IRS Hasn’t Reprimanded a Single Staffer For Targeting Pro-Life Groups

From: Life News

Americans believe the targeting of pro-life groups and conservatives by the Internal Revenue service was a deliberate act. However, the agency hasn’t officially reprimanded a single staffer over it.
As Politico reports today:

Lawmakers pressing for more heads to roll at the Internal Revenue Service are going to be disappointed.
“Why weren’t more people fired?” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) demanded at a hearing Tuesday on the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, channeling the frustration of his colleagues.
Turns out it’s not so easy.
In fact, it appears that no one has been formally reprimanded and a spokesperson for the union representing IRS workers said it hasn’t been called to help any employees yet. Most employees involved in the targeting program are covered by protections for federal workers that could drag out the termination process.

Why is disciplining IRS staffers over the targeting so difficult?

The incoming acting IRS Commissioner, Daniel Werfel, could try to clean house — but he’d have to be prepared for a lengthy appeals process.
Under federal rules, a fired government worker has the right to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. He or she can challenge the decision, argue that their actions don’t meet the threshold for termination and ask to be reinstated — especially if there was no warning of trouble in past performance reviews.
The incoming acting IRS Commissioner, Daniel Werfel, could try to clean house — but he’d have to be prepared for a lengthy appeals process.
Under federal rules, a fired government worker has the right to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. He or she can challenge the decision, argue that their actions don’t meet the threshold for termination and ask to be reinstated — especially if there was no warning of trouble in past performance reviews.

Jay Sekulow of the pro-life legal group ACLJ talked about what this scandal means and its significance.

“A key Obama Administration official has just asserted her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. The IRS scandal has reached a new phase. The Obama Administration unlawfully targeted conservative groups and has been caught,” he told LifeNews.

“We are just days away from filing one of the largest lawsuits we have ever filed. I am leading our team of ACLJ attorneys in directly taking on the unlimited resources of the IRS – to end this abuse and harassment once and for all,” he said. “Over the past 18 months, the ACLJ has represented 27 of these targeted groups from 17 states.”

With the scandal concerning the IRS and its targeting of pro-life and conservative groups growing, national conservative activists held nationwide rallies today at IRS offices across the country.

Reports indicate President Barack Obama’s top attorney knew in April that the Internal Revenue Service was targeting pro-life and conservative groups. The reports show Obama’s top lawyer was notified in April that the Treasury Department’s inspector general had finished an audit of the IRS over the allegations.

The IRS will soon face more than controversy and Congressional hearings over its discrimination of pro-life and conservative groups. The federal agency will soon find itself in court.

The news comes as a report shows James Dobson, the pro-life family advocate, disclosed that he was a victim of IRS discrimination because he spoke out against pro-abortion President Barack Obama.
Obama addressed the massive IRS scandal and promised it would never happen again.

“I’ll do everything in my power to make sure this never happens again,” he promised.

The chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced he will hold a hearing on the IRS scandal this week. The federal agency has targeted pro-life groups as well as conservative and religious organizations.

In one case LifeNews has profiled, a pro-life group was told it had to promote abortion. A top pro-life legal group also informed LifeNews that cases it handled support mounting accusations that demonstrate the agency’s abuse of pro-life organizations.

Darrell Issa says Lois Lerner lost her 5th Amendment Rights

From: POLITICO.com

Lois Lerner might win the legal battle but she’s prolonging the political war.

Instead of simply taking the scorn of lawmakers for a day, repeatedly invoking the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination, and then moving on, she chose defiance.

And her bravado has prompted House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) to say she has waived her constitutional right to not comment.

Now, he plans to haul the director of the IRS’s tax-exempt department back to the committee for questioning.

“When I asked her her questions from the very beginning, I did so so she could assert her rights prior to any statement,” Issa told POLITICO. “She chose not to do so — so she waived.”

Lerner shocked the committee room in the opening moments of Wednesday’s hearing by delivering an opening statement denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.

“I have not done anything wrong,” said Lerner, who triggered the IRS scandal on May 10 by acknowledging that the agency had singled out conservative groups applying for tax exemptions. “I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee.”

Beyond that, she refused to answer the committee’s questions, immediately triggering a debate among panel members over whether she had just voided her Fifth Amendment rights.

At the very least, Lerner’s speech prolonged the process. She’s almost certain to be back on Issa’s turf when Congress returns in June from the Memorial Day recess. If she refuses to talk then, the committee could ultimately pursue a contempt charge.

Issa said late Wednesday that he’s consulting the House parliamentarian and outside counsel to determine how to proceed.

Legal experts, however, say Issa’s argument that Lerner has waived her Fifth Amendment rights might not be as strong as he suggests.

“I don’t think a brief introductory preface to her formal invocation of the privilege is a waiver,” said Stan Brand, a Washington lawyer who was the general counsel for the House of Representatives from 1976 to 1983.


For one, this is Congress, not a courtroom, says James Duane, a professor at Regent University School of Law.

