Posted on 06/05/2013 6:45:30 AM PDT by NOVACPA
The latest twist in the conservative effort to tie the IRS tax-exempt targeting scandal to the president is to focus on public visitor records released by the White House, in which former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman's name appears 157 times between 2009 and 2012. Unfortunately, few of those pushing this line have bothered to read more than the topline of that public information. Bill O'Reilly on Thursday called them the "smoking gun" and demanded of Shulman, "You must explain under oath what you were doing at the White House on 157 separate occasions." His statement built on a Daily Caller story, "IRS's Shulman had more public White House visits than any Cabinet member." An Investors Business Daily story and slew of blog items repeated the charges.
"The alibi the White House has wedded itself to is that it had to work closely with the IRS to implement ObamaCare," the Investor's Business Daily has written -- as if that were not true.
And yet the public meeting schedules available for review to any media outlet show that very thing: Shulman was cleared primarily to meet with administration staffers involved in implementation of the health-care reform bill. He was cleared 40 times to meet with Obama's director of the Office of Health Reform, and a further 80 times for the biweekly health reform deputies meetings and others set up by aides involved with the health-care law implementation efforts. That's 76 percent of his planned White House visits just there, before you even add in all the meetings with Office of Management and Budget personnel also involved in health reform.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Well then he should have said so instead of sitting there fumbling around until “Easter Egg Hunt” came to mind.
Links to article don’t work
Then why did he say 118 times?
suuuure—and every time I say I’m going to Kohl’s to look for a new blouse, I NEVER look at handbags, jewelry etc...I know it isn’t much of an analogy, but it really is this simple to me :)
Puh-leez!
Apologists at the Atlantic have a full plate...
This article does NOT do what the headline says it does: show that the claims that Shulman visited the White House 157 times are “fake”! The article does indicate that most of the visits were noted as for Obamacare-related meetings. And the article makes a big deal of the Eisenhower Building next to the White House and included in the White House’s security perimeter as not being what most people think of as the White House, and implies that most of the visits were to this building, rather than the White House proper.
Big deal! The fact remains that Shulman visited the White House complex an extraordinary number of times for the leader of a non-political / independent agency, especially in comparison to visits by his predecessors.
The Obamacare meetings are great cover to hide other more nefarious activities.
Besides, aren’t there tunnels linking the buildings?
So he wasn’t having an affair with Michelle? /s
Subpoena Schulman’s work diary at the IRS to see how many
times he had meetings at the WHm and with whom.
All executives keep this type of documentation.
Ah, the Atlantic.
Bastion of honesty.
Only pub more “honest” is the NYT.
/s
Riiiiight.
How many times with Robert Bauer?
For a second, I thought the fake-story story was a fake fake-story story.
Happy Easter!
But...the decision that Obamacare was going to become a tax wasn't decided until 3 years later from the supreme court.
So...explain to me again why there were 157 visits!
I did not hear Schulman DENY the accusation.
Since he is a ‘government employee/appointee’, then it should be no problem for his office to provide an UNEDITED/UNREDACTED list of all his ‘appointments’.
Because he is just a confused government worker. Only the reporter at the Atlantic has enough intelligence to know the 'truth'. (/sarcasm)
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.