| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
Posted on 04/18/2002 10:49:16 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
For Immediate Release
Apr 18, 2002
Press Office: 202-646-5172
JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS CLINTON IRS ATTEMPTED AUDIT
IRS OFFICIAL ADMITS: “WHAT DO YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU SUE THE PRESIDENT?”
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the non-profit educational foundation that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it was fighting in court an audit attempt instituted by the Clinton IRS in retaliation for Judicial Watch’s litigation against President Clinton. Judicial Watch first received notice of an attempted IRS audit on October 9, 1998, a few days after its “Interim Impeachment Report,” which called for Bill Clinton’s impeachment for misuse of the IRS, was officially made part of the Congressional record. The IRS’s initial audit letter demanded that Judicial Watch “[p]rovide the names and addresses of the directors and their relationship to any political party or political groups.” In January, 1999, an IRS official admitted to Judicial Watch representatives, in the context of the propriety of the audit, “What do you expect when you sue the President?” Another IRS official admitted in June, 1999, that the political affiliations of Judicial Watch’s directors is a factor in any IRS audit.
After Judicial Watch scored legal victories against the Clinton Administration, Judicial Watch received audit notices and warnings from the IRS. For instance, immediately following its uncovering of the Clinton-Gore White House e-mail scandal in February, 2000, Judicial Watch lawyers received a call from an IRS official to inform them that Judicial Watch was still on the IRS’s “radar screen.” The IRS finally agreed to defer on deciding whether to audit Judicial Watch until after the Clinton Administration ended. Despite this agreement, in one of the last acts of the Clinton Administration, the IRS sent Judicial Watch another audit notice on January 8, 2001. The IRS also sent new audit notices throughout 2001 after Judicial Watch criticized IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti. Rossotti is a Clinton appointee who “inexplicably” continues to serve under President Bush. In addition to presiding over the audits of perceived critics of the Clinton Administration, Judicial Watch requested criminal and civil investigations of Rossotti for his criminal conflict of interest in holding stock in a company he founded, AMS, while it did business with the IRS.
Judicial Watch now is fighting the attempted audit in federal courts in the District of Columbia and Maryland. As Robert Novak reports in his April 18th column, despite repeated requests to Attorney General Ashcroft to investigate, his Bush Justice Department has thus far refused to do so. (See Judicial Watch's letter to Attorney General John Aschroft) Instead, in the context of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against the Cheney Energy Task Force, a Bush Administration official told Novak, “I don't know what we are going to do with this Klayman.” A copy of Judicial Watch’s complaint against IRS officials is available by clicking here.
“Judicial Watch has no objection to IRS audits at the proper time and place, under correct, non-political circumstances. We have nothing to hide. But when we were told that we were being audited because we sued Bill Clinton, we had no choice but to stand up and fight in court. Now, for its own reasons, the Bush Administration is content to let Clinton appointee Rossotti continue to harass Judicial Watch. Our lawsuits in response are intended not only to protect Judicial Watch, but are for the good of all Americans,” stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.
© Copyright 1997-2002, Judicial Watch, Inc.
That's all I've seen. As a matter of fact, to the best of my knowledge the only information the IRS makes public in audits would be in the case of criminal charges; i.e., we wouldn't even know they were trying to audit JW if JW hadn't told us so.
Do you have any idea why it would be necessary for 'eWW' to protect the list with his life from the IRS?
One has to wonder who - or what - might be on that donor list. Big politicos? Clinton's rivals, either Democratic or Republican? Foreign donors? Foreign governments? Who knows? The IRS must be on the trail of something....My "most-likely" guess would be that someone has claimed they gave large sums to JW and JW hasn't claimed receiving those sums, but I'm just guessing here.
Wouldn't you think 'eWW' would like to get on with the mission of ferreting out gov't corruption, conducting his cruises, filing the FOIA request, doing some Amicus briefs and in general getting back to fund raising?
I really would think so, unless they think these threats of disclosing identities might make people donate even more, to "protect their privacy"......
Now, I'd like to get back to the question of why you called Brown's death a suicide. Do you have a theory? Can you cite any other sources ... even one ... that supports your claim? If not, why did you make the claim ... just to DISHONESTLY disrupt?
That's all that I've been trying to tell you. Klayman and Judicial Watch have changed their tune about the "demise" of Ron Brown.
Untrue. Klayman has never stated that he thinks operatives of Clinton murdered Brown (although his legal actions may bring that possibility to mind). And Klayman has never suggested it was a suicide as you dishonestly tried to suggest. You still sticking to that lie?
How do you know when he first became involved? I'd like to see that under oath.
Why don't you ask Judicial Watch if it will make public all of its correspondence (including e-mail) regarding the Ron Brown matter? And if they won't, ask why not?
If you work for them or are one of their friends, please urge them to begin complying with the law. Tell them to come clean about all of the contributions and this entire Ron Brown mess.