“[T]his woman was not the defendant,” he said, rejecting comparisons between the committee room and a court room. “This is not a trial.”

Lois Lerner: 'I Have Done Nothing Wrong' Then Pleads the Fifth

Former IRS Director Refuses To Apologize Or Held Accountable

IRS Scandal: Stonewalled in Cincinnati

From: ABC News

Welcome to Cincinnati – Ground zero of the exploding IRS scandal.

Things started brewing earlier this month when Internal Revenue Service officials in Washington first admitted conservative groups were targeted for extra scrutiny by tax bureaucrats in Ohio's Queen City.

By May 14 – three days into the mess -- IRS staffers in Cincinnati were hard to find as reporters descended on the city. At the home of IRS staffer Elizabeth Hofacre, who was caught up in the blossoming controversy, mail below the slot in her front door was noticeably piling up when an ABC News reporter stopped by last week.

A few miles away, IRS analyst Mitchell Steele, answered the door of his home in a bath robe though the work day was just about to begin downtown. He seemed genuinely beaten down and told ABC News "this isn't fair to me."

Yet another staffer – Stephen Seok, one of the supervisors in the Determinations Unit at the heart of the scandal – would not answer his phone or front door even though he and his family could be seen coming and going. His windows were covered by taped-up sheets of white paper.


Back at the John Weld Peck Federal Building where ousted acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said "rogue" agents did their work, it was fairly calm for the first couple of days. There was a heightened security presence outside, some workers said, but nothing too extreme.

At the IRS office on the fourth floor, a woman who answered the buzzer referred reporters to officials in Washington, though they were not returning very many calls. That staffer also said she was not allowed to speak to anyone – a line that was repeated by agency personnel during the week.

IRS headquarters in Washington denied that a no-talk rule was official policy because, after all, agency staffers still have a constitutional right to talk to whomever they want.

"Our policy is that press inbounds (queries) are referred to the press office," a spokesman said. "But people have First Amendment rights, they are entitled to speak."

Asked whether employees were reminded of the official media policy this week, the spokesman said "no."

Not so, said IRS folks in Ohio.

One of them, who asked not be named, told ABC News that security guards did remind employees of the official policy not to talk with the press – a warning cemented by the punch line "or risk losing our jobs."

Even leaders of the local union that represents the IRS workers under fire took the admonition to heart, hanging up on reporters who wanted to ask questions about the scandal. One longtime IRS worker and union member called the response by the National Treasury Employees Union "dazzling."

On Thursday morning, after news that Miller was sacked, two ABC News journalists walked into the Peck Federal Building in Cincinnati looking for answers. The newsmen were screened at the door by security. They emptied their pockets as instructed, removed their belts, then went through the metal detectors.

We wanted to ask who about made the decisions in the unit and when the profiling started. And whether those decision makers been identified yet.

But the answers – like the people involved – remained elusive.

As we traveled the public hallways of the building – watched over by security cameras – an armed uniformed police officer with the Federal Protective Service followed us. We were looking for a particular office—of someone who would not want to be seen talking to reporters--but chose to bypass it because of our official babysitter.

Asked why we were being escorted in a public building, the officer identified himself as Insp. Mike Finkelstein and said he was only trying to make sure that the newsmen were not a "nuisance." He brushed aside further questions. The cop said a supervisor would call to explain.

One of the reporters wanted to know if the act of following the journalists was an effort intended to scare off any federal employee who might have considered speaking to the press. That's sure what it looked like; and, even if that wasn't the goal, it was the effect.

As of Friday night, no supervisor had called back.

After ABC News phoned and e-mailed the spokespeople in Washington repeatedly for more than 24 hours, a low-level staffer with Homeland Security finally responded. "After review by a supervisor, it was determined that the inspector acted according to proper security procedures and that no improper conduct occurred," the spokesman said.

Whether improper conduct occurred at the IRS—and who was responsible for targeting the president's enemies, as some members of Congress have argued – will be subject to much more review.

US News | Weird News | More ABC News Videos

White House knew of IRS scandal “weeks ago”

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Julian Bond: Targeting Tea Party 'Legitimate'

IRS Was Targeting Conservatives In 2010

From: ABC NEWS

The targeting of conservatives by the IRS started earlier and was more extensive than the IRS acknowledged last week, according to a draft IRS inspector general report obtained by ABC News.

As we reported on “Good Morning America” this morning, the IRS began targeting “Tea Party or similar organizations” in March 2010. That was when the Cincinnati-based IRS unit responsible for overseeing the applications for tax exempt status starting using the phrases “Tea Party,” “patriots” and “9/12″ to search for applications warranting greater scrutiny.

During this first phase, 10 Tea Party cases were identified. By April of 2010, 18 Tea Party organizations were targeted, including three that had already been approved for tax-exempt status.

By June 2011, the unit had flagged over 100 Tea Party-related applications and the criteria used to scrutinize organizations had grown considerably, flagging not just “Tea Party” or “Patriot” in group names, but also groups that were working on issues like “government debt,” “taxes” and even organizations making statements that “criticize how the country is being run.”

