Witch’s Will For A Mourning In May
I will remain in “mourning” so long as Obama’s unworthy ass sits in the Oval Office.
Quote of the day:
My Top 3 Stories:
Unreal: IRS Official Who Oversaw Targeting Scandal Now In Charge of Obamacare Division
by Guy Benson
Reality is sometimes crazier than fiction. My initial reaction? You must be joking (via ABC News):
The Internal Revenue Service official in charge of the tax-exempt organizations at the time when the unit targeted tea party groups now runs the IRS office responsible for the health care legislation. Sarah Hall Ingram served as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. But Ingram has since left that part of the IRS and is now the director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act office, the IRS confirmed to ABC News today. Her successor, Joseph Grant, is taking the fall for misdeeds at the scandal-plagued unit between 2010 and 2012. During at least part of that time, Grant served as deputy commissioner of the tax-exempt unit.
If you’re waiting for a rimshot, give it up. Smell the reality, friends. And In case you were curious, yes of course Ms. Ingram raked in more than $100,000 in taxpayer-funded bonuses as she oversaw her office’s the abusive targeting scheme. Now she’s off to bigger and better things; namely, monitoring and enforcing your healthcare arrangements.
Conservatives have already started making the IRS-Obamacare nexus clear — a killer talking point — but this new information brings the connection to an entirely new level. The woman who is arguably the individual most directly responsible for the operation of the IRS targeting scandal has been promoted to run Obamacare enforcement. Let that sink in.
Obamacare’s core individual mandate, which the Supreme Court upheld as a tax in 2012, goes into effect next year, and our trustworthy, apolitical pals at the Internal Revenue Service are in charge of policing it. I’m sure being infected by toxic IRS taint will make Obamacare even more popular than it already is.
This Is No Ordinary Scandal
Political abuse of the IRS threatens the basic integrity of our government.
by Peggy Noonan
We are in the midst of the worst Washington scandal since Watergate. The reputation of the Obama White House has, among conservatives, gone from sketchy to sinister, and, among liberals, from unsatisfying to dangerous. No one likes what they’re seeing. The Justice Department assault on the Associated Press and the ugly politicization of the Internal Revenue Service have left the administration’s credibility deeply, probably irretrievably damaged. They don’t look jerky now, they look dirty. The patina of high-mindedness the president enjoyed is gone.
Something big has shifted. The standing of the administration has changed.
As always it comes down to trust. Do you trust the president’s answers when he’s pressed on an uncomfortable story? Do you trust his people to be sober and fair-minded as they go about their work? Do you trust the IRS and the Justice Department? You do not.
Obama is the Ultimate Ad Hominem President
At a fundraising event earlier this week in New York City, President Obama said this:
What’s blocking us right now is a sort of hyper-partisanship in Washington that I was, frankly, hoping to overcome in 2008. My thinking was when we beat them in 2012 that might break the fever, and it’s not quite broken yet. But I am persistent. And I am staying at it. And I genuinely believe there are Republicans out there who would like to work with us but they’re fearful of their base and they’re concerned about what Rush Limbaugh might say about them…
As a consequence we get the kind of gridlock that makes people cynical about government. My intentions over the next 3 ½ years are to govern. … If there are folks who are more interested in winning elections than they are thinking about the next generation then I want to make sure there are consequences to that.
Mr. Obama’s statement, a variation of what he’s said countless times in the past, is worth examining for what it reveals about him.
1. President Obama is once again engaging in what psychiatrists refer to as projection, in which people lay their worst attributes on others.
Worth a Read:
DOJ Didn’t Follow the Law in AP Subpoenas
The White House must be speed-dialing foreign leaders to ask them which one wants to be next to stand next to Barack Obama. There is a danger, though, of lightning striking with each lie he tells.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) said Thursday that it appeared the standard procedures for subpoenaing records from a media organization were not followed in the Justice Department’s seizure of phone records from The Associated Press.
“There is a process when you are subpoenaing documents from a media organization that apparently were not followed in this case and we need to find out why,” Goodlatte told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
Now, even liberal talker Bill Press is calling for Obama to fire Attorney General Eric Holder.
