Oh, by the way, Lois Lerner apparently targeted a Republican senator for “examination” too

posted at 5:21 pm on June 25, 2014 by Allahpundit

Not just any Republican senator either. It’s Chuck Grassley, who’s been a bigwig on the Senate Finance Committee — which oversees taxation matters — for ages.

It’s unclear what an “examination” would have entailed, but an audit seems to be on the menu.

“We have seen a lot of unbelievable things in this investigation, but the fact that Lois Lerner attempted to initiate an apparently baseless IRS examination against a sitting Republican United States Senator is shocking,” said Camp. “At every turn, Lerner was using the IRS as a tool for political purposes in defiance of taxpayer rights. We may never know the full extent of the abuse since the IRS conveniently lost two years of Lerner emails, not to mention those of other key figures in this scandal. The fact that DOJ refuses to investigate the IRS’s abuses or appoint a special counsel demonstrates, yet again, this Administration’s unwillingness to uphold the rule of law.”

Background:
While the Ways and Means Committee investigation into Lerner’s involvement in the potential Grassley examination is ongoing, documents show that Lerner received an invitation to a speaking event that was intended for Senator Grassley. Instead of forwarding the invitation to Grassley’s office, Lerner immediately suggested to others in her office that the issue should be referred for examination. The Committee was able to investigate this information through its authority under Section 6103 of the tax code. A waiver was signed by Senator Grassley and his wife in order to make this information public.

In other words, both Grassley and Lerner were invited to the same tax event, but somehow Grassley’s invite ended up in Lerner’s envelope. That’s how she knew he’d been invited. And because Grassley’s wife was included on the invite, Lerner jumped to the conclusion that the event organizers were offering to “inappropriately” pay for his wife. What’s wrong with her raising the alarm about that? Well, (a) there was no reason yet to think Grassley had accepted the invitation. She wanted to “examine” the guy on the mere possibility that he would. And (b) per her e-mail exchange with her deputy on this, she seems … not to understand the law at all. It falls to the deputy to explain to her that it’s not illegal for event organizers to pay for his wife so long as he reports the income on his 1040. In other words, not only did she assume without knowing that Grassley and his wife would attend, she assumed without knowing that they’d end up lying about it on their next tax return.

DrewM makes an interesting point, though: Are we sure from the e-mails that it was Grassley whom Lerner was targeting rather than the organization that sent the invitation? It’s ambiguous; read the e-mails yourself and see. It may be that she wanted the group examined, not Grassley, for offering to pay for his wife irrespective of whether Grassley acted on that offer. Although even there, the deputy’s point is that … it’s not illegal! It would all depend on whether the group properly recorded and disclosed the payment made to Mrs. Grassley. The Grassleys might have ended up getting sucked into the investigation later, to see whether they had disclosed the income from the group on their own return, but it could be that it was the group that was chiefly in her crosshairs, not him.

So that’s the best-case scenario. The head of the IRS’s exempt organizations divisions wasn’t targeting a Republican, she just didn’t know the rules about exempt organizations well enough to handle a rudimentary question involving an invitation. Sleep tight, America.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Consider, if the Dems get their way a Lois Lerner will soon be deciding just how badly you need that medical treatment.

Cicero43 on June 25, 2014 at 6:37 PM

Hmmmm.. Barack Hussein Obama’s Administration has been targeting Christians for persecution ever since he was ushered into office.

/Marxists.. They stick together!

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 6:20 PM

Her history , or maybe her qualifications for the job :

Under the direction of Lois Lerner, the Federal Election Commission sued the Christian Coalition in the 1990s. She harassed the Christian Coalition for three election cycles. She lost her case. Lerner even asked one conservative during the case if Pat Robertson prayed over him. (Sound familiar?)

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/05/breaking-lois-lerner-sued-christian-coalition-in-largest-fec-action-in-history-then-was-promoted-to-irs-video/

Her other qualification as a Sh1tcago thug :
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/060313-658636-lois-lerner-targeted-durbon-opponent-al-salvi.htm


Salvi recognized Lerner when she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination before Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee as the woman who made him an offer: “Promise me you will never run for office again, and we’ll drop this case.”

This was an offer he could and did refuse, running again in 1998 for Illinois state treasurer.

“That’s the woman,” Salvi said. “And I didn’t plead the Fifth like she did.”