The American people can be very forgiving. Trust them!
I'm not slandering any organization. I'm just asking questions which none of you seem to want to answer.
As you yourself have said, this entire matter is very suspicious. Call Judicial Watch and ask them to put all of their cards on the table so that the American people can know the truth.
And what do they call the tactic of claiming that JW called the death a suicide when he never has?
And as far as "personal belief" goes, I'm more than willing to argue the facts in the Brown case. Why pick on FreedominJesusChrist? She never has claimed an intimate knowledge of the circumstance surrounding the Brown death. But I do.
I posted a few of the facts in the Brown case a few posts back. Let's see if you have the guts to try and dispute them, or will you just RUN like democRAT move-on'ers ALWAYS do. Let's see if you have anything "clever" to say about the facts in the articles at Newsmax.com on the Brown case. Let's see if you have anything "witty" to say about the x-ray of Brown's head that pathologist after pathologist say indicate a bullet wound. Bet you can't name one who doesn't ... unless you'd like to argue the credibility of Dickerson.
We also know that Judicial Watch has never come out and publically stated that Ron Brown was murdered.
Gee. Maybe because he's honest unlike you. He simply asked for an autopsy which would show whether or not Brown was shot in the head. Dare I say "diversion" on your part?
Tell the truth for once: Why doesn't Judicial Watch want the American people to know the truth about Ron Brown's "mysterious death"?
And I suppose you call this an "honest" debating tactic? Well all I can do is say thanks, again, for showing up and keeping the Ron Brown discussion alive ... and proving that yet another Klayman detractor dishonestly discusses the subject. Now let's see if you run from the statements of the pathologists too.
If Judicial Watch would just trust the American people and make public the information requested by the IRS, it could make the IRS look silly.
If there's nothing to hide, that is.
And, more importantly, why shouldn't Judicial Watch disclose all that has been requested so that we can learn more about all this?
I know you don't. But I don't think that the American people should be asked to join you in just moving on this time.
I'm betting on the IRS. The people need to know that this entire matter has been properly investigated. And let's let the chips fall where they may.
Trust the American people!
You take good care of yourself and thanks for the exchange. You've been very kind and helpful to all of us.
At least you seem to accept the idea that there may be a bullet in Brown's head. But since you're big on providing scenarios before we indeed know if there is a bullet in his head, why don't you give us your theory. I'll help you out a little. Don't forget to explain how Brown managed to overpower the other 34 people on the plane and make the pilot fly the plane into the mountain before he shot himself ... no wait. Ok, let's see. Brown shoots himself then staggers to the cockpit (past the 34 others) and makes the pilot ... Hum. And then there's the problem of where the body was discovered and its condition (intact). And don't forget to address the question of why the AFIP LIED about the facts in the case. And why the Air Force skipped the safety board. Did they know that Brown committed suicide before the ground investigation even began? If so, how? Another torn up suicide note ... like Foster's (wink, wink)?
Hate to say it ned, I didn't think you could make Klayman detractors look more foolish. But you did. Thanks for helping us out!
GO AUDIT GO.. get on with the mission of ferreting out gov't abuse
dem Bones gonna rise again
Banks DO give out private information regarding any client of theirs which goes to the IMF and foreign sources. Banks operate on similar standards as the IRS because we use their worthless paper called Federal Reserve Notes. Now, they may not give it out to the public, but it is given to foreign sources as the IRS has a treaty with the IMF.
Because of statutes regulating the business of banking and not because of the Fourth Amendment. On a regular basis, banks cooperate with the Government by giving financial information about their clients.
Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment is ignored here by the banks and the IRS. True, banks cooperate with the government who in return disseminate this information to foreign sources. Thie explains why the IRS can go into one's bank account and seize their accounts. The IRS works with all the banks.
Explain this: If an American citizen is free, why do they need an I.D. when going into the bank to do withdraw funds? Simply for the fact that we are regarded as debtors to the government. Free citizens don't carry I.D. to banks. In the earlier days, people owned gold and I.D.'s were unheard of. My father is living proof of that era. Communist sympathisizer Franklin Delano Roosevelt had all the banks closed on March 6-9, 1933, by order of the Bank Holiday Act of 1933, and ordered all the gold be taken from private citizen's vaults and accounts.
Why won't Judicial Watch cooperate with the Government or the American people? What is so explosive about the information that is being requested? Who is Judicial Watch protecting and why? Why the cover-up?
If the information that the IRS is requesting is Lawful then there is no problem. The issue is that JW is a non-profit organization and it has tax-exempt status by the IRS. JW does not work for profit basis.
Why won't the IRS go after Jesse Jackson and his so-called "non-profit" organization when everybody now knows that it is the biggest moneymaking skakedown criminal operation that NEEDS to be investigated!
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.