Patterico's Pontifications

11/29/2013

Cancer Patient Loses Coverage, Blames ObamaCare . . . Gets Audited

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:26 am

So earlier this month, a cancer patient named Bill Elliott went on Fox News with Megyn Kelly, complaining that his health insurance had been cancelled. He believes it was because of ObamaCare.

So far, nothing particularly new here. We’ve heard these stories — and you know there are plenty more out there.

It seems as though the Obama administration knows it, too — and wants to discourage more criticism. FrontPageMag.com reports (via Instapundit):

[Bill Elliott] went on FOX News where his story was picked up by C. Steven Tucker, a health insurance broker who helped him keep his insurance.

Now suddenly Bill Elliott is being audited for 2009 with an interview only scheduled in April 2014. Assuming he lives that long. That might be a coincidence, but Tucker is being audited back to 2003.

That’s a rather strange coincidence.

Here’s the timing of all this. The above video was posted on November 7, 2013. On November 14, Sara Marie Brenner wrote about it in the Washington Times, and explained the help that Tucker had given Elliott. As Tucker explains on his blog, Tucker was on the radio on November 13 and 15 discussing the matter. Twenty days after Elliott’s appearance on Fox News, Elliott reported the certified letter from the IRS, on this radio show broadcast on November 27:

Skip ahead to 23:00 to hear about it. Due to government cutbacks, Elliott gets to wait until April 2014 for his interview. In an update on his blog, Tucker reported news of Elliott’s audit, and disclosed that he was being audited too:

On November 27, 2013 Bill joined Rocky D again on South Carolina’s AM1340 WQSC. The good news? Bill is now in full remission thanks in large part to the life saving treatment he was able to continue receiving because his illegally cancelled policy was restored. The bad news? He is now being audited by the IRS and they are now coming after ME all the way back to 2003.

Oddly enough, Dr. Ben Carson was audited right after criticizing ObamaCare.

My, the coincidences do pile up, don’t they?

MEANWHILE: This boy has cancer. He lost his coverage due to information getting lost during the ObamaCare transition, affecting his chemotherapy. His mother was told that the correction of the problem could be expedited only if he were pregnant or an illegal. (No, really. That’s what his mother says she was told.)

This all brings up a significant problem, which is, of course: how is Obama going to audit this kid?

Oh well, there’s always his parents. And if they don’t pay income taxes, then the president could just audit the reporter who broadcast the story. And maybe the TV station that did the story has a license up for renewal. Heck, maybe the station owner visits porn sites and can simply be embarrassed into silence.

There’s always a way.

60 Responses to “Cancer Patient Loses Coverage, Blames ObamaCare . . . Gets Audited”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (d87e46)

  2. This is scary. Notice also the op-ed in the Post suggesting that the two-term limit on the Presidency be eliminated.

    Didn’t Ben Franklin worry that we all secretly wanted a king? Kind of sounds like we do. But the problem, as always, is that you don’t truly get to choose what kind of king you get. And it may not always please those clamoring for it now.

    I look at all the precedents being set: using the IRS as a weapon, selective enforcement of parts of law, removing the filibuster. Scary times. Now, the Left has no problem at all being hypocritical about this; they fully expect to go back to Plan A if a Republican gets into office.

    But you know, they aren’t thinking it through. I recommend they recall the sad story of Robespierre during the Terror.

    Simon Jester (9883c5)

  3. The sad part is, I bet JEF didn’t even order this. It’s baked into the IRS cake. It is now systemic. And there are no restraints whatsoever despite it being public knowledge and despite Issa’s constant posturing. Nothing will change. It does not bode well for the future.

    Gazzer (e6ddf8)

  4. A continuing criminal enterprise, top to bottom. A surprise? Not in the least.

    Colonel Haiku (9f11ce)

  5. the UN should condemn American human rights abuses much more loudly than they do I think

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  6. It looks like the IRS can decide to survey an audit (accept a return as filed) “where the taxpayer is deceased, has a terminal illness, or other extraordinary circumstances exist.” If so, I think that should apply to this case.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  7. The really scary part is that nobody finds this surprising. Auditing political opponents should be big news, but it isn’t.