Nearly four years and $100,000 in legal fees later, federal Judge George Lindbergh dismissed the frivolous FEC case against Salvi for lending his campaign his own money, leaving FEC attorney Lerner, who was present and actively arguing before the judge, dismayed. “We never lose!” Lerner said, in a veiled threat to Salvi afterwards.

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

Yes, impeaching the President is politically risky, but Congress should do it anyway, because justice demands it.
For this & a dozen other scandals.

itsnotaboutme on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

Consider, if the Dems get their way a Lois Lerner will soon be deciding just how badly you need that medical treatment.
Cicero43 on June 25, 2014 at 6:37 PM

Hey don’t forget about the GOP. Welfare is their deal too….

Brock Robamney on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

MeanWhile,…back at Team IRS:

RS flagged conservative political groups
3m
Federal court orders US to pay $50,000 to conservative group after tax return information reportedly leaked -@AP
Read more on bigstory.ap.org
============================

Court orders US to pay conservative group $50K
Jun. 24, 2014 6:02 PM EDT
**************************

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal court has ordered the U.S. government to pay $50,000 to a conservative group that says confidential information from its tax returns about its donors was published on the website of a political opponent.

The board chairman of the National Organization for Marriage said Tuesday that his group still wants to learn more about how the information from a 2008 tax form emerged from the IRS.

John Eastman’s group opposes same-sex marriage. The information about his organization’s donors ended up being published in 2012 by the Human Rights Campaign, which supports gay rights.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued a consent judgment dated Monday ordering the U.S. to pay the $50,000.

IRS spokesman Bruce Friedland says privacy law prevents his agency from commenting.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/court-orders-us-pay-conservative-group-50k

canopfor on June 24, 2014 at 6:46 PM

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 6:44 PM

The devotion these people have to the government, and its flimsy excuses and lies…they’re cultish. And of course, anytime you disagree with them is proof you are less intelligent than them.

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 6:28 PM

Going to bat for the IRS. How intelligent of them.

CurtZHP on June 25, 2014 at 6:49 PM

This b!tch needs to be exterminated already!

I’m sick and tired of seeing her uglier-than-a-shaved-dog’s-rear-end mug last year.

Lois Lerner is the poster child for Japanese experiments in energy involving human waste.

She’s less than f*#$ing dust.

(Should I tell you how I really feel?)

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 6:50 PM

Salvi recognized Lerner when she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination before Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee as the woman who made him an offer: “Promise me you will never run for office again, and we’ll drop this case.”

This was an offer he could and did refuse, running again in 1998 for Illinois state treasurer.

“That’s the woman,” Salvi said. “And I didn’t plead the Fifth like she did.”

Nearly four years and $100,000 in legal fees later, federal Judge George Lindbergh dismissed the frivolous FEC case against Salvi for lending his campaign his own money, leaving FEC attorney Lerner, who was present and actively arguing before the judge, dismayed. “We never lose!” Lerner said, in a veiled threat to Salvi afterwards.

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

Federal court orders US to pay $50,000 to conservative group after tax return information reportedly leaked -@AP

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 6:44 PM

“No corruption at the IRS. Lois Lerner’s history, and good character and motives shall never be doubted nor questioned!” -jaxisaneurophysicistbabblingidiotinlovewiththe”preciousness”ofhisownthoughts

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 6:55 PM

IRS spokesman Bruce Friedland says privacy law prevents his agency from commenting.

Fcuk you a$$hats!

canopfor on June 24, 2014 at 6:46 PM

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Some really weird stuff when you quote yourself 2 minutes into the future.

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 6:55 PM

Salvi recognized Lerner when she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination before Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee as the woman who made him an offer: “Promise me you will never run for office again, and we’ll drop this case.”

This was an offer he could and did refuse, running again in 1998 for Illinois state treasurer.

“That’s the woman,” Salvi said. “And I didn’t plead the Fifth like she did.”

Nearly four years and $100,000 in legal fees later, federal Judge George Lindbergh dismissed the frivolous FEC case against Salvi for lending his campaign his own money, leaving FEC attorney Lerner, who was present and actively arguing before the judge, dismayed. “We never lose!” Lerner said, in a veiled threat to Salvi afterwards.

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

This b!tch needs to be exterminated already!

I’m sick and tired of seeing her uglier-than-a-shaved-dog’s-rear-end mug last year.

Lois Lerner is the poster child for Japanese experiments in energy involving human waste.

She’s less than f*#$ing dust.

(Should I tell you how I really feel?)

