| 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.
I just assumed that all but the most "serious" of problems with Judicial Watch's records could have been corrected in the last three and one-half years.
One should never assume anything.
However, since you are so up to date on legal matters, let me ask you Mr Fiend, to
- now post - and furnish all FR readers with - the exact length of time
- one is allowed to make their response. I'm sure you'll supply, right now, the correct answer?
Incorrect response. Thorn, you failed to post your knowledge of the latest motions filed by the defendents in the Loral Shareholders case.
Secondarily Thorn, let me ask you again, (for the second time) -have you Thorn, reviewed the devastating Loral Shareholders case? Have you read it? Tell us all about this case Mr Thorn. Thorn, when you come here and make slanderous claims against JudicialWatch, make sure you're up to date with all JW filings please.
This important Judicial Watch case is an ongoing and pending case in Federal Judge Lamberth's court in Washington, D. C.
Well, now I'm not sure if there is an exact answer to that question, but I do know that, if there is an exact answer, it's an answer that I just don't know.
I have been assuming that there are cases in which an entity's records contain such "serious" problems that it might take three and one-half years to correct them, but I suppose it is possible that an entity's records could be so seriously irregular as to be never correctable.
I have been hoping that that is not what we are dealing with here.
Then prove it by showing equal outrage that the Bush administration has apparently not even bothered to investigate dozens of credible allegations of serious crimes by the last administration and its supporters. The Bush administration are the ones with the power and the responsibility for bringing the Clintons and their minions to justice for the CRIMINAL matters. It NEVER was Klayman's responsibility even though much of what he uncovered in his civil investigations were CRIMINAL violations.
Klayman is just grandstanding he has no intention of causing any real problems for Clinton...his accusation keep him in the spotlight and his contribution flowing.
That may be true ... NOW ... but it certainly wasn't true when Clinton was in power. And I ask you this ... does Bush have any intention of causing real problems for those democRATS who subverted our election process, our government's system of checks and balances, our military, our DOJ, our FBI, our IRS and countless other government agencies? He's the one with the power ... he the one who should be held accountable for Clinton escaping justice.
Anyone who believes Klayman is going to do something is in denial.
I'm not in denial. Klayman NEVER could do anything about the CRIMINAL matters. ONLY Ashcroft can. Those of YOU who ignore that are the ones in denial.
The time for action has come and gone.
Not as far as Ashcroft is concerned. He could still do something. He could still put lots of criminals in jail. NO EXCUSES. Otherwise, you are just pushing the "move-on" philosophy.
The same thing should happen with Klaymans contributions....NO results, NO money !
Fine. I agree. Now hold the GOP and Bush campaigns to the same standard as Klayman. NO results ... NO MONEY!
Lot's of claims, but no substance, as usual with the Klayman/JW bashers.
I am surprised that we haven't yet heard about Klayman's legal battle with his mother or how unethical they are for going after the NWO Bush Klan.
I think I said 'gain', not 'game', and I think I said 'apparently'. Perhaps it is all a game to them. However, if they are only spending 4% of their funds on their supposed purpose, the other 96% has to be going somewhere. I think it more likely that they are using it to line their own pockets than that they are secretly giving it to charity.
There is not documented proof of any sort of money laundering or any illegal activity by them.
You're the one who brought up money laundering and illegal activities, not me. I'd hope if lawyers were doing such things, they'd be smart enough not to leave behind much "documented proof" however.
I am sure that most of Judicial Watch supporters know who their money is being spent and apparently, they do not mind.
"who their money is being spent" or "how"?
You seem to be a big supporter, and you don't seem to mind how they spend the money, could you tell us how they are spending it or who they are spending it on?
I am truly grateful that we have people such as Larry Klayman and the staff of Judicial Watch around. I believe that in the end, the Bush Cheerleaders will thank the vigilance and consistency that Judicial Watch has continued to show over the years. I see many similarities between the attitude and beliefs of the Rockefellar country club Republicans back in the day and the ardent W. Bush supporters we are encountering now. They are NWO Republicans; no good in the long run at all for the Conservative Cause.
The IRS does many things that I see as being unconstitutional, for they also use tax-exempt status as a means to coerce religious organizations and churchs into silence on such issues as abortion, voting for moral candidates, and homosexual marriage, by classifying these issues as political instead of moral issues.
As evil, intolerant, bigoted and moronic as the leftist cause is, so the forces of good err in excessive tolerance, open hearted acceptance, and excessive intellectualization.
It is about time for the good people to recognize that barabarism is as implacable in contrarian politicians and bureaucrats and institutional leftists as it is among the terrorists with whom they find common cause.
We are resolute in the defense of innocent life against terror.
It is time to take the gloves off and start rooting out leftist rot, plenty of room at gitmo for clinton era leftist scum.
But you said, in post #234:
Judicial Watch is not scamming its supporters for personal financial game. There is not documented proof of any sort of money laundering or any illegal activity by them. It is easy to throw around accusations and even harder to back up those claims with hard evidence. I am sure that most of Judicial Watch supporters know who their money is being spent and apparently, they do not mind.
If you know that Judicial Watch is not scamming its supporters, you must have some knowledge of their financial matters. You also say there is no documented proof of money laundering or other illegal activity - if you know nothing of JW's financial activities, how would you know that?
You really need to make up your mind - do you know they are honest, or do you not know anything about it?
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.