“I have no confidence in Eric Holder anymore, and you shouldn’t either,” Press wrote. “This AP story from the Justice Dept is too far-reaching. Seizing these phone records is a violation of freedom of the press. FIRE Holder.”
On Thursday, Press renewed his call for Holder’s dismissal, writing, “I still haven’t heard a legit justification for the subpoenaing the AP phone records. They didn’t notify AP, they didn’t narrow search.”
“What ‘breach of national security’ are we talking about re the AP story? It’s BS and Holder should be fired,” Press tweeted.
On Fox just now, Democrat talker Julie Roginsky said that Obama’s claim that he only learned about the IRS abuse last Friday, in the press, means one of two things: Either he’s uniformed because his staff aren’t doing their jobs, or he knows more than he is saying and is not being “entirely forthcoming.” It clearly pained Roginsky to speak both of those possibilities.
No, the IRS Should Not Be Policing Tax Exemptions Before It Grants Them
In response to the IRS scandal, voices are rising in defense of the Internal Revenue Service’s need to police the behavior of non-profit 501 (c) groups. Didn’t the IRS need to ensure that groups applying for non-profit status would conduct themselves properly once they had received it? That is the question raised. The answer, actually, is no, not really.
The IRS’s enforcement power has to do with misconduct following the granting of tax-exempt status. It should not presume lack of good faith on the part of those applying for the status. What it can do to them, fairly and legally, is revoke the status based on the organization’s behavior after the exemption is granted—thus effectively crippling and destroying it. That is its policing power. It is the threat of losing the status that acts as the deterrent to violating the guidelines and boundaries established by the law.
When COMMENTARY was threatened in just this way in 2009 (almost certainly as the result of a political witch hunt the origination of which I do not know) we had no doubt that what the IRS was doing was within the scope of its mandate. We knew that because we were and are highly conscious of the boundaries drawn by the law—that we could not endorse candidates or promote the electoral interests of a political party.
Tea Partiers Confront Comcast CEO: Why Would a Conservative Want Their Money to Pay Al Sharpton’s Salary?
Megyn Kelly Explodes At Liberal Guest Over Benghazi Talking Points: ‘Come On! Can We Have Some Honesty?’
Tea Party Victims Detail Intimidation, Claim Vindication
The IRS’ actions confirm the worst fears of conservatives.
Sharyl Attkisson on Benghazi: “The media’s not always consistent in the vigor that they use to pursue a given topic”
Via the Brody File, here’s big-media’s most dogged Benghazi reporter confirming, as tactfully as she can, that she too thinks the press is in the tank. Lest you doubt her conclusion about a certain, shall we say, curious incuriosity among her colleagues, look around at the news today and see how many reporters you find asking obvious follow-up questions about the Benghazi e-mail dump last night.
The most obvious:
Are there any key e-mail exchanges from September 12 and 13? The document string starts on the 14th, three days after the attack and with the CIA somehow already having concluded that the whole thing was “spontaneously inspired” by the protests at the embassy in Cairo. How did they arrive at that?
And where oh where is the determination, long since debunked but repeatedly mentioned by Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice in the immediate aftermath, that the Mohammed movie had anything to do with this? That’s not in any version of the talking points. Did Hillary and Rice simply assume that that’s what inspired the Cairo protest, ergo it must have indirectly inspired the Benghazi attack too? Because, as Tom Joscelyn convincingly argues, the Cairo protest was intended not so much to protest the film as to celebrate Al Qaeda on the anniversary of 9/11 — starting with the fact that it was Ayman al-Zawahiri’s own brother who helped organize it
Cockroach Of The Day:
Obama’s tapped-out trust
by George F. Will
Leaving aside the seriousness of lawlessness, and the corruption of our civic culture by the professionally pious, this past week has been amusing. There was the spectacle of advocates of an ever-larger regulatory government expressing shock about such government’s large capacity for misbehavior. And, entertainingly, the answer to the question “Will Barack Obama’s scandals derail his second-term agenda?” was a question: What agenda?
The scandals are interlocking and overlapping in ways that drain his authority. Everything he advocates requires Americans to lavish on government something that his administration, and big government generally, undermines: trust.