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 6:50 PM

A firing squad isn’t good enough!

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 6:58 PM

Going to bat for the IRS. How intelligent of them.

CurtZHP on June 25, 2014 at 6:49 PM

They’re our enemy. And that’s how they see us, too. Good. Let’s have no illusions here about the opposing sides and their differing values.

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:02 PM

They’re our enemy. And that’s how they see us, too. Good. Let’s have no illusions here about the opposing sides and their differing values.

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:02 PM

At this point, anyone who is an enemy to freedom and liberty doesn’t deserve to share the same air and soil as me.

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 7:06 PM

WTF…..Why is she opening Grassley’s mail?
I bet Grassley had the decency and the character not to open Lerner’s mail.
Isn’t that one more crime Louis committed?

Privatize It on June 25, 2014 at 7:09 PM

Yes, impeaching the President is politically risky, but Congress should do it anyway, because justice demands it.
For this & a dozen other scandals.

itsnotaboutme on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

Too bad We The People can’t vote to impeach his azz in this years elections.

The Dems would never be able to raise THAT many dead people in the midterms. But the Dems could hit up places like Detroit and NYC for street bums and illegals – That’s Obama’s base at this point.

Very sad, actually. To think of all the hope that our ‘esteemed’ millenials had for some skinny black Urkel looking dude in a suit, from Chicago – they elected him so he could destroy their futures.

Sham. Wow. Obama.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:09 PM

“No corruption at the IRS. Lois Lerner’s history, and good character and motives shall never be doubted nor questioned!” -jaxisaneurophysicistbabblingidiotinlovewiththe”preciousness”ofhisownthoughts

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 6:55 PM

wow, didn’t get enough of outing yourself as a moron last nite, huh?

well, glad to see you have capacity for something.

the irs conveniently lost hard drives a couple of weeks after the congressional investigation started. even an idiot like you would be able to recognise fraud.

crying wolf over something that…well, even an idiot like you should be able to recognise as having nothing to do with targeting a us senator takes the focus away from the true scandal and, more destructively, stands a change of planting the seeds of doubt in the mind of a public currently siding with the GOP on the scandal. it doesn’t take much for people to think, “hmm, maybe they are just exaggerating” when paranoid hysteria with no basis in reality is the news story of the day. look what it’s done for harry reid on the kochs — he’s even lost the left.

i know you like losing. you’re one of those perpetually aggrieved victim types who is certain that the entire world is out to get you. nevermind that you’d be calling for the head of grassley, whose acu rating is lower than that devil mcconnel’s, if some sufficiently demagogic neoconservative zealot came along to tempt you into friendly-fire politickin’, today he provides you a chance to exaggerate a genuinely egregious scandal past the boundary of caricature.

and by god, you’re gonna take it.

idiot.

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 6:39 PM

She’s a piece of… work:

CHICAGO – Former GOP U.S. Senate candidate Al Salvi’s revelation this week that IRS official Lois Lerner offered to drop the Federal Election Commission’s (FEC) 1996 case against him if he promised to never run for office again was the proverbial tip of the iceberg.

“Before Lois Lerner took us before the federal judge, her last offer was for me to promise to never run for office again. That was always part of their demands,” Salvi said. “Before that last offer, another FEC representative that reported to Lerner wanted $200,000 and a promise not to run.”

Knowing his $1.1 million campaign loan to himself was legal, Salvi rejected the initial settlement offer from FEC attorney Colleen Sealander. In later conversations, Sealander lowered the amount to $100,000, then $40,000, but always with the additional promise to never run for office again.

“Every time we talked, I refused the offer, and Colleen said she’d have to check with someone,” Salvi said. “I finally told her I’d like to talk to whomever she reported. That’s when I got a call from Lois Lerner.”

During that call, Salvi said, he explained to Lerner exactly what happened — that while the loan to himself was legal, there may be a difference of opinion on how the loan was reported to the FEC. Salvi explained it was a simple matter and said he thought Lerner would suggest an agreeable solution and dismiss the Democratic National Committee’s complaint.

But that was not Lerner’s reaction. Instead, that’s when she said to Salvi, “Promise me you’ll never run for office again, and we’ll drop the case.”

Salvi said he asked Lerner if she would be willing to put the offer into writing.

“We don’t do things that way,” Salvi said Lerner replied.

Salvi queried how then could such an agreement be enforced.

