Infuriating! IRS Fraud, deception, and criminality known about and covered up.
Many just "knew" that the 2012 election was stolen one way or another. The current occupant is in the Oval Office by way of theft aided and abetted by IRS obstruction and treachery.
Another Outrage: New emails suggest that the Obama State Department knew about the Clinton email problem for at least three years but covered it up. Any criminal investigation of the Clinton email scandal must include officials in the Obama administration.
Democratic Senator Sought DOJ and IRS Prosecutions of Conservatives
It wasn’t just Obama’s Internal Revenue Service that sought to suppress conservative voices in order to help him retain the presidency in 2012.
We learned further of a dangerous enterprise involving a key Democratic Senator and the Obama Justice Department from 72 pages of Justice documents we released this week. They reveal email conversations between Department of Justice officials and the staff of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) regarding the criminal prosecution of Tea Party and other conservative groups for fanciful violation of IRS rules.
The conversations were in preparation for a briefing by Justice Department officials for Sen. Whitehouse’s staff and for a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism hearing on April 9, 2013. One internal agency email exchange indicates Sen. Whitehouse’s interest in seeking criminal prosecution of groups targeted by the IRS:
From: Erb, William (OLA)We uncovered the documents through a federal court order in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v Department of Justice (No. 1:14-cv-01239)).
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 4:54 PM
To: Raman, Mythill (CRM) [REDACTED] (CRM);Wroblewski, Jonathan (CRM); Hulser, Raymond (CRM); Smith, Jack (CRM); Burton, Faith (OLA); Levine, Doug (OLA); Suleiman, Daniel (CRM); Lenerz, Daniel J. (CRM); Shatz, Eileen M. (TAX); OBrien, Paul (CRM); [REDACTED] (CRM); [REDACTED] (CRM); Cimino, Ronald A. (TAX)
Cc: Buretta, John (CRM): Agrast, Mark D. (OLA); [REDACTED] (CRM)
Subject: RE: New Whitehouse question regarding Campaign Finance Investigation and Prosecution
All: New question from Sen. Whitehouse. Sen. Whitehouse is likely to ask AAAG Raman whether the Department of Justice is too deferential to IRS in deciding to prosecute 501(c) organizations that make fraudulent statements regarding their political activities in their IRS filings. Sen. Whitehouse is curious why, for example, if a 501(c) tax organization files were leaked, and they clearly showed that make false statements, why the Department of Justice wouldn’t prosecute the case by itself and not wait for the IRS. Looping in the Tax Division who also can help CRIM come up with a quick response. Thanks, Bill.
Later, at the Judiciary Subcommittee hearing, Sen. Whitehouse asked why the Department of Justice wasn’t prosecuting political groups on its own, independently of the IRS.
“I would urge that the Department and the Service get together and rethink whether in these two specific areas, which I think bear little resemblance to traditional tax violations and are in fact very plain-vanilla criminal cases, whether or not that deference to the IRS is actually serving the public interest at this point, or whether the Department could not proceed to … put together a criminal case showing a fairly straightforward false statement or a fairly [straightforward] shell corporation disclosure violation.”The newly released emails show that following the hearing, at the request of Justice Department lawyers, Sen. Whitehouse’s staff sent over examples of the organizations Whitehouse had in mind for prosecution. They included American Future Fund, Crossroads GPS, Americans for Responsible Leadership, Freedom Path, American is Not Stupid, Inc., RightChange.com II, and A Better America Now. All of these are conservative organizations.
The new emails also show collaboration in the Department of Justice with officials in the IRS in preparing for the hearing. The IRS sent a draft of its planned testimony for the hearing to the Justice Department. Judicial Watch previously exposed a plan by the Obama IRS and Justice Department prosecutors to pursue criminal charges against the very Tea Party and anti-Obama groups that the IRS was targeting. We uncovered two years ago how Lerner described the impetus for the left-wing prosecution effort in 2013 email to top IRS staff:
As I mentioned yesterday — there are several groups of folks from the FEC world that are pushing tax fraud prosecution for c4s who report they are not conducting political activity when they are (or these folks think they are). One is my ex-boss Larry Noble (former General Counsel at the FEC), who is now president of Americans for Campaign Reform. This is their latest push to shut these down. One IRS prosecution would make an impact and they wouldn’t feel so comfortable doing the stuff.So, don’t be fooled about how this is being articulated – it is ALL about 501(c)(4) orgs and political activity.
But in an email sent a few minutes earlier, Lerner acknowledged prosecutions would evidently be at odds with the law:
Whether there was a false statement or fraud regarding an [sic] description of an alleged political expenditure that doesn’t say vote for or vote against is not realistic under current law. Everyone is looking for a magic bullet or scapegoat — there isn’t one. The law in this area is just hard.The Obama administration prosecution effort seemingly ended with the exposure of the IRS targeting in a May 2013 report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). IRS official Lois Lerner did not reveal the targeting until just before the report’s release, in response to a planted question at an American Bar Association conference.
