“IRS Employee to Congress: We’re Still Subjecting Tea Party Groups to Heightened Scrutiny”
And why not? The GOP leadership — as it’s done with its phony, symbolic votes to repeal ObamaCare — has shown that it will engage in the theater of investigation and prosecution (perhaps), but it will never reach the higher ups, and a few scapegoats and some strong words of condemnation will be all that it musters, a show for the media and to gull GOP donors. I mean, Issa’s committee has worked around the clock to dig and dig, and is now convinced low-level rogue staffers in Cincinnati didn’t act alone. Progress! CNS News:
IRS screeners continue to flag certain applications for exempt status for secondary scrutiny on the basis of name alone regardless of whether there is any evidence of political activity, an IRS employee has told a House Ways and Means Committee investigation.
A transcript of the interview with a Cincinnati-based IRS employee was released today by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) and Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Charles Boustany Jr., M.D. (R-LA) in a letter calling on IRS Acting Commissioner Daniel Werfel to immediately cease the IRS’s apparent continued practice of targeting Tea Party applications based on name alone:
Q: “If you saw – I am asking this currently, if today a Tea Party case, a group – a case from a Tea Party group came in to your desk, you received the file and there was no evidence of political activity, would you potentially approve that case? Is that something you would do?”
A:” At this point I would sent it to secondary screening, political advocacy.”
Q: “So, you would treat a Tea Party group as a political advocacy case even if there was no evidence of political activity on the application. Is that right?”
A: “Based on my current manager’s direction, uh-huh.”
The lawmakers’ letter calls on the IRS to provide notice to its employees that any such targeting will be subject to discipline and referral to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration for investigation:
The news of continued targeting comes after President Obama installed new IRS leadership and pledged that the IRS would “put in place new safeguards to make sure this kind of behavior cannot happen again.”
Right. And he will not rest until the jobs return, or the Benghazi attackers are brought to justice, etc. Except when he does rest. Or plays golf. Or goes on vacation. Or has his Hollywood sycophants over for parties and concerts on our dime.
Look. This will displease some of you, but here it is: I’ve said all along that I suspect the reason we’re seeing a refusal to name an independent special prosecutor to investigate the IRS is because there are those in the GOP establishment who were either actively complicit in the targeting, or else knew about it and intentionally turned a blind eye. Lois Lerner likely knows this. So she’ll be fine.
That’s not a conspiracy theory, either: that’s conjecture based on a thousand instances of supporting evidence. The GOP elite hates the TEA Party. Rove has taken to trying to usurp the “conservative” label in order to marginalize the TEA Party as fringe radicals, and then put forth moderate candidates as “conservative” — as well as lend support to statist policy that he’ll also relabel as “conservative” (with the help of progressives. See, eg., “comprehensive immigration reform,” where the “conservative support” is funded by left wing billionaires and given cover by Rove, Jeb Bush, and the rest of the Rockefeller Republicans).
So to believe that the very same people who, for instance, tried to have Mark Levin’s radio show pulled from certain markets would give aid, either actively or by omission, to a targeted attack on the TEA Party in the run up to election season, is hardly black helicopter stuff.
In fact, it’s so damn plausible — and likely — that it means my having continued to mention it will only solidify my wilderness wandering.
Because even the suddenly uber-conservative, award-winning erstwhile mouthpieces for pragmatism, inevitability, and the crass naivety of the Purists and True Believers, won’t touch that one.
The object, after all, is to appear to be leading. Not to put yourself too far out there. There’s just no profit or prestige — or access — in it that way. And as we all know by now, being a pragmatist means never having to say you’re sorry.