The report, done by the Inspector General for the IRS, also shows that senior IRS officials in Washington was aware of what was going on as early as August 4, 2011 when, according to the report, the IRS chief counsel held a meeting with the IRS’s Rulings and Agreements unit “so that everyone would have the latest information on the issue.”
 

TEA PARTY Invades OCCUPY DC- (explicit)

Tea Party Versus Occupy Wall Street

Jesse Jackson Jr.: 10th Amendment Is Racist

From: Tenth Amendment Center

t’s become pretty much a daily occurrence – one big government statist or another dredging up slavery and racism as THE reason to oppose decentralization, state sovereignty, and when you get right down to it, the federal system created by the Constitution.

Over the weekend, Jessie Jackson Jr. slapped down the race card.

“After all, it was the Tenth Amendment and states’ rights that protected the institution of slavery. The words ‘slave’ or ‘slavery’ did not appear in the Constitution. The institution of slavery, the Tenth Amendment and states’ rights are joined at the hip,” Jackson wrote.

I could easily debunk this asinine statement, pointing out the obvious – that the lack of the literal word “slavery” in the Constitution doesn’t prove that the federal government didn’t legally support the institution. It did. And Jessie Jackson Jr. surely knows this, as do most junior high history students. Then I could spend a considerable amount of time delving into the history of nullification and state assertion of sovereignty, showing how it was used by northern abolitionists to battle the federal Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.

I could tell the story of Joshua Glover, a runaway slave who was freed from prison and ushered along the Underground Railroad to freedom in Canada, and how the state of Wisconsin stood its ground, claiming “state’s rights” to aid those who helped Glover to freedom. I could examine the long list of evils states asserted sovereignty to battle, including child military conscription, free speech violations, unconstitutional tariffs and random deportation of foreign nationals at the president’s discretion.

But why bother? I’ve done this countless times, written volumes and made speeches. People like Jackson simply don’t listen. Their ears remain filled with the Siren Song of racism.

So I am going to simply accept Jackson’s premise. The Tenth Amendment, state sovereignty and nullification will always remain “attached at the hip” to slavery. I, as a proponent of limiting federal power to its constitutionally prescribed limits, must be a racist.

But if I am to truly embrace Jackson’s reasoning, I must conclude that he’s a racist too.

You see, the Democratic Party and slavery are joined at the hip.

It was, after all, the Democratic Party that supported the institution of slavery leading up to the Civil War. And it was the Democratic Party that embraced the KKK during reconstruction. In fact, the Ku Klux Clan was an informal arm of the Democratic Party in the late 1860s and 1870s. Klansmen not only targeted blacks, they also went after Republican politicians and engaged in voter intimidation. This helped the Democratic Party reestablish itself in the south during the post-war years.

In his book A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1990), renowned historian Dr. Eric Foner wrote:

“Founded in 1866 as a Tennessee social club, the Ku Klux Klan spread into nearly every Southern state, launching a reign of terror against Republican leaders black and white.”

He went on to explain this “reign of terror.”

The Tea Party Is the Enemy???

Sen. Kerry Begs Media to Stop Giving ‘Equal Time or Equal Balance’ to ‘Absurd’ Tea Party Ideas

Sean Hannity Takes John McCain To the Woodshed

Joe Scarborough Said What About Tea Partiers?

Hold your breath and be amazed

Cavuto: Stop Blaming the TEA Partiers for the Debt Crisis

Town Bans Tea Party Signs in Public Park

From: Michigan Capitol Confidential

A federal lawsuit claims a Branch County tea party group was denied the right to display banners and signs at a tea party rally at a public park in Coldwater because it was “too political” and “too controversial.” The Coldwater City Council then passed a resolution banning all banners and signs in that park.

The Thomas More Law Center law firm filed its lawsuit last week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. Attorney Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center alleged that Coldwater City Manager Jeff Budd objected because the Common Sense Patriots of Branch County were “too political” and “too controversial.”

Budd didn’t respond to an email seeking comment. Heather Peet was the only person of the nine-member City Council to respond to an email seeking comment. She referred questions to John Hutchinson, the city’s legal counsel. Hutchinson didn’t respond to a phone message left at his law office or an email.

In a Nov. 2 memo to the City Council, Budd stated the “administrative headaches” of increased requests to have banners in the park led the city to either “allow all banners or no banners.”

Barb Brady, a member of the Common Sense Patriots of Branch County and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, referred questions to the Thomas More Law Center.

According to the lawsuit, the Common Sense Patriots had held five rallies at the Four Corners Park. Muise said to regulate speech at a traditional public forum such as a city park, regulations must be precise. He said the ban of all signs and banners is too broad.

“Instead of using a scalpel, they used a sledgehammer,” Muise said. “They didn’t mind when they had people put up banners for some innocuous event, but when the tea party put up their sign, they said, ‘Wait a minute. This is too controversial.’ ”

“There is a problem when you ban everything in a traditional public forum."