Cummings: Full IRS interview shows White House didn’t direct tea party targeting

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) practically begged Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), NOT to release the full transcript of the interview with the IRS employee actually involved in the "targeting" of Tea Party Groups, but Issa couldn't give a good enough reason, so today, Cummings released it.

And it states that the screening started, NOT on order from the White House, but on their own suspicions. Seems a supervisor at the IRS noticed some irregularities in some of the applications and so talked to his manager (a self-described “conservative Republican”) about them. The manager also became suspicious and OK'd a "filter" to screen these particular groups with more scrutiny. And over the next few months, they proceeded to do so.

Nothing to do with the White House. Just two IRS employees in Cincinnati, trying to do their job. They did ask Washington IRS employees for help in the review process, so they were also involved, but the questions came from a small office in Ohio.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Democrats have released the entire 205-page transcript of an interview with a self-described “conservative Republican” employee in the Cincinnati office of the IRS who says he wasn’t aware of any White House involvement in the targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, nor was there any political motivation in his work.

Source

Asked, “Do you have any reason to believe that anyone in the White House was involved in the decision to screen Tea Party cases?” Mr. Shafer replied, “I have no reason to believe that.”

Mr. Shafer was then asked, “Do you have any reason to believe that anyone in the White House was involved in the decisions to centralize the review of Tea Party cases?”

“I have no reason to believe that,” he said.

Source2

The Cincinnati manager in the transcript revealed Tuesday is a self-described “conservative Republican” who told congressional investigators that he asked Washington IRS officials for guidance on a tea party case on Feb. 25, 2010, the same date listed in an inspector general’s report as the genesis of the IRS’s targeting efforts.

The Cincinnati supervisor also confirmed that an IRS screener from his office developed the controversial search criteria that the agency used to identify groups for extra scrutiny.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) practically begged Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), NOT to release the full transcript of the interview with the IRS employee actually involved in the "targeting" of Tea Party Groups, but Issa couldn't give a good enough reason, so today, Cummings released it.

Not that it really matters, (as it is just a big game) but I read your whole post and see absolutely nothing in it substantiating your statement that, "... Issa practically begged..."

First, the people placed in charge of each government division are going to do precisely what they are supposed to do without any direct contact with der Fuhrer...this is how totalitarian states and czars behave...they do not need marching orders because they think and act exactly like they are supposed to think and act...

Furthermore and to wit, anyone labeling themselves a conservative in this day and age is generally more a libtard who has no clue who Goldwater and Reagan are...Bush, Cheney, Haig, and Baker, made sure any real conservative got the message when Ronnie bought a bullet...

ETA: Just noticed this in the article also...

Mr. Issa released a statement criticizing Mr. Cummings for releasing earlier selected excerpts from the very same transcript, and said that the move could compromise the joint investigation underway by the Oversight and Government Reform and Ways and Means Committees.

and,

As Mr. Cummings acknowledges in the letter, though, IRS employees in D.C. did play a role in the improper targeting of conservative groups.

So not only did you tell a blatant lie in your opening statement to this OP, you conveniently left out exactly why the desire to not release the transcripts...and, there is zero question that this business with the IRS, along with the AP, Benghazi, and the NSA, clearly demonstrate this sitting president has absolutely zero interest in promoting any sense of transparency in government, let alone a sense of peace and trust...

HE is a fraud. And his supporters are frauds.

Extremely weak and shallow attempt at defending the indefensible...

Do you really think a confession from the person who did it, will matter to the people on ATS?!?

Nope, Obama still did it.

With all the lies so far,

why would this new miracle be truthful ?

I KNOW the White House operative council was behind the whole thing.

The lies have been there every step of the way.

Those commies are using the old trick of "telling a lie to make it true"

Originally posted by Ghost375
Do you really think a confession from the person who did it, will matter to the people on ATS?!?

Nope, Obama still did it.

L L

I have no reason to believe that.

I've got to say, this doesn't put anything to rest or make anything easier. I believe it only highlights the need for serious investigations into what happened here. The following article says just the opposite and names the names who said it, when and where they said it as well as quotes for precisely what they said in many cases. IRS offices in California, Texas, Alabama, Virginia and Wisconsin are named and cited with specific incidents of problems as well as statements from more than one employee stating it was coming from Washington.

IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

In fairness, I don't think Obama knew a thing about it. If he did, it would have been in the most casual and passing of ways. He's FAR too busy flying all over the nation, near 7 days a week, giving speeches and fundraisers to manage something like this at the same time. It's a wonder he has time to do anything really work related.

The IRS up to the top though? Heck... That's part of official congressional testimony at this point in time and under oath. They need to get to the bottom of this and flush whoever took part in the policy decisions. If that's ALL inside the IRS? Fine with me. Easier, in fact. Obama's name just adds a circus to what ought to be a straight forward case of political corruption to investigate.

reply to post by totallackey

First, the people placed in charge of each government division are going to do precisely what they are supposed to do without any direct contact with der Fuhrer...this is how totalitarian states and czars behave...they do not need marching orders because they think and act exactly like they are supposed to think and act...

You know....I do exactly as I should without direct contact with my boss on a daily basis. Not because I am brainwashed or have been dictated to, but because I am paid to know what my job is and follow certain steps to find and solve specific issues.

Furthermore and to wit, anyone labeling themselves a conservative in this day and age is generally more a libtard who has no clue who Goldwater and Reagan are...Bush, Cheney, Haig, and Baker, made sure any real conservative got the message when Ronnie bought a bullet...

Reagan was a conservative?

Sorry.....you just lost it.

Not to mention most the Tea Party would take issue with that.

