Before getting to the opinion of the group ‘Cause of Action’, allow me to just highlight the trail and how it appears to be falling into place.

January 2010 – President Obama gives a state of the union speech where he decries the recent Supreme Court ruling “Citizens United”.  (video here)  I’m also going to put the video below and make an odd request:
Please, watch it 5 to 8 times!   At each time look at the key people who react and/or rise after Obama’s words.   Most have noted Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito’s infamous mouthing of the words “that’s not true“, but I need you to look beyond Alito and the unknown Supreme court Senior aide {female at end of row}.

Look at Treasury Sec Tim Geithner and Attorney General Eric Holder.  Then replay and look at Senator Harry Reid, Senator Dick Durban and Senator Chuck Schumer {seated behind the Supremes}.   Pictures and video are worth thousands of words.
SUMMER 2010 –  In 2014 hindsight we know after this State of Union Speech – The IRS Tax Head Lois Lerner and the DOJ are in discussions about whether the Tax Enforcement Unit inside the DOJ should be assisting the IRS with investigation, using the FBI, of 501(c)(4) entities that are specifically the ire of the Obama administration as a result of that Citizens United ruling.  (more…)

In what might well be a very revealing week ahead the IRS will appear in two different court jurisdictions to explain the now infamous, lost but never reported, missing Lois Lerner emails.

On July 10th the IRS will have to explain in federal court the context of their failure to preserve evidence for the longstanding Judicial Watch lawsuit.   On May 13th 2013, the Lois Lerner emails were the subject of a specific JW lawsuit over non-compliance with FOIA.  The IRS has never told the court in this case that any emails were lost/missing.
The following day, on July 11th, the IRS will try to block a motion filed by Houston based True The Vote which seeks to have independent outside digital forensics experts comb through the IRS email files to see if the IRS claim is valid.   Judge Reggie Walton has agreed to hear arguments in support of True The Vote’s motion. (more…)

If media folks are finding sources willing to give out this much specific detail, it’s only a matter of time before the entire lid blows off the IRS scandal.  And the more that comes out, the more it looks like a DOJ initiated scheme using the IRS, instead of an IRS scheme using the DOJ.

(Via Daily Caller) Ex-Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner tried to audit Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley after Grassley blocked President Obama’s nominee to head the Department of Justice (DOJ) tax division, an executive branch insider told The Daily Caller.

Grassley made it more difficult for the IRS and DOJ to work together to target conservative groups by blocking Obama’s political appointee Mary L. Smith from taking over the DOJ Tax Division, which prosecutes criminal cases for the IRS. Grassley held up the nomination in early 2010, just as Lerner and fellow IRS officials were mapping out their targeting strategy. The White House later withdrew Smith’s nomination. (more…)

Headline reflects the “Cliff Notes” Version:

…”Well, as the constitutional lawyer who sits in the Oval Office would tell you is, he would read the entire decision before he passed judgment in terms of his own legal analysis. What we have been able to assess so far … is that there is a problem that has been exposed, which is that there are now a group of women of an indeterminate size who no longer have access to free contraceptive coverage simply because of some religious views held, not by them necessarily, but by their bosses… We disagree and the constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office disagrees with that conclusion from the Supreme Court. And that’s why we–primarily, because he is concerned about the impact it could have on the health of those women”….

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says corporations can hold religious objections that allow them to opt out of the new health law requirement that they cover contraceptives for women.
The justices’ 5-4 decision Monday is the first time that the high court has ruled that profit-seeking businesses can hold religious views under federal law. And it means the Obama administration must search for a different way of providing free contraception to women who are covered under objecting companies’ health insurance plans. (more…)

Put forth without comment. What do you think about this ?

Yesterday we shared a potentially explosive new aspect to the IRS targeting of groups antithetical to the White House.   In essence Lerner’s attorney, William Taylor III, told a politico reporter that his client was responding to the DOJ’s request for information, not soliciting them.
Yes, there is good reason for people who have followed this story to feel as if it really wouldn’t, or couldn’t, or won’t make a difference.   Given the current state of political affairs a great deal of righteous frustration that nothing shall be done regardless of who initiated the illegal machination is not misplaced…..
Also, Yes, against the recent Cochran V McDaniel outcome in Mississippi this frustrated sentiment is justified, very justified.    And yes, the establishment GOP is just as opposed to the Tea Party as the establishment Democrats in this regard.   Yes to all of this…
However, it really does make a difference.

