Civil Rights

Holly Paz testifies:

"What were these employees' explanations for using the term 'tea party'?"

"Just sort of a shorthand reference," she said. "You know, I think they may have reference, you know, it's like calling soda 'Coke' or, you know, tissue 'Kleenex.' They knew what they meant, and the issue was campaign intervention."

Because of all these liberal tea party groups.  Right. 

Note that this doesn't even agree with earlier testimony.  If you're persecuting tea party groups based on those groups having "tea party" in their name, it doesn't matter if you think "tea party" is internal shorthand for a politically neutral term.  To borrow her analogy, it doesn't matter if you are referring to generic soda as "Coke" internally if you send an intern out to buy "Coke" and the intern comes back with "Coke".

This also doesn't explain why liberal groups sailed through with no scrutiny while conservative groups were delayed and denied.

"Do you have any sense of how it is that they could have not noticed that there was a problem with using 'tea party' to refer to political advocacy cases?" asked another Democratic counsel for the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

"My impressions, based on, you know, this instance and other instances is that because they are so apolitical, they are not as sensitive as we would like them to be as to how things might appear," Paz responded.

IRS employees are so apolitical that 75% of their campaign donations go to Democrats (over the past three elections), and every single traceable donation in 2012 from the Cincinatti office at issue here went to Obama or liberal Democrat Sherrod Brown.

If the Democrats want to play monopoly with the instrumentalities of the federal leviathan, than Paz and her colleagues who participated in this abuse of power deserve to go directly to jail.  Do not pass Go.  Do not collect $200.

Instead, she's gone on "administrative leave", which we outside of Washington, DC would call a paid vacation.

... says Big Sister Napolitano.

... and removing their facebook pages, too.  It's almost like they have something to be ashamed of, isn't it?  Peggy Noonan writes that the IRS thinks they are The Untouchables.  I agree; I'm just thinking of a different kind of untouchable.

... says TalkLeft?  And Democratic Senator Manchin?

I do have this to say: just because Holder resigns does not mean the scandals are over.

Not the Tea Party groups.

Holder: "With all due respect, Senator, I don't think this is an appropriate setting for me to discuss that issue. I'd be more than glad to come back in a -- in an appropriate setting to discuss the issues that you have raised.  But in this open forum I don't . . ."

In other words, yes, he did.

Members of Congress should not have special rights, but you can be damn sure that if you piss them off, they can do more about it.

UPDATE: Found a transcript and got Holder's exact quote.

Punishable by up to four years, not to mention the lifetime prohibition on your 2nd Amendment rights.  How many of our founding fathers could have been convicted of "annoying" a police officer?

The next link in the chain between the IRS agents abusing Tea Party applicants and the White House is IRS lawyer Carter Hull, who closely oversaw the work of at least one agent in the Cincinnati office and suggested some of the questions being asked of the applicants.

UPDATE: Orders coming from Washington is corroborated here.

Former Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Doug Shulman visited the White House 118 times between 2010 and 2011. Acting Director Steven Miller, who took over at the IRS in November, also made numerous visits to the White House, though variations in the spelling of his name in White House visitor logs makes it difficult to determine exactly how many times.

The frequent trips to the White House under Obama far outnumbered the times other administrations felt the need to meet with the IRS, according to Mark Everson, who led the IRS under former President George W. Bush. Everson said he remembers making only one trip to the White House between 2003 and 2007 and said he felt like he'd "moved to Siberia" because of the isolation.

Sarah Hall Ingram visited the White House 160 times between 2011 and January of 2013. The majority of those visits appear to be related to Obamacare (she was visiting Jeanne Lambrew, who is Deputy Director of the new White House Office of Health Reform), but she would have had lots of opportunities to coordinate with White House staff on other matters.

I can't speak to what was really going on, but the amount of coordination between the IRS and the White House appears to be extremely unusual.

The House Judiciary committee is investigating.

To me, the only question seems to be whether Holder was actually under oath, or if they pulled another Clinton and let him testify without actually swearing an oath to tell the truth.

It's past time for Holder to go, but it would be nice to find out what Obama knew and when he knew it, too.  Since Holder doesn't seem bothered by the Contempt of Congress, let's see if the Special Prosecutor of Congress is more effective.