    The House should put all this together, hold hearings and impeach. Sure, there cannot be a conviction, but that’s not the point. The point is not to acquiesce and to make the Senate Democrats defend this stuff in the next election.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  8. Meanwhile: WaPo op-ed calls for letting Obama run again.

    Not sure how I feel about that. Sure he should lose, but he should have lost last time.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  9. Obama told Barbara Walters he may stay in DC so his youngest daughter can finish school there. I guess liberals think he might as well be President if he’s going to stay around.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  10. I’m inclined to agree with Gazzer on this one. This stuff is probably happening without the benefit of an order from Obama or Valerie Jarrett (though it wouldn’t at all surprise me if she has been fully briefed on this operation). Obamacare calls for the hiring of 16,000 new IRS personnel. That’s a whole bunch of new supervisory positions for current agents and a bunch of director positions for current supervisors — basically a real boon to the career advancement goals of this bureaucracy. Should it be surprising that they will do whatever it takes to protect the Obamacare gravy train?

    What the GOP ought to do is immediately propose legislation to undo the hiring of the 16,000 agents. Cite instances like this and like the whole Lois Lerner situation, and declare the IRS is an out of control politicized bureaucracy and must be brought to heel. Make the Democrats defend the IRS and its power grab. The GOP should also call for the mass firing of every single management-level IRS employee. Then let’s see which ones of them are willing to step forward and blow the whistle on political pressures within the office.

    JVW (709bc7)

  11. Obama told Barbara Walters he may stay in DC so his youngest daughter can finish school there. I guess liberals think he might as well be President if he’s going to stay around.

    Nightmare of nightmares: Hillary is elected in 2016. As a thank-you to the African-American community, and as payback to Obama for naming her Sec of State, she nominates him to the Supreme Court to replace the retiring Anthony Kennedy. The Senate is tied up 50-50, so the Dems extend the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominees in order to end a GOP filibuster and Vice President Elizabeth Warren casts the tie-breaking vote to make him the newest associate justice by a 51-50 margin.

    JVW (709bc7)

  12. I think this is more than bureaucrats doing as they please. The IRS has been doing this since Day One of Obama’s first term. That’s too big a coincidence for me to believe the federal bureaucrats suddenly felt free to do whatever they wanted.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  13. Scum bag POTUS, scum bag followers.

    Rodney King's Spirit (5c6cbf)

  14. Can they file a FIOA request to find out how exactly the IRS detected they were picked for audit?

    Hired Mind (7f3e0d)

  15. I think Obama’s future is on MSNBC, appearing for 10 minutes or so across each of MSNBC’s primetime line up. He’ll get paid millions but won’t add any viewers except for first month looky lous. And he can do it as long as he likes, no matter the economics. He’s too smart to not shape his own legacy and too cool not to do it on TV.

    For a laugh just imagine the reviews. Or even just the headlines. When will Chauncey Community Organizer go away?

    East Bay Jay (a5dac7)

  16. I think Obama’s future is on MSNBC. . . . He’ll get paid millions but won’t add any viewers except for first month looky lous. . . . He’s too smart to not shape his own legacy and too cool not to do it on TV.

    Well, that’s an interesting conjecture. One glaring hole in my Supreme Court idea is that it would seem that justices of the court actually have to do a modicum of hard work and study, and it doesn’t appear that Obama wants to do much beyond reading speeches written for him by a staff of speechwriters. I suppose he could delegate all of his Supreme Court work to his clerks — and no doubt he would be able to attract the top left-wing law school graduates every single year — but even having to sit through oral arguments is probably way too mundane for him.

    So yeah, I think the TV talking head idea would be just about right. The irony is that he would be nothing more than the left’s version of Sarah Palin on Fox.

    JVW (709bc7)

  17. Then let’s see which ones of them are willing to step forward and blow the whistle on political pressures within the office.

