Tags

, , , ,

With Obamacare sucking much of the oxygen out of the public interest room, the IRS scandal is being more or less swept under the rug.  This despite what seems incontrovertible evidence that Barack Obama and the Democrats used the IRS–and continue to use it–as a thuggish enforcement wing of the Democrat party.  There is now no doubt that the IRS was instrumental in suppressing conservative fundraising and anti-Obama advocacy in the 2012 election.  Without the IRS as his personal Gestapo, Barack Obama might have lost the election, and surely would have had a much harder time of it.

credit: patdollard.com

credit: patdollard.com

And now, the IRS is hiring thousands of new employees–in essence, increasing its power and decreasing the ability of anyone to effectively oversee it–as the primary enforcement agency of Obamacare.  Consider that: the tax agency that has proved itself a partisan political operation, violating federal law at whim, is in charge of American’s health care via the power to imprison, seize assets, and generally financially ruin anyone obscure IRS functionaries decide they don’t like.  But hey, what’s to worry about?

Fortunately, Jay Sekulow at the American Center for Law and Justice, has recently amended its complaint against the IRS, many IRS officials including the execrable Lois Lerner, and the United States.  Fox News has an article written by Sekulow:  

What was sold to the American public as a low-level scandal perpetrated by a few rogue employees – a scandal stopped after senior officials became aware and asserted control – is now (to borrow a Watergate phrase) ‘no longer operative.’

Contemporary media myth holds that President Obama is the Sergeant Schultz of politics: he knows nothing about everything.  Benghazi?  Nope, didn’t have a clue.  The Obamacare Debacle?  Of course not!  It’s a big government; how can anyone expect the President to know anything about the one policy he most cares about?  The IRS?  Certainly not… or does he?

Was Obama involved in the IRS scandal?  He was the one who identified the targets – in the most public manner possible.

Instead, we detail a long-running assault on the Tea Party, beginning shortly after its emergence in 2009, that is empowered, encouraged, and orchestrated not only by senior IRS officials in Washington, but also through outright targeting by the White House, Congressional Democrats, and the mainstream media.

In fact, the IRS was doing little more than focusing its attention exactly where the president of the United States told it to focus – on the groups the president himself identified as a ‘threat to democracy.

And who would pose a threat to democracy?  According to the Obama Administration, anyone supportive of the Constitution, anyone that believes in limited government, Christians, military veterans, anyone that believes in not spending more money than they have, and absolutely anyone affiliated with the Tea Party.  Some examples:

On August 9, 2010 the president warned of ‘attack ads run by shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names” during his weekly radio address.  The President said:  We don’t know who’s behind these ads and we don’t know who’s paying for them . . . you don’t know if it’s a foreign controlled corporation. … The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.’

On September 16, 2010, President Obama once again warned that some unidentified ‘foreign-controlled entity’ could be providing ‘millions of dollars’ for ‘attack ads.’  Less than one week later, he complained that ‘nobody knows’ the identities of the individuals who support conservative groups.

On September 22, 2010, President Obama warned of groups opposing his policies ‘pos[ing] as non-for-profit social and welfare trade groups’ and he claimed such groups were ‘guided by seasoned Republican political operatives’ and potentially supported by some unidentified ‘foreign controlled entity.’

On October 14, 2010, President Obama called organizations with ‘benign sounding’ names ‘a problem for democracy’; the next week he complained about individuals who ‘hide behind those front groups,’ called such groups a ‘threat to our democracy,’ and claimed such groups were engaged in ‘unsupervised’ spending.

Sarah Hall Ingram credit: patdollard.com

Sarah Hall Ingram
credit: patdollard.com

It’s possible that the IRS campaign against Mr. Obama’s political enemies was not actively planned and encouraged from the White House.  After all, good Progressives don’t need to be told what to think or whom to attack; they know exactly what to do because they think alike.  However, we know that IRS official Sarah Hall Ingram made 155 visits to the White House, and others made hundreds of others during the period the IRS was actively pursuing Mr. Obama’s political foes (there is evidence they still are).  But so what?  Is there other evidence of collusion?  Oh yes:

Next, consider the IRS’s actions following those statements.  Not only did the IRS continue its targeting, it issued broad questionnaires that made unconstitutionally-intrusive inquiries designed to get answers to exactly the questions President Obama posed.

Who are your donors?

What is the political activity of your family and associates?

What are the passwords for your websites?

After all, according to the president, you’re only afraid to answer these questions if ‘you’ve got something to hide.

So what?  What does this mean?

The demagoguery is breathtaking.  Not only does he raise the wholly-unsubstantiated possibility of shadowy ‘foreign” involvement in the Tea Party groups, a charge incredible on its face, but he goes the extra mile of calling such groups, a ‘threat to our democracy.’

When the president of the United States declares these groups a ‘threat to our democracy’ is it any surprise that his enthusiastic supporters (and donors) within the IRS responded with an unprecedented campaign of selective targeting, intimidation, and governmental intrusion?

Considering the thuggish, Chicago machine nature of Mr. Obama and his political operatives, that’s not surprising at all.

By all means, take the link and read the entire article.  It’s eye-opening.