It has been troublesome that so much of the media is already arguing from the beginning of this last week that this wasn't like Watergate. My question is: how could they already know that the Obama White House wasn't involved in these decisions? What would have happened with Watergate if the media had shown the same quickness in drawing conclusions?
Politico provides one of many examples of how the mainstream media.
Lew also defended Sarah Hall Ingram, a commissioner who has been targeted by Republicans for formerly overseeing the tax exempt division before heading to her current post helping the agency implement the health care law.
Ingram, Lew said, was not involved in the targeting program.
“Chronology matters in cases like this,” he said. “I’ve asked some questions since becoming aware of this, and my understanding is her responsibilities moved over from the tax exempt unit to implementation of the Affordable Care Act before there was any opportunity to be involved in this.”
Ingram served as the commissioner of tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. . . .
Why not even list some obvious questions such as the events at the tax exempt division occurred during early 2010, early in the 2009 to 2012 period when Sarah Hall Ingram was in charge of the division? How could she have been involved in the implementation of the ACA in March of 2012 before it was signed into law on March 23, 2010
March 1, 2010: An IRS manager in Cincinnati, Ohio asks employees to begin searching for 501(c) tax exemption applications using the terms Tea Party, Patriots and 9/12 as their criteria.
April 1, 2010: Managers in Washington, DC and Cincinnati decide to send a “Sensitive Case Report” about the Tea Party cases up the chain in Washington.
April 19, 2010: The Sensitive Case Report is shared with two executives in Washington, DC, one of whom is Lois Lerner and the other her immediate subordinate.
August 12, 2010: The IRS creates a “BOLO” (Be on the Lookout) listing instructing agents to identify Tea Party case files.
December 13, 2010: A manager for the Exempt Organizations (EO) group at the IRS in Washington informs the manager in Cincinnati that the processing of Tea Party cases would soon be reviewed with the Senior Technical Advisor to Lois Lerner, the Director of EO.
June 1, 2011: The Acting Director of Rulings and Agreements in Washington, DC, Lois Lerner’s immediate subordinate, asks the manager in Cincinnati for the criteria used to identify Tea Party groups.
June 29, 2011: The Director of EO in Washington, DC, Lois Lerner, is briefed that the criteria being used by employees includes “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” “9/12 Project,” “Government Spending,” “Government Debt,” “Taxes,” “make America a better place to live,” and cases with statements that criticize how the country is being run.
July 5, 2011: The BOLO listing criteria is revised to search for “organizations involved in political, lobbying, or advocacy.”
January 25, 2012: The BOLO is updated to change the search criteria to “limiting/expanding Government,” “Constitution and the Bill of Rights,” and “social economic reform/movement.”
March 12, 2012: Senator Chuck Schumer sends a letter to IRS Commissioner Shulman along with six of his Democrat colleagues, calling for the agency to impose a strict cap on the amount of political spending by tax-exempt, nonprofit groups.
There is another problem. Let's just say that Sarah Hall Ingram immediately started working on Obamacare when it became law even though she was still technically in charge and running the tax exempt division. Why was that? Was something being hidden by her not being officially assigned to Obamacare? For example, where costs for Obamacare being shifted onto other programs?
Take another claim from something taken seriously by the mainstream media, Salon.com. "No evidence of White House involvement . . . none is found in the IG’s report"
If the IG did not interview people in the White House, how could the report determine that there was no evidence of White House involvement? If the IG did interview people in the White House, how could the Obama White House claim that they had no knowledge of IRS punishing conservatives?
Labels: IRSgate, obamacare