Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, September 22, 2016

The commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service on Wednesday denied that he ordered his staff to destroy thousands of emails sought by Congress in 2014 during its investigation into the IRS targeting scandal.

Unapologetic and defiant two years ago, John Koskinen appeared very subdued and contrite today as he expressed "regret" for making incorrect statements during his testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in 2014. "Some of my testimony later proved mistaken," Koskinen conceded. But he insisted that he had testified honestly to the best of his knowledge at the time.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Before some of you rip the source (PJ Media), I used this source because mainstream outlets won't cover this story. It was either PJ Media or the Washington Examiner.

When it became clear that the IG was going to blow the lid on what they were doing they expanded their BOLO list to include liberal groups also. However, not a single liberal group had their application delayed (for accept or deny) beyond 90 days. Not 1. Not a single liberal group was subjected to demands for donor lists, demands for all sorts of invasive documentation, and demands that highly personal questions be answered, such as the content of their prayers. Not 1. Some conservative groups are going on 5 years with their status in limbo. That is utterly ridiculous and, in fact, it's criminal.

This came straight from the Democratic Party. You can tell by how Democrats have reacted to this and how they've behaved during investigative hearings. If the IRS was going rogue they would have been nearly as outraged as Republicans. But they haven't. They have been covering for the IRS and have assisted in stonewalling the investigation. Sheldon Whitehouse is involved in this. Chuck Schumer is involved. Elijah Cummings is involved. Barack Obama is involved. Eric Holder was probably involved. Koskinen is involved in an impeachment hearing and the Dems spend their time with the gavel grilling Koskinen about Trump's tax returns.

The IRS destroyed tapes containing Lois Lerner emails AFTER they were subpoenaed. John Koskinen just this week admitted to giving false testimony to congress. The MSM covers all of this up. Remember the Nixon tapes? That was the crime of the century according to WaPo. The Obama IRS destroys files and the MSM barely even reports on it and this story drops out of the news cycle within a day by the outlets that bother to give it perfunctory coverage.

The Democratic Party is a criminal enterprise.

#1 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 03:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

The Democratic Party is a criminal enterprise.
#1 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The Democrats are criminals through commission, Republicans by omission.

#2 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-09-22 03:23 PM | Reply

Andrea,

Congressional Republicans have handled this scandal incredibly poorly. They are so feckless and incompetent.

They had a ------ for Benghazi, which wasn't even a scandal, and have mostly ignored this which is one of the biggest domestic government scandals in several decades.

#3 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 03:25 PM | Reply

#3 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I remember the IRS scandal, it was fumbled, but I also think Liberals and the MSM didn't care.

I would think that would concern all sides, that kind of abuse. But I have found politics today to be something like ProFootball. No matter what your guy does you defend him to the death, regardless of ethics, you see that here daily.

But I will say this election season has been entertaining, you need a lineup card to tell who is for what.

Benghazi, I just didn't understand, I mean I get the frustration and bringing out the immediate lies like the video, but the full court press? Perhaps its because there was nothing else to throw.....

Bottom of the stack, well we always have Benghazi lets throw more and see if anything sticks ....... :)

#4 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-09-22 03:40 PM | Reply

Andrea,

Progressives actually applaud the IRS' actions because of the political outlooks of the groups that were targeted.

Liberals don't care mostly because the MSM has buried this story, thus it's not on their radar.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 03:43 PM | Reply

The GOP went hard after Benghazi (and soft on this) because they are political whores. Hillary Clinton has been the presumptive nominee for 4 years and the State Department has ZERO ties to the IRS, which means if the IRS scandal were to be fully exposed it could only be tied to Hillary in a superficial manner - her 'Party' did this!

The lies surrounding Banghazi enraged Republicans. Politically harming Clinton motivated Republicans.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 03:45 PM | Reply

There is a huge reason why this hasn't been a media priority and it has to do with the GOP budgetary decisions:

Between 2010 and 2012, the number of applications the IRS received each year seeking 501(c)(4) certification doubled.[31] During this period, budget cuts and personnel cuts reduced the IRS's ability to adequately perform its core duties.[32] When the Obama administration requested in 2011 that Congress increase the IRS's $12.1 billion budget by $1 billion to allow the agency to hire 5,100 additional agents, Congress instead reduced the IRS budget to $11.8 billion, and the IRS offered buyouts to 5,400 of its 95,000 employees.[32] The U.S. National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson, told The New York Times in January 2012, "The overriding challenge facing the I.R.S. is that its workload has grown significantly in recent years, while its funding is being cut.... This is causing the I.R.S. to resort to shortcuts that undermine fundamental taxpayer rights and harm taxpayers -- and at the same time reduces the I.R.S.'s ability to deliver on its core mission of raising revenue."[32] en.wikipedia.org

What Jeff fails to mention was the explosion of right-leaning groups using 501(c) 3 and 4 groups was beyond what the de-staffed IRS could handle, and the reason these groups proliferated was because they became conduits for circumventing federal election and disclosure laws designed to limit contributions and are particularly effective because donors don't have to be identified as they do outside of tax-exempt groups.
The statutory language of IRC 501(c)(4) generally requires civic organizations described in that section to be "operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare". Treasury regulations interpreting this statutory language apply a more relaxed standard, namely, that the organization "is operated primarily for the purpose of bringing about civic betterments and social improvements".[1]
Scott Walker ran all his millions of dark donations through a 501(c)4 for the GOP candidates fighting recall in Wisconsin. Exactly what "social welfare" is accomplished by funding political ads during election cycles? Not only can wealthy donors give huge amounts of money anonymously, they also receive tax breaks for doing so. Why do you think right leaning groups jumped all over themselves to create backdoor funding for their political goals?