I don't say this often...but this was a complete fail.

reply to post by xuenchen

Those commies are using the old trick of "telling a lie to make it true"

If you said fascist...I would agree.

Commies? No...far from it.

All I can say is that these sorts of threads are the best comic relief I can find on the web.

reply to post by Ghost375


It doesn't matter if Obama directed it or not, what matters is that it happened in the first place. No minimizing is going to make it better or less disturbing.

What happened is political targeting from an agency that needs to be strictly unbiased to political affiliation. Obviously, the implications of what did happen are now being downplayed as the left asserts that Obama did not directly target republican groups.......... Thats great but correct me if I'm wrong, the IRS is under direct management from the United States executive branch of government, perhaps not directly being involved is PART OF THE PROBLEM.

It would seem the White House and the Department of Justice are blissfully unaware of any wrongdoings directly under their noses. What is worse do you think, being directly involved or being so completely and painfully inept that you have no idea what the people directly under you are doing on an every day basis?

This administration is a bad joke and so is the the government in it's current state as a whole, it started with Bush and 9/11 and the patriot act and continues, just as corrupt, just as absurd and just as tyrannical today.

The only reason I have so much disdain for Obama is because he promised something different and not only did he fail to deliver, he lied, he perpetuated and is now living epic, titanic lies, not about some things but about everything, he promised to be hope and change, change we could believe in................. Yeah, right.

Keep defending this garbage dump of an administration based on your liberal ideology instead of your brain. See where it gets you in the end.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
sure, because the IRS doesn't lie...
gotcha...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) practically begged Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), NOT to release the full transcript of the interview with the IRS employee actually involved in the "targeting" of Tea Party Groups, but Issa couldn't give a good enough reason, so today, Cummings released it.

And it states that the screening started, NOT on order from the White House, but on their own suspicions. Seems a supervisor at the IRS noticed some irregularities in some of the applications and so talked to his manager (a self-described “conservative Republican”) about them. The manager also became suspicious and OK'd a "filter" to screen these particular groups with more scrutiny. And over the next few months, they proceeded to do so.

Nothing to do with the White House. Just two IRS employees in Cincinnati, trying to do their job. They did ask Washington IRS employees for help in the review process, so they were also involved, but the questions came from a small office in Ohio.

Sucks to be you, Darrell Issa! Your feeble cover-up failed.

What a humiliating reversal. Obama will sleep with a grin on his face tonight!

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

sure, because the IRS doesn't lie...
gotcha...

We're from the government and we're here to help...so you're saying that's not true?

Looks like Oblama reps said,."We are not to blame... Get It!!
to the IRS.....
LOL

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Thank you for so eloquently proving my point...

The people at the IRS are being paid to target certain political groups...

Alexander Haig

I doubt you even know who Reagan is, let alone Goldwater...Once the bullet found Ronnie, everything he talked about in '76 and in '80 went out the window...the policies of the fascist state, the glorious so-called points of light as seen by Herr Bush, took over...you do remember what Haig said, correct?

No...sorry... response fail...

reply to post by totallackey


If he doesn't know who Barry or Ron were, he's sure not going to know about Al's power-grab.

reply to post by Sankari


Meh, self censorship. I didn't have anything nice to say, so, I'm not gonna say anything.

reply to post by totallackey


Sigh...

No, the people at the IRS are paid to do their job and looking for potential fraud is part of that.

I am still waiting to see the proof that the IRS is trained or forced by policy to target Conservative non-profits. There is plenty of conjecture...but no proof. So far it's a bunch of hearsay and political posturing.

everything he talked about in '76 and in '80 went out the window

Man, that sounds like another politician I know that cow towed to the fascist lobby after promising so much.....sounds like Obama!

I doubt you even know who Reagan is, let alone Goldwater

Reagan was a puppet that played the part of "conservative" and Goldwater was the real-deal libertarian conservative. Big differences on ideology between the two and there really is no comparison.

But what do I know...

reply to post by totallackey


You know, I tend to agree with you here. Reagan was a conservative's Republican, IMO....but making the compromise to bring in that evil little troll of a Vice President sealed the fate of a nation in ways he could never really have grasped at the time. Personally, I respect Reagan and his memory deeply. I've even visited his Library, twice. A heck of a place if you get the chance, not least of which for the actual walk through you do of Air Force One as it stood in Reagan's days in office.

However...when the man screwed up (Mental Health System taken apart... Iran/Contra... to name a couple) he screwed the poor pooch so bad they should have arrested him for animal cruelty. Nothing quite as bad as having chosen George H.W. Bush to be his running mate tho. Almost a fatal mistake for the old guy.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Thank you for the response...make no mistake, the ideas of Iran/Contra and the dismantling of NIMH were absolutely not the ideas of of Reagan...that was all the doing of the fascist Bush...

That whole family are nothing but crooks (Neil), and liars (every single one of them). You can tell when they are lying...when their lips move...Not to say nobody else is not a liar (me included), but these people will kill to protect their lies...doubly dangerous...

reply to post by totallackey


So I take it Jeb Bush can't count on your energetic support and donations, right? (hops off quickly and jumps in hole before thrown objects catch up) lol....

I was just a kid in grade school when the Mental Health system was torn apart. I just listened to my father talk about it for years as a street cop who had to deal with what was thrown out and left to fend for themselves with no support. Ahhh... The turning points in history and where you can say major things really did change on single decisions.

reply to post by sheepslayer247
I will agree to disagree, as the subject of the OP is different from what you appear to be so hung up on... I do not wish to derail the thread...

have a nice day...and don't let the Little Caesar two step in your avatar trip you on the way out...