    Or, clearer, say that the next Republican president will prosecute any IRS employee who is involved in, follows orders to, or knows of and does not report use of IRS power to suppress grass-roots political activity. And rather than threatening peoples jobs, threaten their pensions.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  18. That’s too big a coincidence for me to believe the federal bureaucrats suddenly felt free to do whatever they wanted.

    Wink wink nudge nude saynomore.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  19. nudGe. gah.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  20. Obama’s future is on MSNBC

    Perhaps, but Fox would pay more. Obama Nation, right between Hannity and O’Reilley.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  21. I also think Obama should run for President again.

    I think he should win the Democratic primary because the Democrats won’t dare raise a legal challenge lest they lose the black vote and no one else will have any standing to raise a legal challenge.

    Then we see if states put him on the ballot in clear defiance of laws.

    It would be a great way to draw a line. It would give us clarity.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  22. Meanwhile they are focused on the unspeakable horror that is the music teacher’s guild

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/365125/bullying-civil-society-jeffrey-h-anderson

    narciso (3fec35)

  23. No. I don’t think so, he would Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter on steroids,

    narciso (3fec35)

  24. I don’t understand how the Dems do not see the exorbitant increase of IRS personnel as dangerous in that all Americans – whether left or right – are subject to the whims of the agency. And once its increased and it has broader powers, it will not be undone.

    Dana (45070c)

  25. Dana, think of the Dems as a homeowner and the IRS as a slightly-crazy pitbull residing in their yard (an unkempt yard, I should mention, with junk strewn about). The Dems like the fact that the pitbull snarls and threatens their antagonistic neighbors (the GOP), so they are willing to risk the possibility that at some point the pitbull will really freak out and attack its master.

    JVW (709bc7)

  26. Gubmint by Gangsta, itza thug’s life, playah, know what I’m sayin’…

    Colonel Haiku (9f11ce)

  27. They will push and push until the people won’t take the misuse of government or the oppression anymore.

    Colonel Haiku (9f11ce)

  28. We need to see the House start filing Articles of Impeachment. Start with the IRS officials, then Eric Holder, and keep working up.

    SPQR (768505)

  29. They will push and push until the people won’t take the misuse of government or the oppression anymore.

    Real Soon Now™

    Kevin M (131754)

  30. a couple years back, when i actually had income, i filed my taxes and the IRS sent mw a letter saying they had reviewed my submission & made some changes.

    being of sound mind, i didn’t object, and they sent me my massive return…

    fast forward about 6 months, and after a signature or two on various petitions on the WH page, using my Army e-mail addy, i was graced by a letter from those ba5tards saying they had looked at my taxes again and now i suddenly owed them money & penalties.

    F the IRS & every sorry sack who w*rks for them: villainous scum, one and all.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  31. Grain of salt on the audits? Or do we have a copy of the letter.

    I keep thinking that, but then each story is proven true, but I want to be skeptical for the sake of the truth, that O-care stinks.

    Patricia (be0117)

  32. To repeat: Stewart Baker’s main point was “Why wouldn’t we consider doing to Islamic extremists what Glenn Greenwald does routinely to Republicans?”
    Stewart Baker, Understanding the Enemy

    Ibidem (1e3d24)

  33. #28,SPQR’s got the right idea: the House should open debate on Articles of Impeachment. Our nation is in decline under the illegitimate yoke of an intransigent tyrant. Barack Obama’s presidency has been marked by the suffering of our people. In nearly every case, Obama’s obdurate pursuit of pigheaded policies has not only failed to correct problems, he has made them worse.

    Other than armed rebellion, our people must depend on their Congressional representatives to protect against the Executive Branch’s heavy handed abuse of the rights of our citizens. It’s past time for Congress to do its most important job.