Oh course these groups should have to prove they deserve their status, and it makes sense that a Democratic administration would prioritize the scrutiny of the very groups trying to remove them from power. The whole mess is sorted and filthy beyond any ethics whatsoever, even though the law seems to allow it even under these circumstances. But scandal? No, politics.

#7 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 04:08 PM | Reply

Progressives actually applaud the IRS' actions because of the political outlooks of the groups that were targeted.

Crazy how accurately you predicted TonyRoma's appearance on this thread NostraJeffJ!

#8 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2016-09-22 04:14 PM | Reply

What Jeff fails to mention was the explosion of right-leaning groups using 501(c) 3 and 4 groups was beyond what the de-staffed IRS could handle, and the reason these groups proliferated was because they became conduits for circumventing federal election and disclosure laws designed to limit contributions and are particularly effective because donors don't have to be identified as they do outside of tax-exempt groups.

It is a blatant falsehood that the IRS couldn't handle all of the applicants. They went way above and beyond normal protocol in terms of the information and documentation they demanded. They actually added to their workload by demanding way more information than is normal for these types of applications.

Oh course these groups should have to prove they deserve their status, and it makes sense that a Democratic administration would prioritize the scrutiny of the very groups trying to remove them from power.

Nobody is saying they shouldn't jump through the requisite hoops. The problem was that new hoops were created but only for certain groups the administration disapproved of. Add to that these applications, which were normally handled in Cincinnati, were sent to Washington to be sat on. Lastly and most importantly, the IRS is supposed to be a neutral agency. To say it's only natural for them to target certain groups is clearly criminal.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#9

Jeff, I don't disagree with a word you're saying but for the reality that these groups aren't for social welfare at all, they're conduits for funneling unlimited amounts of cash toward political ends that have nothing to do with the promotion of social welfare unless you're defining your political agenda as such.

I don't know the legal statutes, but I wouldn't term it a scandal on it's face. I'm more appalled that these contributions are tax deductible in any form whatsoever regardless of which party receives them. THAT is the scandal imo!

#10 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 04:24 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

The problem was that new hoops were created but only for certain groups the administration disapproved of.

It sure sounds like you're suggesting collusion between the White House and the IRS to stymie specific groups.

Do you think there was?

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 04:45 PM | Reply

#11

He's certain of it.

#12 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 04:46 PM | Reply

Once again, with this lib administration, the ends justify the [illegal] means.

#13 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-22 05:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yes, I believe there was collusion.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 05:23 PM | Reply

Then appoint a special prosecutor or something.

Impeaching without evidence makes Congress into a kangaroo court. It's petulant and sets a bad precedent.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 05:27 PM | Reply

Koskinen presided over the destruction of subpoenaed files and gave false testimony to congress on more than 1 occasion.

He didn't preside over the crimes themselves, just the criminal coverup.

PS - There is NO way the Obama DoJ is going to appoint a special prosecutor. As far as the Executive investigating this it went to Barbara Bosser, a longtime Obama donor. Of course, not a single media outlet has ever contacted Ms. Bosser to ask questions regarding her 'investigation'.

#16 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 06:07 PM | Reply

but for the reality that these groups aren't for social welfare at all,

Are you saying that of 100% of these groups? Or, just the conservative ones?

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 06:08 PM | Reply

#17

Don't know Jeff, but the TEs who's only actual purpose is to run campaign ads and influence the election or rejection of specific candidates, doesn't matter which side.

#18 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 06:21 PM | Reply

PS - There is NO way the Obama DoJ is going to appoint a special prosecutor.

I figured that's what you truly believe, which is why I said Congress should appoint one.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-22 06:29 PM | Reply

And to be clear: Any group should be allowed to advocate any policy they deem important if they stay on that policy. If they mention any particular politician or party, I believe that crosses over into political advocacy and shouldn't enjoy TE status at all.

For example read this if you haven't: www.theguardian.com

There is no way this should be legal and I'm not just saying that because the Republicans did it. I'm sure Dems do it too.

#20 | Posted by tonyroma at 2016-09-22 06:30 PM | Reply

Tony,

They are allowed to engage in politics as long as it's less than 50% of their activity. That you think it shouldn't be that way isn't the issue. The issue is that as long as that is the rule the IRS should treat all applicants the same. What they did was criminal as was leaking the donor lists for certain groups to Pro Publica. To date, not a single person has been held accountable.

A number of these groups have sued and the IRS lawyers have been eviscerated by judges on a number of occasions for their behavior in court.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-22 06:36 PM | Reply

Is there no branch under this administration that has not been compromised?

#22 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-23 06:26 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

Drudge Retort