in IRS court filings that he saw no damage to the drive before sending it off to another IRS technician, leading some in the media to suggest that the lost emails scandal is basically over. But Signor’s statement, issued in response to the Judicial Watch lawsuit, does not jibe with sworn congressional testimony. ...

Sullivan's order seems to have been motivated by the obvious contradiction. 

See also Judge Orders IRS to Turn Over More Info on Lois Lerner Emails.

An Idea to Shrink the Tax Code and IRS

An idea from a political veteran via a blog post by Clark Judge:

In the course of one month, Bengazi, the IRS scandal, and the tapping of the Associated Press all broke — and the GOP couldn't do a thing with it.

The GOP should come out for a flat tax and announce that, thanks to all the administrative savings from so vastly simplifying the tax code, we'll lay off half the IRS. Get rid of all those agents they hired for Obamacare and many more. Americans hate the IRS. The complexity of the tax code is a big reason for the agency's corruption. And you get a tax code that is friendly to economic growth to boot. Tie the two issues — stagnation and corruption — together.

Commenters to Judge's post note that many conservatives have long thought the flat tax idea a good one. Given the recent exposure of IRS corruption, however, the idea may never have been as appropriate as it is today.

Johnson: Proposed IRS Regs Fracture Liberals

"The proposed Internal Revenue Service regulations governing political activity by nonprofits that have united the Right in opposition are now fracturing the Left," writes Eliana Johnson. Labor unions, the ACLU, and other liberals are joining conservatives in opposing the regs.

The proposed changes, which were unveiled in late November, would classify much of the day-to-day activity of 501(c)(4) social-welfare groups, including voter education and registration, as political, thereby endangering their tax-exempt status. They would also prohibit public communication 60 days before a general election or 30 days before a primary election that identifies a political candidate — that is, nearly every advertisement aired by groups such as the conservative Americans for Prosperity or the liberal League of Conservation Voters — during the period when they are most effective.

Labor unions worry that 501(c)4 regulations aimed at silencing conservative voices will easily be applied to 501(c)5 non-profits and used to silence liberal union voices. 

The American Civil Liberties Union, meanwhile, submitted a 26-page comment to IRS commissioner John Koskinen slamming the proposed regulations. “Social welfare organizations praise or criticize candidates for public office on the issues and they should be able to do so freely, without fear of losing or being denied tax-exempt status, even if doing so could influence a citizen’s vote,” the group wrote, calling such advocacy “the heart of our representative democracy.” The ACLU argued that, if the advocacy of social-welfare groups influences voting, it does so only by “promoting an informed citizenry.”

Strassel: IRS Targeting and 2014

"President Obama and Democrats have been at great pains to insist they knew nothing about IRS targeting of conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofits before the 2012 election," writes Kimberley Strassel at the WSJ. "They've been at even greater pains this week to ensure that the same conservative groups are silenced in the 2014 midterms."

That's the big, dirty secret of the omnibus negotiations. As one of the only bills destined to pass this year, the omnibus was—behind the scenes—a flurry of horse trading. One of the biggest fights was over GOP efforts to include language to stop the IRS from instituting a new round of 501(c)(4) targeting. The White House is so counting on the tax agency to muzzle its political opponents that it willingly sacrificed any manner of its own priorities to keep the muzzle in place.

...my sources say that throughout the negotiations Democrats went all in on keeping the IRS rule, even though it meant losing their own priorities. In the final hours before the omnibus was introduced Monday night, the administration made a last push for IMF money. Asked to negotiate that demand in the context of new IRS language, it refused.

Strassel points out that unions will have no such restrictions on their political activities.

And an IRS rule that purports to—as Mr. Werfel explained—"improve our work in the tax-exempt area" completely ignores the biggest of political players in the tax-exempt area: unions. The guidance is directed only at 501(c)(4) social-welfare groups—the tax category that has of late been flooded by conservative groups. Mr. Obama's union foot soldiers—which file under 501(c)(5)—can continue playing in politics.

Strassel reports that Cleta Mitchell, an attorney representing targeted tea party groups, has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with Treasury and the IRS "demanding documents or correspondence with the White House or outside groups in the formulation of this rule." Treasury has already said it won't comply until April, after the rule's comment period closes; and IRS has not responded at all.

House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp (R., Mich.) "has now authored stand-alone legislation to rein in the IRS, though the chance of Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) allowing a Senate vote is approximately equal to that of the press corps paying attention to this IRS rule." Concludes Strassel:

So that puts a spotlight on newly sworn-in IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, who vowed during his confirmation hearing to restore public trust in the agency, and now must decide whether to aid in a new and blatantly political abuse of IRS powers. The White House is using the agency to win an election this fall. They gave the proof this week.