    Barack Obama and dozens of his black-hearted criminal co-conspirators inside the White House and in the various regulatory agencies are more than guilty of a high crimes, felonies, and misdemeanors against the people and against the Republic. If our nation is to survive, if our people are to prosper, this failed President and his criminal cabal must be removed from office. And, it’s the solemn duty of our elected members of the House of Representatives to bring the case for impeachment to the floor for open debate.

    ropelight (94ce35)

  34. A long-term cancer patient, with a lot more urgent things on his mind than taxes, may have thrown up a red flag or two to the IRS computer. Maybe something as simple as interest from a bank account, or a gain from a stock sale, or mutual fund switch, or retirement account withdrawal, etc., that the IRS got a 1099/whatever for from the financial institution, but not anything from him on his return.

    nk (dbc370)

  35. ropelight, have they told you if you have Parsonage-Turner by any chance? My favorite wife had it, and it drove her nuts for months not having a diagnosis of what it was. And she’s a ****ing neurologist! Hers cleared up.

    nk (dbc370)

  36. the late Mr. Awlaki, among other figures, fall into that category,

    narciso (3fec35)

  37. nk,

    They are auditing Elliott for tax year 2009. Maybe he had cancer then, too, but how do you explain his insurance agent getting audited, too?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  38. I’m only speculating, DRJ.

    You know me. I like to think the best of people, even the IRS. I don’t have a cynical bone in my body. ;)

    And how are you? Eat a lot? Despite my best intentions, my calorie thermometer shut down my appetite and I did not eat half of what I had planned to eat. ;)

    nk (dbc370)

  39. nk, I wish your assumptions were correct, because the more plausible reason — as suggested by DRJ — is that the IRS is doing to Elliot and Tucker (much less to Ben Carson) what it has been doing to Tea-Party or similar type of non-profit organizations over the past few years.

    Keep in mind that such contemptible behavior would be occurring in the glare of all the negative publicity directed at the IRS over the recent past. Simply put, there apparently are truly rogue elements within that agency. We’re looking at banana-republic, Venezuela-lite dynamics at work. We’re looking at a variation of the grotesque type of manipulation going on in Argentina, where its government has made it illegal to report the actual rate of inflation.

    I’m so disgusted and sickened by what’s happening to the US, that perhaps a let’s-give-benefit-of-the-doubt-to-Nidal-Hasan mentality isn’t such a bad idea or egregious response after all.

    Mark (58ea35)

  40. I skipped the meal this year but not the football, and that’s the most important part at my house.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  41. Since the IRS is stonewalling investigations, there is no reason to assume any act by them is in goodfaith.

    SPQR (768505)

  42. Agreed. The IRS has been auditing Obama critics since the first week of his first term. That’s too big a coincidence.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  43. How do we know the IRS hasn’t been auditing Obama critics since before week one of his first term?

    They’re the kind of people who would have started auditing Obama critics just as soon as he got elected in November 2008. These people at the IRS don’t need written orders. Obama is big government. The IRS is big government. They’re fans of each other.

    Obamacare means 16,000 more IRS agents (Treasury Employee Union members) and greater power for their agency. You’re dreaming if you think they wouldn’t do this on their own, and brazenly as long as they know they’re protected.

    Steve57 (338553)

  44. Probably before the 2008 election, too. Just not so audaciously. They can always find a reason to audit you.

    Steve57 (338553)

  45. Associated Press via drudgereport.com: You can take our word for it. Americans don’t trust each other anymore. We’re not talking about the loss of faith in big institutions such as the government, the church or Wall Street, which fluctuates with events. For four decades, a gut-level ingredient of democracy – trust in the other fellow – has been quietly draining away.

    These days, only one-third of Americans say most people can be trusted. Half felt that way in 1972, when the General Social Survey first asked the question. Forty years later, a record high of nearly two-thirds say “you can’t be too careful” in dealing with people.

    An AP-GfK poll conducted last month found that Americans are suspicious of each other in everyday encounters. Less than one-third expressed a lot of trust in clerks who swipe their credit cards, drivers on the road, or people they meet when traveling.

    Does it matter that Americans are suspicious of one another? Yes, say worried political and social scientists. What’s known as “social trust” brings good things. A society where it’s easier to compromise or make a deal. Where people are willing to work with those who are different from them for the common good. Where trust appears to promote economic growth. Distrust, on the other hand, seems to encourage corruption. At the least, it diverts energy to counting change, drawing up 100-page legal contracts and building gated communities.

