New Documents Reveal DOJ, IRS, and FBI Plan to Seek Criminal Charges of Obama Opponents

Judicial Watch is at it again. They have some newly obtained documents that seem to point at a concerted effort by Federal Agencies to target "opponents" of Obama.

These are new and obtained by FOIA and court orders.

Some involvement of course by Lois Lerner (aka Lois the Innocent, 5th Baroness of Legalville), who was apparently a "go between" and apparently transmitted IRS tax returns and other info to other Agencies illegally.

More to read....

New Documents Reveal DOJ, IRS, and FBI Plan to Seek Criminal Charges of Obama Opponents

Judicial Watch today released new Department of Justice (DOJ) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents that include an official “DOJ Recap” report detailing an October 2010 meeting between Lois Lerner, DOJ officials and the FBI to plan for the possible criminal prosecution of targeted nonprofit organizations for alleged illegal political activity.

The newly obtained records also reveal that the Obama DOJ wanted IRS employees who were going to testify to Congress to turn over documents to the DOJ before giving them to Congress. Records also detail how the Obama IRS gave the FBI 21 computer disks, containing 1.25 million pages of confidential IRS returns from 113,000 nonprofit social 501(c)(4) welfare groups – or nearly every 501(c)(4) in the United States – as part of its prosecution effort. According to a letter from then-House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, “This revelation likely means that the IRS – including possibly Lois Lerner – violated federal tax law by transmitting this information to the Justice Department.”

The documents were produced subsequent to court orders in two Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits: Judicial Watch v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:14-cv-1956) and Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice (No. 1:14-cv-1239).

and an added gumdrop...
Lois Lerner may have also been behind conservative targeting in Wisconsin

Remember those horrifying police raids in Wisconsin a while back? With no hyperbole, it was modern-day tyranny that should have incensed the entire nation, regardless of political affiliation or viewpoint. Instead, very few ever even heard about it.

Why? Because progressives were the perpetrators and conservatives were the targets. The raids were part of a so-called “investigation” of conservatives who were supporting Scott Walker.

Well new email evidence suggests that Lois Lerner may have been in cahoots with a Wisconsin official regarding the investigation.

Guess Lois won't be voting for Scott Walker (assuming she will even be eligible to vote by next year that is)

In other news, water is wet. It is the Chicago way.

So amazing!

originally posted by: NavyDoc
In other news, water is wet. It is the Chicago way.

Lol

I wonder how many people caught that analogy ?

This may call for a double pun?


"Dick" did stuff like that "Daley" in Chicago .

the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

a reply to: xuenchen

The sad thing is? Boehner has proven his alliance to the "Global Governance" along with all of the other cowards in Washington! Our debt is ONLY sustainable as long as our military is of use to the corrupt Bankers who rely on them taking out the countries who are going against them!

America needs to take a real close look at Greece! The only thing separating the 2? Is the military force! When the bankers figure out a way to have a military not dependent on America? The whole Ponzi scheme will come to an end!

originally posted by: jimmyx
the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

What about the illegal transfer of IRS data to other agencies without a court order?

You support that 100% I imagine.

You favor bureaucrat control and by-passing laws.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: jimmyx
the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

What about the illegal transfer of IRS data to other agencies without a court order?

You support that 100% I imagine.

You favor bureaucrat control and by-passing laws.

they were trying to validate claims, using other sources....when you are trying to land a job with an employer, do you think they are going to take your word for everything you wrote down on an job application?...NO has been the answer for decades.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: jimmyx
the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

What about the illegal transfer of IRS data to other agencies without a court order?

You support that 100% I imagine.

You favor bureaucrat control and by-passing laws.

they were trying to validate claims, using other sources....when you are trying to land a job with an employer, do you think they are going to take your word for everything you wrote down on an job application?...NO has been the answer for decades.

They were bypassing laws.

They were establishing their own illegal regulations.

Looks like you welcome tyranny and authoritarianism.

a reply to: jimmyx

townhall.com...

If liberal organizations were equally -- or somewhat equally -- swamped with inappropriate questions, hyper scrutiny from IRS headquarters, and massive delays, why couldn't Cummings' brigade produce a single witness to testify to those facts? And were any IRS working groups formed to review liberal organizations' applications? The agency mobilized twelve such units for scrutinizing conservatives.


While the list did contain the word “progressive,” screeners were in fact instructed to treat “progressive” groups differently from “tea party” groups.

Whereas screeners were merely alerted that a designation of 501(c)(3) status “may not be appropriate” for applications containing the word ”progressive” – 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from conducting any political activities – they were told to send those of tea-party groups off IRS higher-ups for further scrutiny.

That means the applications of progressive groups could be approved on the spot by line agents, while those of tea-party groups could not. Furthermore, the November 2010 list noted that tea-party cases were “currently being coordinated with EOT,” which stands for Exempt Organizations Technical, a group of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. Those of progressive groups were not.


So the terms employed during initial screening processes did include words like "progressive" (although from what we know about the original 'BOLO' lists, they were overwhelmingly skewed toward conservative descriptors), but only conservative applications were marked for additional scrutiny -- including micromanagement from Washington. This abuse led to plainly uneven outcomes along ideological lines, as reported by USA Today:

In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked. That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months. In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows. As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.

Zero Tea Party conservative groups' applications were approved for more than two years, as dozens of lefty groups were rubber-stamped.

Yes, it seems as though the word "progressive" appeared on some of those 'BOLO' lists (see update below), but the screening and approval process went on as usual for those groups. Not so for the other side, against whom Beltway managers directed added scrutiny, onerous follow-up questionnaires, and interminable delays.

