Posted on 05/18/2013 11:41:49 PM PDT by Steelfish
May 18, 2013 Evidence Emerges That Obama Administration Official Knew of IRS Targeting During 2012 Campaign
By Margaret Brennan (CBS News) WASHINGTON - There were new questions Saturday night concerning if anyone in the White House was aware of the IRS' targeting of conservative groups.
Inspector General Russell George said he informed a deputy at the Treasury Department in June of 2012 about the probe into the IRS.
The Treasury Department confirmed the timeline but said they did not know the details of the investigation until last week.
It's the first evidence that someone within the Obama administration knew about the practice during the presidential campaign.
It is unknown whether anyone in the White House was told of the federal investigation.
Republican Congressman Aaron Schock serves on the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees the IRS.
"We don't have any reason to believe at this point that it was anybody outside the IRS directing them to do this," said Schock. "Obviously there's been claims that the White House might have been involved and other groups. I don't have any reason to believe that."
Special Section: IRS Targeting Controversy
He says the IRS' behavior was criminal, claiming it hurt the ability of conservative groups to fundraise and that limited their influence.
"Until we know who it was responsible for the activities, we need to continue to investigate," Schock said.
A six-month-long investigation by the inspector general failed to pinpoint exactly who made the decision to subject some applications to extra scrutiny.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
We need to start getting traction on this soon....before the Ohaha mob uses their criminal Chicago political skills to skate on this.
They are the kingpins of political crime----they know every trick in the book.
Btw, tell me, again. What exactly does Valerie Jarrett do in the WH?
The guys I want to see before congress are the two rogue agents in Cincinatti. Then roll them up. Why do we have to endure these higher level idiots.
I only saw Pfeiffer on Fox, and wasn't clear on what he was claiming Issa knew. Knowing there was an IG investigation into targeting claims isn't the same as knowing that conservatives were in fact being targeted. My guess is that's going to be the distinction with Issa.
Regardless, I'm not sure what the WH is trying to imply regarding Issa. He's not in charge of the IRS. He had long called for investigations into the targeting claims. If he had no first hand knowledge of targeting and was only aware of an investigation then he acted appropriately. It's to be expected that he had a heads up on an investigation because of his oversight authority. Lots of people knew there was an IG investigation into the targeting claims. Heck, Jack Lew said it was published on a govt. web site.
The White House claims specifically regarding the knowledge of the IG investigation (only informed a few weeks ago) strain credulity. We now know that senior Treasury officials and Obama's appointee to the Chief Counsel of the IRS all had knowledge of the targeting conservatives approximately 1-2 years before the IG investigation began. That this knowledge was not shared with the WH is hard to believe.
Agree completely. Like you said, Issa is not in charge of the IRS. Just more of their distraction/shell games.
[[Well, I have reason to believe that the WH was involved]]
Me to- in fact I’m nearly 100% certain they did- however, provign it is antoher thign altogether
—— “We don’t have any reason to believe at this point that it was anybody outside the IRS directing them to do this,” -——
Still don’t even have the names of the “rogue agents.”
This investigation is a joke.
Well, I have reason to believe that the WH was involved. guilty until proven innocent.
Sure, that isn’t the way our law works, but what difference does it make now? The IRS treats everyone like they are guilty,so, turn about is fair play.
Guilty until proven innocent is the appropriate standard for judging politically. All those “negative liberties” such as the First Amendment presume that the government will be tempted to violate them. And the very standard of “innocent until proven guilty” can only be applied to defendants by presuming that the prosecutor is “guilty” (of wrongfully charging someone with a crime) until proven innocent.And of course when Mr. Obama says “If I had a son he would look like Trayvon,” he is dissociating himself from Zimmerman - and creating a presumption that the prosecutor of a man who was originally deemed innocent by the police is currying favor with the highest-ranking personage in the country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.