JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS CLINTON IRS ATTEMPTED AUDIT

Judicial Watch ^ | April 18, 2002

[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.

[ned]

LOL! No, I wouldn't say that about you at all. I can only claim bad mental facilities. I'm "just slightly" over 40 now so I'm allowed right?

Absolutely, we're all allowed.

Believe me, I can usually think more clearly, but there is just so much pressure involved in all of this.

[terilyn]

(speaking solemnly): Absolutely, it's life or death. Klayman and JW must not be subject to an audit by the IRS because they're better than the rest of us. Oh yes, and more "ethical" too.

[ned]

Whenever I start to get too shook up on this thread, I just begin repeating the Judicial Watch slogan:

Because no one is above the law!

Sometimes that helps me see things a little more clearly.

[Howlin]

You're being quite disingenuous. Nobody said it was going to be given to the public.

Except Larry, of course.

[terilyn]

Sounds like Larry needs to read his own slogan ;)

[ned]

Well, he certainly doesn't make any of this any easier on the rest of us when he keeps bringing up that "over my dead body" threat. I just hope that he can continue to try to see that there can be a great deal of value in life no matter where he may have to spend the rest of it.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

terilyn,

First of all, you have the quotes by ChaseR and I turned around. Second of all, we were just joking around. ChaseR and I are friends and we joke around a lot. Third, neither of us work for Judicial Watch. I do not believe that Judicial Watch employees even comment on these threads.

We are not trying to fundraise for them, heck, they would have to pay us to do that. The reason ChaseR and I put up with crap like this, is because we believe in exposing the truth and being vigilant about it. We never tire of defending Judicial Watch, because we believe in our hearts that their cause is just and that they truly believe the same thing.

I apologize if we had offended some posters, it was meant as a joke and not as a chastisement.

[deport]

Wanna help get the word out and maybe get dem bones dug up..... In the words of the 'eWW' or as he sometimes calls himself "a conservative Ralph Nader", we have the following words....

• It cannot be disputed that what you have in Ron Brown's head is a bullet hole. [end snip]

Go Audit Go
Dig dem bones.....

[terilyn]

"The reason ChaseR and I put up with crap like this"

"Crap" like what? And did I miss it or did you answer the question? The question was: What is your agenda for making sure this thread is bumped through the month of May? I would honestly like to know what you meant by that.

[goldilucky]

I strongly believe that the issue alone is jurisdiction as well as venue. Why the IRS chooses to impose its private codes and regulations which have no law and effect on a non-foreign, non-profit organization like JW's, NEEDS to be investigated. JW may "reside" in Washington DC which is recognizable as a territory of the U.S. within standard meaning of the I.R.C., but the organization remains to be for non-profit, educational purposes. Furthermore, I don't even think the attorneys for JW have a stock initiative for purposes of making money in the organization. So the issue of the IRS electing to target JW is for them to have access to the addresses of supporters, volunteers, and contributors so that the IRS can then mess with them next.

And I say, let them try coming at my doorstep. They are the ones outside the law and their statues or codes are in conflict with my Fourth Amendment right. So, I just kindly show them the door.

[terilyn]

And you're correct, I do have your comments turned around. My apologies.

[Fred Mertz]

Ignore terilyn, she's a statist.

They laugh about the IRS, and they don't realize the reality of the situation.

Fortunately Larry Klayman does. Gads, I hope he exposes their corruption and hypocrisy!

[ned]

but the organization remains to be for non-profit, educational purposes.

Of course, that's one of the truly sad aspects of this. Mr. Klayman has been donating all of his time for several years to fight corruption and when all is said and done, he now finds himself in the middle of this financial scandal. And I'm sure that he had nothing to do with any of the problems.

Let that be a lesson to all of us. "No good deed goes unpunished."

[Fred Mertz]

Your comments make you transparent. No offense intended. I call 'em as I see 'em.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

You are correct that I had linked to a Judicial Watch fundraising section for reformjoy on this thread. I was not aware that I wasn't supposed to do this. If it is not allowed, you can remove my post, I am sorry about that and it won't happen again. It was post #1682.

[Luis Gonzalez]

To: Luis Gonzalez

"LAST WARNING" ~~~
***
"I've seen enough - I'll continue to donate each quarter - I'm gone -"

I'll be listening to the show tonight. I know you'll do well on all topics. (hope you polish up though -on Loral/Chinagate)
Sure wish things had worked out with you, me and the attorney for a Loral segment tonight.
Anyway, we're all packed up - moving to another house this weekend - unplugging and packing up computer - tonight- after your show)

Also, no hankies -or fanfare -needed or desired - in any fashion/this is addressed to you only..rofl - but I won't be posting anymore at FR - (will however, continue to donate to all future/quarterly FR fundraisers) - too much hassle from your friend the Admin Mod...looks like he is 'gunning' for me now - so I'll leave on my own and become a valued lurker.
(surprised that you Luis, didn't also get a 'Warning' for your share of namecalling and baiting - anyway - this is my last post - I'll be lurking from time to time - (hope you do a Loral segment sometime) - later....

162 posted on 1/24/02 2:00 PM Eastern by ChaseR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I sincerely hope so too. Thanks for the reply.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I thought you might find that old post amusing.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

There is no financial scandal at Judicial Watch, you guys are making a scandal.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

You have said plenty of dumb things yourself.