Also bear in mind two other elements of the IRS scandal: The targeting of conservative donors, and the wildly improper (and illegal) leaking of conservative groups' confidential donor lists to their political adversaries.

originally posted by: jimmyx
the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

Hard to take you as a middle of the road person as you appear to have a bit of distain for the republicans judging from your previous posts...

Dare I quote one of your Articles titled "GOP The New American Taliban"

"after seeing how the 2012 election was run by the republicans, the results, and the aftermath, i notice stark similarities to the islamic taliban."

Real shocker that you agree with the IRS on this one...You're about as fair and balanced as Bill O'Reilly....

So...

I can actually blame Obama this time?

originally posted by: eisegesis
So...

I can actually blame Obama this time?

Don't get carried away here, this is still clearly the fault of Bush.... cause' Bush.

Bush, yeah.

Not a shocker that one side of the same damn coin is up to this. Very Clinton-esque. It's a shocker that the thread is very quite.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: jimmyx

townhall.com...

If liberal organizations were equally -- or somewhat equally -- swamped with inappropriate questions, hyper scrutiny from IRS headquarters, and massive delays, why couldn't Cummings' brigade produce a single witness to testify to those facts? And were any IRS working groups formed to review liberal organizations' applications? The agency mobilized twelve such units for scrutinizing conservatives.


While the list did contain the word “progressive,” screeners were in fact instructed to treat “progressive” groups differently from “tea party” groups.

Whereas screeners were merely alerted that a designation of 501(c)(3) status “may not be appropriate” for applications containing the word ”progressive” – 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from conducting any political activities – they were told to send those of tea-party groups off IRS higher-ups for further scrutiny.

That means the applications of progressive groups could be approved on the spot by line agents, while those of tea-party groups could not. Furthermore, the November 2010 list noted that tea-party cases were “currently being coordinated with EOT,” which stands for Exempt Organizations Technical, a group of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. Those of progressive groups were not.


So the terms employed during initial screening processes did include words like "progressive" (although from what we know about the original 'BOLO' lists, they were overwhelmingly skewed toward conservative descriptors), but only conservative applications were marked for additional scrutiny -- including micromanagement from Washington. This abuse led to plainly uneven outcomes along ideological lines, as reported by USA Today:

In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked. That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months. In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows. As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.

Zero Tea Party conservative groups' applications were approved for more than two years, as dozens of lefty groups were rubber-stamped.

Yes, it seems as though the word "progressive" appeared on some of those 'BOLO' lists (see update below), but the screening and approval process went on as usual for those groups. Not so for the other side, against whom Beltway managers directed added scrutiny, onerous follow-up questionnaires, and interminable delays.

Also bear in mind two other elements of the IRS scandal: The targeting of conservative donors, and the wildly improper (and illegal) leaking of conservative groups' confidential donor lists to their political adversaries.

All that exonerating information must have been in all those deleted files.

I wonder what the IRS would do to any of us, when faced with an audit we delegated thousands I files and emails?

Very fitting for this administration. I remember Obama's re-districting....as if I'd really willingly give up so much private information. I don't think I ever laughed so hard in someone's face when they told me answering those questions were mandatory. Anyways....my point, is this type of behavior has been going on since day one, not that it didn't in other administrations (yes Dubya) but at least other adminstrations were sneaky and diabolical about it, Obama is like a fake president making fake laws. Has it really ever been verified....never mind, I'm off topic enough.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: jimmyx
the entire group 503(c) (4)...IS TARGETED!!!....those that claim it, are trying NOT to pay taxes. the IRS was doing it's job, researching the declarations on the forms with a fine tooth comb....if those people can't stand the scrutiny, then DON'T CLAIM to be a non-profit......there are plenty of other ways they can donate to a political cause or person.

What about the illegal transfer of IRS data to other agencies without a court order?

You support that 100% I imagine.

You favor bureaucrat control and by-passing laws.

they were trying to validate claims, using other sources....when you are trying to land a job with an employer, do you think they are going to take your word for everything you wrote down on an job application?...NO has been the answer for decades.

They were bypassing laws.

They were establishing their own illegal regulations.

Looks like you welcome tyranny and authoritarianism.

He welcomes it when it's Democrats doing it against Republicans. If it's the other way around they need to be jailed I am sure.

11.3.21.1  (03-28-2008)
Background

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and TIGTA employees are authorized by IRC §6103(k)(6) and Treasury Regulation 301.6103(k)(6)-1 to disclose return information to the extent necessary to gather data relating to their official tax administration duties or to accomplish properly any activity connected with such official duties. It is also possible for IRS to allow IRC §6103(n) contractors to make IRC §6103(k)(6) disclosures as part of their contractual responsibilities.

Situations in which IRS employees may make investigative disclosures arise daily. with few exceptions, no special permission or authorization is needed to make investigative disclosures under the circumstances and conditions described in Treasury Regulation 301.6103(k)(6)-1, so long as the IRS employees are performing official duties relating to:

An administrative appeal

A ruling or prefiling activity

A negotiated agreement

An examination

Collection activity

Civil or criminal investigation

Enforcement activity or other offense under the internal revenue laws

Certain personnel or claimant representative matters

Preparation for or investigation leading to an IRC §6103(h)(2) proceeding

a reply to: xuenchen

I feel it is necessary to dispel a major flaw in your argument, pertaining to Jimmyx's position about Tax Laws being broken by Lerner/IRS. In the OP source article, an undisclosed DOJ lawyer sent an email to the IRS in-house lawyer;
wherein, he states

"..We are 6103 authorized and I can connect you with TIGTA to confirm; we would like the unredacted documents."

www.irs.gov...

This coming from the same people who said ISIS was training 8 miles from the US border in Mexico.

SO I would highly take what they say with a large grain of salt.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I wonder what the IRS would do to any of us, when faced with an audit we delegated thousands I files and emails?

Have your named changed to a federal inmate number.