    “It’s like the rules of the game,” Clark said. “When trust is low, the way we react and behave with each other becomes less civil.”

    “The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency.

    It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama Presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their President.

    The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.

    The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President.”

    ^ Such trends apply to just about any society (and not just the US) where liberal instincts and biases — either naive or hard-bitten, or both — have swamped or pummeled common sense, with very few exceptions.

    Human nature is to blame in general.

    Mark (58ea35)

  46. #32 Patricia

    Being the veteran of 3 audits, with a 4th ongoing I agree that without the letters from the IRS and absent any knowledge of each persons finances, it is hard to sit here and yell harassment.

    One question I also had was about the 20 days… the IRS does nothing in 20 days. The only thing they do fast is bank your check.

    Another question was about the guy who is being audited back to 2003. My understanding is that the IRS normally does not dig back more than 4 years unless they uncover evidence of willful negligence or tax evasion. Then they keep tugging the string back as far as it’ll go. Lets put it this way… if they are digging around 2003, the IRS thinks he has a body buried back there. Hopefully he isn’t/hasn’t stupid enough to be representing himself.

    I have no doubt there are people in the IRS who are tormenting conservatives. Look at all the people who get dinged after speaking out, and it seems to be a trend. There has to be a few closet conservatives in the IRS, so why aren’t there leaks of tax returns of Democrats? I think it is a values thing… most conservatives feel that this type of behavior is wrong and two wrongs don’t make right.

    I was recently audited for the 4th time in twenty years. This time I get other audit letters inside my existing audit. The left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.

    1st audit ever was in 1993. I got bad advice from my CPA. Payroll tax issue. Some independent contractors are reclassified as employees.
    Paid mid 5 figures to the IRS and the State of CA

    2 Was in 2006. Went back to 2002. No change. Took a year and $5000 to earn that result

    3 2010. They went back to 2008. Sold two homes that I’d built. IRS reworked my returns and said I owed high 6 figures. We got it down to low six figures

    4. Currently under audit back to 2010. For some reason the IRS keeps spitting out new audit notices when really they should just be expanding the scope of the existing.
    I expect this one will result in little or no change.
    I will probably spend $10,000 to get that result.

    I doubt any of this is political, although it could very well be some connected person wants to silence dissent… God knows this town is full of rich Obama donors and maybe the local IRS officers are highly partisan (I know one audit agent’s wife quite well… her husband is a conservative guy).
    It isn’t likely political, but instead due to the types of businesses I have and due to the mistakes or prior misinterpretations of tax regulations.

    It is maddening to see Jon Corzine, Charlie Rangel walk away scot free but that is life… on the other hand I see Steven A. Cohen of the SAC hedge fund got dinged for $1.2B by the SEC and no doubt the IRS is going to go fishing…. oh, wait… Cohen went from being a Democrat bundler in 2008 to being a big Republican bundler…. hmmmm

    steveg (794291)

  47. I left out this part:

    I wrote a series of letters to the local paper editorial page that criticized Democrats for spending away the future, and also pointing out lies about Bush, using Bush as bogeyman to avoid responsibility. I pointed out that Obama could not even bring himself to be truthful about something as simple as the math surrounding his signature achievement Obamacare.
    I also called out our local representative Lois Capps for saying she would only serve two years (her husband died while in office and she took over his seat) and for being a do nothing except as a Democrat rubber stamp… all she does is act like a bobblehead.
    I am registered as Republican in a very very blue city.

    steveg (794291)

  48. Hmmm,

    First, since we are talking about someone from Chicago, synonymous with political machinery, who suggested one bring guns to knife fights
    it would not be surprising for the fed government to be treated just like the local political scene, full of winks and nods and seeing to it that what needs to get done is done,
    and like most bullies, it will continue as long as it is allowed
    Whether beginning impeachment proceedings is the best way to go about it, I don’t know. I’m thinking it is not, since many of the low info or misled info voters will just react negatively rather than pay attention.
    But I don’t know.

