Paul L. Caron

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

The IRS Scandal, Day 1160

IRS Logo 2Politico Morning Tax, News on the Koskinen Front:

After lying dormant for a while, there’s been some news on the effort by some House Republicans to impeach or censure or strip the salary of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen. Relatively minor news, but news all the same. First, our Katy O’Donnell reports that a bipartisan group of eight former IRS chiefs took strong exception to the impeachment effort. “We believe these actions are both disproportionate and counterproductive. They would do serious, long-term damage to our revenue system,” they wrote in a letter to House leadership and the top Republican and Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. And while Ways and Means members haven’t been out front in the anti-Koskinen effort, Brady endorsed the no-salary effort. After a panel discussion on tax reform organized by the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, Brady said he takes, "every chance I get to make the case that this IRS ought to behave differently," Tax Analystsreported. Sources on the Hill have been less than enlightening about where things stand on the matter. But it’s a fair guess that some of Koskinen’s fiercest critics see bigger fish to fry — like investigating the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email practices.

IRS News, IRS Scandal, Tax | Permalink


Mr. wodun: Back to the ad hominem attacks, as usual.

A while back you made a comment about your time at the IRS, was I mistaken and were you really talking about some other government agency?

Are you upset about the Obama administration funding of Democrat non profit activist groups or Democrat non profit activist groups engaging not only in politics but violence all over the country?

Where are your calls to investigate them?

Posted by: wodun | Jul 13, 2016 1:16:50 PM

Mr. wodun: Back to the ad hominem attacks, as usual. BTW, I have never been on the IRS or Chief Counsel payroll.

Mr. Smitty: You are correct that I would be very upset and ready to man the barricades “if the IRS became Trump's attack dog against unions and other progressive groups.” There is no evidence, however, that the Obama Administration has used the IRS as an “attack dog” against conservative organizations or anyone. Neither the several Republican-led committees and subcommittees of Congress, nor the Republican-appointed TIGTA chief have turned up any such evidence. Innuendo, supposition, exaggeration, stupidity, negligence, and fabrications, yes. Evidence of malfeasance or illegality? None. Connections to the WH? None. Efforts by any Republican-led “investigating” committee to grant immunity to LLerner and force her to tell us what she knows? None. Why do you think?

Posted by: Publius Novus | Jul 13, 2016 8:55:03 AM

Don't be too hard on Publius, he is/was an IRS employee and probably was a willing participant in the persecution of dissidents. He already has said numerous times it was the right thing to do.

Posted by: wodun | Jul 12, 2016 8:12:44 PM

They would do serious, long-term damage to our revenue system,

Democrats should have thought of that before using the IRS to persecute dissidents while letting Democrat nonprofits engage in politics. Heck, Democrats steer government money to their activist groups to engage in politics.

Posted by: wodun | Jul 12, 2016 8:11:24 PM

Publius Novus (aka IRS-scandal denier), I'm pretty sure your opinion about this alleged non-scandal would change in a heartbeat if the same tactics were used by a President Trump. I am 100% confident that if the IRS became Trump's attack dog against unions and other progressive groups you'd be the first to call for his impeachment and you'd be just as fast to call for the head of whomever team Trump put as head of the IRS to slow-walk any evidence of wrong-doing.

PS I offer no opinion as to the electability of "the Donald" in this hypothetical, but am merely pointing out that what the Obama Administration and Koskinen have done is, in fact, a scandal of significant magnitude.

Posted by: Smitty | Jul 12, 2016 11:32:59 AM

Fer shoor. And when the investigation of the investigation hits a dry hole, Chairman Chaffetz can investigate that. But if Sec. Clinton wins, I'm sure the Chair is sufficiently resourceful that he won't have to resort to an investigation of an investigation of an investigation. After all, there's the Vince Foster matter, just for starters.

Posted by: Publius Novus | Jul 12, 2016 9:04:22 AM