Conservatives have long tangled with Lerner, who was director of enforcement at the Federal Election Commission from 1986 until 2001, when she moved to the IRS.

"Everything we have seen at the IRS was reeled out first at the FEC," says Jim Bopp, a noted election-law attorney who represented the Christian Coalition in its successful fight to quash the FEC's attempt to impose a $5 million fine on the group for political activities. The FEC lost the case on summary judgment in a 1999 opinion written by a Jimmy Carter appointed judge.

"In a dozen out of the 81 depositions in the case, the FEC wanted to know about people's religious beliefs or the content of their prayers," Bopp told me. "Lerner took the speech-chilling culture she developed at the FEC right over to the IRS."

More details from the Weekly Standard.

I'm going to throw in one huge caveat here.

We know there was an emergency meeting of the Journ-o-list membership within the White House on Wednesday.  Several known left-wing "journalists" and pundits were spotted entering the White House, presumably to strategize the response to the scandals.  Those who came out were sticking to the same story: It was all Lois Lerner's fault and doesn't go any higher than that.

There seems to be ample evidence that Lerner would not object to the sort of tactics used in the improper IRS investigations, but the fact that we are being fed Lerner as the target suggests to me that there's more to it than that. 

It seems the IRS has decided that Lerner's work is so good she deserves a paid vacation.

UPDATE: Part of the "more to it" is Sarah Hall Ingram, who was in charge of the IRS division when the whole thing started.

Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won't answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening -- or why she didn't disclose it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor III. Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

There's an interesting dilemma here.  Does Congress proceed to charge her with crimes, or offer immunity in return for testimony about involvement higher in the food chain?

It looks like she won't get out of appearing.

Conservative groups seeking information from the Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Conservative Enterprise Institute.

Combine this with the IRS targeting of tea party groups, and it looks like a systemic problem.  At some point, it doesn't matter whether the White House ordered officials at various government agencies to break the law and target their enemies; the officials at those agencies know what to do without being told.  They can help and hinder in ways both small and large.  And over time, when it is consistent, it adds up.

The two "rogue low-level employees" turn out to be four employees who were just following their bosses' orders while targeting almost 500 organizations.  In at least one case, groups paid $400 to "fast track" the process without actually being fast-tracked.  There are credible charges that information from Romney's tax information was leaked during the campaign.  The head of the office in charge of this can of worms was Sarah Hall Ingram, who seems to have received more than $100,000 in bonuses (in addition to $175,000 in salary) during the relevant period.  Oh, and those bonuses would have had to be approved at the Presidential level, and she's now in charge of Obamacare.

UPDATE: A smoking email?

UPDATE: Reason magazine has a good summary of the situation.

UPDATE: Obama's counsel was told weeks ago, which contradicts his claim to have only learned about the scandal from the news.  House Democrats are demanding more resignations.

UPDATE: No ordinary scandal.  It started at the top.

Unlike her first article on the topic, this one actually provides useful information.

Ok, ok, it's a blog post by Jennifer Rubin, not the Washington Post editorial board.  But there IS a pool on the resignation question.  So, go vote: it's 64% in favor of resignation as I write this.

"Today I'm going to take a big leap over all of the many specific challenges we're facing, some of which you'll hear about from the incomparable Cecile Richards, to suggest a more comprehensive solution, Schakowsky said. "Today I am asserting that humanity is at a crossroads on this small planet and that our survival as a species is dependent on women taking charge, taking the world in our own hands."

"I really do believe that we are at a tipping point from which there could be no turning back -- a turning point that the traditional male hierarchy of the world ignores at their own peril. A peril that puts us all in the unacceptable danger -- actually of extinction, so let us begin the era of the woman."

I don't intend to be taken charge of by politicians of either party -- or gender.  Moreover, I am offended by the blame that Schakowsky places upon my gender for what she claims is the end of the world.

1) Fast and Furious -- smuggled thousands of firearms to Mexican drug cartels, resulting in the deaths of several American law enforcement officers and hundreds of Mexican citizens.  The President blocked release of evidence to Congressional investigators using executive privilege, yet claims to have known nothing about the operation.  Americans died, and the President lied.