    Second, not sure why nk thinks that ropelight may have Parsonage-Turner (did I miss something?), but it was interesting to read, in particular because it sounds quite familiar to a curious syndrome involving the lower extremity as well. While one variant is labeled “Diabetic Proximal Amyotrophy”, blood sugar levels seem to be poorly correlated with it, and it also can be provoked by general anesthesia/surgery like Parsonage-Turner. Hmmmm.

    MD in Philly (from a different computer and location) (fc692c)

  49. Steve57:

    You’re dreaming if you think they wouldn’t do this on their own, and brazenly as long as they know they’re protected.

    I never said IRS agents wouldn’t do this on their own. My point is I don’t think this is solely attributable to rogue IRS agents. Instead, I believe Obama and his political surrogates have been involved in politically-motivated audits from the beginning, and that involvement gave susceptible IRS agents a license to continue doing it.

    But I could be wrong so I’m not going to be as rude as you were and claim you’re dreaming if you don’t agree with me.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  50. We need to see the House start filing Articles of Impeachment. Start with the IRS officials, then Eric Holder, and keep working up.

    Yes, and the NSA spying, which matters to a lot of Democrats also. And refusing to execute the law. And illegally subordinated crony loans. And lying about Obamacare. And Benghazi.

    It begins to add up.

    They should do this even if there is no chance of conviction: These things have to be marked as unacceptable lest a precedent is established. Also, the Democrats in the Senate have to be made to choose publicly between the President and the Constitution, and pay the political consequences.

    Kevin M (536c5d)

  51. That sounds awful, steveg, like half your time is taken over by those savages.

    Patricia (be0117)

  52. It is expensive and nerve wracking. Some of it has been my fault, in the sense that I made some record keeping errors. I was right in the macro, wrong in the details.
    It’s a very intrusive and adversarial process. Agents need to justify the audit, so they can always find something… That is why I recommend getting a representative that knows the tax code well enough to counter them

    Steveg (794291)

  53. You learn something new everyday, DRJ. I have never in my life heard anyone say “you’re dreaming” is rude. Just that it’s roughly equivalent to saying “you’re wrong” or “you’re mistaken.”

    As in (dream or dreaming when used as a verb):

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dreaming

    dream (drm)
    n.
    1. A series of images, ideas, emotions, and sensations occurring involuntarily in the mind during certain stages of sleep.
    2. A daydream; a reverie.
    3. A state of abstraction; a trance.
    4. A wild fancy or hope.
    5. A condition or achievement that is longed for; an aspiration: a dream of owning their own business.
    6. One that is exceptionally gratifying, excellent, or beautiful: Our new car runs like a dream.
    v. dreamed or dreamt (drmt), dream·ing, dreams
    v.intr.
    1. To experience a dream in sleep: dreamed of meeting an old friend.
    2. To daydream.
    3. To have a deep aspiration: dreaming of a world at peace.
    4. To regard something as feasible or practical: I wouldn’t dream of trick skiing on icy slopes.
    v.tr.
    1. To experience a dream of while asleep: Did it storm last night, or did I dream it?
    2. To conceive of; imagine.
    3. To pass (time) idly or in reverie.
    Phrasal Verbs:
    dream on Informal
    Used in the imperative to indicate that a statement or suggestion is improbable or unrealistic.

    dream up
    To invent; concoct: dreamed up a plan to corner the market.

    Steve57 (338553)

  54. Steve57
    I disagree if you are saying that any individual agent can initiate an audit, because they can’t.
    I worked for one of the IRS’ auditors at the exact same time I was going through what turned out to be a very expensive audit.
    His wife ratted him out early in the process… probably so I wouldn’t ask for cash or something awkward like that.

    I told him I was under audit by his office…. by a different agent and he told me they each have their own case load and are absolutely forbidden to discuss their cases except with their supervisor. He said that my agent was not part of his group.