What’s going on here is obvious: an abuse of power by Democrats in Congress, who wanted to intimidate and possibly jail Obama’s political opponents to help secure Obama’s reelection. Americans should know that the courts have recently concluded that the Obama IRS abuses haven’t stopped – even as we approach another presidential election.
A 2013 study by scholars from the American Enterprise Institute and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University found that, “had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5 – 8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.”
Will the IRS help the Left steal another election in 2016?
Top State Officials Raised Questions about Clinton Emails Three Years Ago
In her attempts to hide her government email from the American people, Hillary Clinton had a willing co-conspirator in the Obama State Department she once ran.
This week we released 113 pages of State Department documents, revealing that in early August 2013 top State Department officials raised questions about Secretary Clinton’s emails and the number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking information about them.
According to the newly obtained emails, in August 2013 State officials were aware of 17 FOIA requests relating to requests for Clinton correspondence, including four that “specifically mention Emails or Email accounts.” Despite the large number of FOIA requests and growing concern among top agency officials, the State Department did not formally request that the former secretary of state produce the emails on the clintonemail.com server until October 2014.
Included among the 17 FOIA requests was a Judicial Watch lawsuit seeking records pertaining to possible conflicts of interest between the actions taken by Hillary Clinton as secretary of state and Bill Clinton’s activities. That lawsuit produced 276 pages of internal State Department records revealing that within two days of the deadly terrorist attack on Benghazi, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, the president of Libya’s National Congress, asked to participate in a Clinton Global Initiative function and “meet President Clinton.” Those records showed Hillary Clinton’s staff coordinated with the Clinton Foundation’s staff to have her thank Clinton Global Initiative project sponsors for their “commitments” during a Foundation speech on September 25, 2009. The lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dept. of State (No. 1:13-cv-00772)) was filed on May 28, 2013.
In a 2014 joint expose with the Washington Examiner Judicial Watch’s Chief Investigative Reporter Micah Morrison reported:
[F]ormer President Clinton gave 215 speeches and earned $48 million while his wife presided over U.S. foreign policy, raising questions about whether the Clintons fulfilled ethics agreements related to the Clinton Foundation during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.
According to documents obtained by Judicial Watch and released … in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act case, State Department officials charged with reviewing Bill Clinton’s proposed speeches did not object to a single one.The new State Department documents were obtained by Judicial Watch under court order in a March 2016, FOIA lawsuit against the agency for all records “about the processing of a December 2012 FOIA request filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington [CREW]” (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:16-cv-00574)). In December 2012, CREW filed a FOIA request with the Department of State for “records sufficient to show the number of email accounts of or associated with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton.” In May 2013, the agency responded that “no records responsive to your request were located.” Earlier this year, the State Department Office of Inspector General concluded that the “no records response” sent in response to this request was “inaccurate and incomplete.”
According to the new records, by early August 2013 top State Department officials raised questions about FOIA requests seeking information related to the Clinton emails:
From: Grafeld, Margaret P
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:47 AMMargaret Grafeld was the deputy assistant secretary for global information services. Sheryl Walter was the State Department director, office of information programs and services/global information services. John Hackett was the deputy director, office of information programs and services.
To: Walter, Sheryl; Hackett, John
Subject: Fw: IPS significant FOIA Report
… Finally, John, you mentioned yesterday requests for Secretary Clinton’s emails; may I get copies, pls and thx.
From: Walter, Sheryl LKaren Finnegan was division chief of the State Department’s freedom of information program.
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:51 AM
To: Hermesman, Geoffrey F [and others]
Subject: FW: IPS Significant FOIA Report
… Geoff, can you get a copy of all requests related to Clinton’s emails?
[Geoffrey Hermesman was a State Department program analyst.]
From: Hermesman, Geoffrey F
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 12:54 PM
To: Sheryl Walter [and others]
Subject: RE: IPS significant FOIA Report
A search of the F2 database identified 17 FOIA cases that contain Clinton in the subject line and can be further construed as requests for correspondence between the Secretary and other individuals and/or organizations. Of these, four specifically mention Emails or Email accounts.
From: Finnegan, Karen M
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 4:10 PM
To: Walter, Sheryl L [and others]
Subject: RE: IPS Significant FOIA Report
Sheryl: To follow-up on my early response, Cristina is handling the Judicial Watch case, CA No. 2013-772 (DDC) (J. Kollar-Kotelly), that seeks access to all communications (including e-mail) between the Department and President Clinton and/or his foundation regarding clearing his speeches [Redacted]
Last month, Judicial Watch released 10 pages of Department records that included an email sent by State Department spokesman Brock Johnson alerting Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s then-chief of staff, that a “significant” Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests had been made for records showing the number of email accounts used by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
These new emails suggest that the Obama State Department knew about the Clinton email problem at least three years but covered it up. What happened in 2013 to cause the sudden interest in Clinton emails at the Obama State Department? Why are we only finding out about this interest now? Any criminal investigation of the Clinton email scandal must include officials in the Obama administration.
Source Judicial Watch