2) Benghazi -- a US consulate was overrun after requests for increased security were denied.  No military aid was provided during the attack and operatives willing and able to go to the aid of those under attack were told to stand down.  Within days of the attack, a coverup was initiated, and a video on youtube which no one had seen before it was pointed out by the administration was blamed for provoking the attack.  Talking points were heavily edited by the State Department and the White House to remove references to terrorism and Al-Qaeda.  The person behind the YouTube video was publically arrested, and ads apologizing for his video were broadcast in Pakistan with taxpayer money.  The filmmaker is still in jail.  Americans died, and the President lied.

3) Politically-motivated IRS audits of "tea party" organizations -- going all the way back to 2010, an obviously politically motivated witch hunt, beginning shortly after the President joked about using the IRS to go after his political enemies.   IRS officials concealed evidence from Congress and the timing of this activity suggests it may have affected the outcome of the 2012 Presidential election.  A "chilling effect" has already been demonstrated, and reporters asking tough questions of the President have been targeted.  Abusing the IRS to go after political opponents was one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon (Article 2: Abuse of Power):

(1) He has, acting personally and through his subordinated and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

In addition to politically motivated audits of groups using Tea Party related names, the IRS has leaked private tax information to political allies, which published that information.

Israel-related groups have also been subjected to additional scrutiny.  Because it isn't like persecuting Jews crosses a bright moral line or anything.

Of course, we should keep in mind that it might not be Obama behind this activity.  It might be Senate Democrats.

4) Sebelius has been caught soliciting outside funds to implement Obamacare -- Doesn't seem like a big deal until you realize that, a) This is the same basic offense as was alleged in Iran-Contra, and b) it is an offense against the separation of powers in the Constitution, with the historical roots of this conflict going all the way back to the English kings seeking to work around the power of Parliament.

5) The Justice Department wiretapped whole offices of journalists for two months, in violation of internal protocols, and still has not said what they were seeking.

Still think he's a good president?

... blame the IRS asking for details information on membership in their organizations, including family members, with the intent to make that information public.

Megan McArdle on the IRS tea party audit scandal:

Lerner, who heads the relevant IRS unit, says it was "initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati," so it's not like this was administration policy.

Megan, Megan, Megan... you're just going to take her word for it?

I recall reading reports about this during the election, along with vigorous denials that there was any political motive to the additional scrutiny.  This is confirmation that there was, in fact, partisan political motivations.  And yes, mistakes were made.  There should certainly be an investigation, but it doesn't make any sense to demand the Obama administration investigate itself.  This is a job for a House committee that can publish the results, or a special prosecutor who can put people in jail, or both.

Frankly, the way that Republican leaders in the House and the Senate have soft-pedaled everything from Benghazi to Fast and Furious, I'm starting to wonder if the Obama administration has pictures of them in bed with a dead boy on one side and a live donkey on the other.

Hat Tip to Dan Riehl.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said Wednesday that he was worried that last week's bombing at the Boston Marathon would make it tougher to pass the Senate's comprehensive immigration reform bill.

And so it should, since both alleged bombers were immigrants.  Not all immigrants are bombers, but not all are here to "do the jobs Americans won't do" either.  Until we control the border, we won't have any idea who is coming into our country.

This doesn't look particularly voluntary to me.

Searching for a terrorist suspect is all well and good.  I have no quarrel with the motivations for this search.  The methods, however, are those of a police state.

Hat tip to Bitter.

Dad Furious After Finding This Crayon-Written Paper in Florida 4th-Grader's Backpack: "I Am Willing to Give Up Some of My Constitutional Rights to Be Safer"

Never mind Dad, I'm mad too.This crosses the line from educating children about the Constitution to indoctrinating children to reject the Constitution. 

Over at A Keyboard and a .45, there's a new study coming out of West Point that describes supporters of "civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government" as terrorists.  In an uncomfortable coincidence, the CIA has been excluded from the rules in the President's drone strike playbook when operating over Pakistan.  It seems the CIA has a habit of approving strikes in Pakistan based on "patterns of suspicious behavior", without a clear idea of who the targets are.  And, of course, when they do know who the targets are, they have not been adverse to strikes against US citizens who they have determined, without trial, to be terrorists.

That adds up to an uncomfortable lack of due process.  While Obama would have to be insane to think he could get away with a drone strike on American soil, the slope is slippery.

Terrorists are those who use violence against a civilian population to achieve political ends.  This latest study -- far from the first to draw such attention -- seems to define terrorists as the President's political opponents.