If the DOJ initiated the inquiry to the IRS under the auspices of FBI investigation of 501(c)(4) group investigation -as the claim by attorney Taylor apparently makes clear- many of the outcomes toward the groups in question reconcile.
Take the example of “True The Vote”, and “Gibson Guitar”.  When both groups were under scrutiny they were visited by various federal agencies like:  the EPA, ATF, OSHA as well as IRS.
However, if the Department of Justice is the internal hub for all the various agencies to assemble their marching orders, then a very specific trail of known evidence is also possible based on outcomes.
(more…)

WASHINGTON DC – Internal Revenue Service officials will have to explain to a federal judge July 10 why the tax agency didn’t inform the court that Lois Lerner’s emails had been lost.
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Emmett G. Sullivan quickly granted a motion filed earlier today by attorneys for Judicial Watch seeking a courtroom status conference “as soon as possible to discuss the IRS’s failure to fulfill its duties to this court under the law, as well as other ramifications of this lawsuit.”

(more…)

WOAH – BOMBSHELL !!
The plot thickens.  We might just have found a biggie….
In a recent Politico interview  (publish date 6/27/14) with the Lois Lerner’s attorney William Taylor III an interesting aspect is buried midway through page #2.
During part of the interview Politico author Rachel Bade inquires about the 1.1 million pages of documents Lerner sent to the Department of Justice that became an issue when discovered by the House Oversight Committee on June 9th 2014.   BACKSTORY HERE.
The documents were sent from IRS to DOJ on a series of 21 discs (CD ROMS) and, according to the admission from the DOJ, “contained legally protected taxpayer information that should not have ever been sent to the FBI“.
Some of the 501(c)(4) documentation included confidential tax records “Schedule B” of IRS filings.   These Schedule B’s outline parties who contribute to, affiliate with, or people who support the 501 organization.   Those tax filing schedules are illegal to distribute.
Why the DOJ waited to inform congress, and why they only did so after Daryl Issa found out about their existence, was a matter congressional consternation but no-one made a big deal about it.
Indeed all prior details and media reports of the interaction have been framed around the substance of legality, and illegality,  for the IRS to actually send the confidential taxpayer data.  This is indeed a concerning aspect – but we think we’ve uncovered something considerably more alarming about both the timing, and the substance.
Inside the Politico article is an explosively revealing defensively framed answer from attorney Taylor.   He is specifically and directly stating it was NOT Lerner who initiated the inquiry:

…” […]  Taylor said Lerner didn’t know [about the unlawful confidential aspect] and sent them because Justice requested the documents”…

.

(more…)

Thirty-five of us, give or take a few. Standing in front of the Orpheum Theater in San Francisco, on an overcast evening in June. Holding signs, protesting the woman who was scheduled to speak inside the theater that night: Hillary Clinton.

Not a large crowd of protesters, but it didn’t matter. The area in front of the Orpheum is not spacious, and we had a perfect position: every single person waiting in line had to pass by within ten feet of every one of us. They couldn’t help but see that we were there.
The ticket holders made a long line, a large group. Most of them looked like progressives. If that’s a “classist” statement, so be it. Not many under the age of twenty. Gays, “intellectuals”, people dressed casual-chic for a night with their current political lodestar. “I’m Ready for Hillary”signs, stickers, and buttons. Stray comments of “Grow up!”, “Where did you go to school?”, etc., but on the whole they were quiet. Likely they didn’t expect us to be there, so they didn’t come prepared with snippy remarks.
This one was different than most of the protests I’d attended in the past; different largely because of the intimacy of confrontation. Other times we’d been on roadsides waiting for Obama’s motorcade, or counter-protesting with Obama supporters, facing-off across Market Street as he fundraised with the Bay Area elite. This was like gathering around a crowd waiting in line to see a movie. (more…)