    So I still did everything more than perfect in case around the water cooler they ever slipped up and chatted about home improvement projects and contractors.

    Lower agents who are auditing you might make things worse for you if they despise your political beliefs, but it would be hard for them to get someone to initiate an audit.
    I think the supervisor of a local office could ask the regional office for an audit based on information (hate mail).

    Guys like Dr. Carson are a different story. IRS employees union leadership could easily see the Dr. on TV and call someone partisan they know high up at IRS national audit central and have the letter sent… so maybe I was wrong about everything taking more than 20 days, but I think Carsons audit was more likely already in the works.
    If he feels he was targeted, he should file an FOIA for everything from 2008-2013 that has his taxpayer ID’s on it, because the IRS can’t operate without using your SS# or FEIN# or TIN# etc

    steveg (794291)

  55. steveg, I wasn’t commenting about who has the authority to start an audit. Just that I’m sure there are people at the IRS who do act in a partisan political manner. And not just at the IRS. There are other agencies that can make your life a living hell. Due to the bureaucratic culture at these agencies people at the IRS will not rat on them.

    For instance:

    http://www.twincities.com/ci_23445937/george-f-will-theres-more-much-more-lois

    In the fall of 1996, at the campaign’s climax, Democrats filed with the Federal Elections Commission charges alleging campaign finance violations by Salvi’s campaign. These charges dominated the campaign’s closing days. Salvi spoke by phone with the head of the FEC’s Enforcement Division, who he remembers saying: “Promise me you will never run for office again, and we’ll drop this case.” He was speaking to Lois Lerner.

    After losing to Durbin, Salvi spent four years and $100,000 fighting the FEC, on whose behalf FBI agents visited his elderly mother demanding to know, concerning her $2,000 contribution to her son’s campaign, where she got “that kind of money.” When the second of two federal courts held that the charges against Salvi were spurious, the lawyer arguing for the FEC was Lois Lerner.

    As Mark Hemingway points out throughout this article, Lois Lerner had a habit targeting people not only for their conservative viewpoints but for their religious beliefs:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/irss-lerner-had-history-harassment-inappropriate-religious-inquiries-fec_725004.html?nopager=1

    …If that all sounds like it could simply be Bopp’s jaundiced characterization of the FEC’s inquiries, Bopp’s testimony includes this transcript of the FEC’s deposition of Lt. Col. Oliver North. …The letter Q denotes the FEC’s lawyer, the letter A denotes North’s responses, and the letter O is used to represent attorneys representing North and the Christian Coalition:

    Q: (reading from a letter from Oliver North to Pat Robertson) “‘Betsy and I thank you for your kind regards and prayers.’ The next paragraph is, ‘Please give our love to Dede and I hope to see you in the near future.’ Who is Dede?”

    A: “That is Mrs. Robertson.”

    Q: “What did you mean in paragraph 2, about thanking -you and your wife thanking Pat Robertson for kind regards?”

    A: “Last time I checked in America, prayers were still legal. I am sure that Pat had said he was praying for my family and me in some correspondence or phone call.”

    …Q: “During the time that you knew Pat Robertson, was it your impression that he had – he was praying for you?”

    O: “I object. There is no allegation that praying creates a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act and there is no such allegation in the complaint. This is completely irrelevant and intrusive on the religious beliefs of this witness.”

    O: “It is a very strange line of questioning. You have got to be kidding, really. What are you thinking of, to ask questions like that? I mean, really. I have been to some strange depositions, but I don’t think I have ever had anybody inquire into somebody’s prayers. I think that is really just outrageous. And if you want to ask some questions regarding political activities, please do and then we can get over this very quickly. But if you want to ask abou somebody’s religious activities, that is outrageous.”

    Q: “I am allowed to make-’’

    O: “We are allowed not to answer and if you think the Commission is going to permit you to go forward with a question about somebody’s prayers, I just don’t believe that. I just don’t for a moment believe that. I find that the most outrageous line of questioning. I am going to instruct my witness not to answer.”

    Q: “On what grounds?”

    O: “We are not going to let you inquire about people’s religious beliefs or activities, period. If you want to ask about someone’s prayers-Jeez, I don’t know what we are thinking of. But the answer is, no, people are not going to respond to questions about people’s prayers, no.”

    Q: “Will you take that, at the first break, take it up- we will do whatever we have to do.”

    O: “You do whatever you think you have to do to get them to answer questions about what people are praying about.”

    None of her colleagues or supervisors reined her in. Why would they? I’m sure as far as they were concerned she was hounding the right people. But note it wasn’t Lois Lerner, head of the FEC’s enforcement division at the time. It was a couple of her flunkies threatening to to do whatever they had to do to interrogate LCOL North about the content of his prayers.

    My point wasn’t about IRS audits but that these bureaucrats don’t turn into attack dogs at the flip of a switch. That’s the culture. They don’t need written orders from the WH. And I wasn’t merely referring to federal bureaucrats. Remember Samuel Wurzelbacher from the 2008 presidential campaign? Of course you do.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/11/20/ohio_ig_report_joe_the_plumber.html

    Ohio IG Report: Joe the Plumber’s Records Were Improperly Searched

    And released, I might add.

    The director of an Ohio human services agency has been suspended for a month without pay and faces review by a county prosecutor for using confidential state databases to find personal information on “Joe the Plumber.” She will also face review for using her state e-mail address to help Barack Obama’s fundraising by identifying potential contributors and offering her own $2,500 donation.

    Then there’s this whopper in the IG’s report:

    The report said that while the searches “were done in the midst of a political campaign,” there was no evidence the information was released “in an effort to support any political activity or agenda.”

    Apparently state and county employees, such as this IG, circle the wagons when it’s one of them. I know several state and county employees who are conservative. They are few and far between. Some are the only conservatives in the building, or as far as they know in the entire county. And among their liberal co-workers this attitude is common. They’re for big government. They are died in the wool democrats. They are bitter partisans. And while perhaps most wouldn’t actually break the law out of partisanship, just like the code of silence among cops they will protect their own.

    Ms. Helen E. Jones-Kelley settled the matter by resigning. So she wasn’t even fired, let alone referred to the county prosecutor. And she was re-hired by her fellow travelers in a different county when the storm passed.

    http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/crime-law/hiring-of-jones-kelley-to-lead-agency-continues-to/nMpFQ/

    I mean, the state IG has the gall to say there’s no evidence that there’s no evidence that Helen E. Jones-Kelley searched the records and released them to help a political campaign when prior to the start of the IG investigation she had been placed on paid suspension for using her office computer for political fundraising? Oh, and one more item from the article about the IG report.

    Searches of Wurzelbacher’s driving history also were made using an account through the Toledo Police Department, which is investigating those actions, the report stated. A former information technology contractor for the Ohio Attorney General’s office conducted a review of driving records for Wurzelbacher and others, without the office’s knowledge, yesterday’s report said. Those searches are being investigated by the Ohio State Highway Patrol for possible criminal charges, the Inspector General report stated.

    What do you think the atmosphere is/was at the Ohio Attorney General’s office, if people there were comfortable conducting illegal searches to dig up dirt on enemies of Obama?

    Getting rid of the patronage system and going to the civil service system was supposed to mean a non-partisan bureacracy. That’s a laugh, not that they’re unionized. When I was living in Kali I used to see campaign or other political bumper stickers on county vehicles. And they were always for the Democrat candidate or the Democratic position on any issue. And there was nothing anyone could do about it because the supervisors agreed with those bumper stickers. We’d be better off with Tammany Hall, so we can clean house. Because with civil service protections we can’t fire them. So we’re stuck with a permanent, partisan Democratic bureaucracy.

    Steve57 (4f25e8)

  56. There’s also this example, that some fell for, disregarding statements to the contrary;

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/17/former-gop-senate-candidate-christine-odonnell-tol/

    narciso (3fec35)

  57. The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’ Ronald Reagan 40th president of US (1911 – 2004).

    Dan (714693)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2581 secs.