According to Salvi, Lerner replied: “You’ll find out.” …

Fallon on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

wow, didn’t get enough of outing yourself as a moron last nite, huh?

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

New Flash: That was you, who outed themselves as a moron.

oscarwilde on June 25, 2014 at 7:16 PM

wow, didn’t get enough of outing yourself as a moron last nite, huh?

…idiot.

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

I didn’t read the rest of your babble. I knew there was no need. Why waste time on a dolt like you who cannot help but insult? And afterall, you are the “genius” who said “free will” is deterministic without realizing how idiotic that position is.

I’ll start taking you seriously when you provide evidence you know how to construct rational arguments, and care about doing so. Deal? lmao

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:16 PM

WTF…..Why is she opening Grassley’s mail?
I bet Grassley had the decency and the character not to open Lerner’s mail.
Isn’t that one more crime Louis committed?

Privatize It on June 25, 2014 at 7:09 PM

NSA

One thing to remember about this Administration.

It is filled with lawyers who have been combing the archives for ways to make what Obama has done “legal”. It only exposes the members of Congress as a Country Club – all of them. There is no middle for these people. It is all or nothing – Their goal is to make ALL AMERICANS dependent on 535 inside the beltway azzholes.

Anyone who tries to penetrate their “Club” will be viciously attacked. Where is my Country?

The R’s are just as responsible as the D’s in this. Eff em all.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:19 PM

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

You are a funny guy. I love peeps like you that can openly discredit and demean themselves and their agenda by the sheer content of their banal posts.

Well done! I commend you.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:23 PM

More likely, Lerner did not care what the rules are. She just wants to nail people and organizations that have different political views that she does. As a federal government employee, that should be cause for termination.

Techster64 on June 25, 2014 at 7:23 PM

After a judge forces the IRS to pay a conservative group $50K for violating privacy laws

IRS spokesman Bruce Friedland says privacy law prevents his agency from commenting.

Irony: its whats for dinner.

Dolce Far Niente on June 25, 2014 at 7:26 PM

wow, didn’t get enough of outing yourself as a moron last nite, huh?

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

New Flash: That was you, who outed themselves as a moron.

oscarwilde on June 25, 2014 at 7:16 PM

jax did that the very first time he(?) started posting here.

jax is an excellent example of how having a high IQ is no guarantee of sanity, emotional maturity, intellectual honesty, or self-awareness. Overall, jax just isn’t very intelligent, but he sure believes he is. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:27 PM

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Question NP:

Does the sheer content of an online screen name give anyone credibility? I bet he’s wearing PJ’s and eating cheeto’s in a basement somewhere in his momma house.

Do you know that he is a neurophysicist?

/Just axin

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:33 PM

You are a funny guy. I love peeps like you that can openly discredit and demean themselves and their agenda by the sheer content of their banal posts.

Well done! I commend you.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:23 PM

From my time lurking and posting here, I haven’t seen a poster who compares to jax when it comes to long-windedness while saying absolutely nothing of substance. And the competition isn’t even close. His(?) posting really is a sight to behold.

In order to spare all of us, including himself, the tedium, I’d suggest that jax learn what “check your own premises” means before posting again. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 25, 2014 at 7:35 PM

Don’t know. For all we know, they might have. This seems to be compliance-based, not politically-based.

jim56 on June 25, 2014 at 5:55 PM

So we’ll be seeing some examples of her going off on some Democrats soon??

Or are the Democrats not privy to the emails??

Or are you full of $hit?

BigWyo on June 25, 2014 at 7:36 PM

Salvi said he asked Lerner if she would be willing to put the offer into writing.

“We don’t do things that way,” Salvi said Lerner replied.

Salvi queried how then could such an agreement be enforced.

According to Salvi, Lerner replied: “You’ll find out.” …

Fallon on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

No wonder she has to crash her computer, deep fry her hard drive, recycle her emails, combust her hard copy files, explode her office building, burn down her house, kill her subordinates……
she don’t do things that leave evidence, just like Killery had to get rid of the Benghazi building and people.

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 7:48 PM

Draft Jim DeMint.

You heard it here first.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:51 PM

Salvi said he asked Lerner if she would be willing to put the offer into writing.

“We don’t do things that way,” Salvi said Lerner replied.

Salvi queried how then could such an agreement be enforced.

According to Salvi, Lerner replied: “You’ll find out.” …

Fallon on June 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM

I think we need to stop getting amazed by the blatant and illegal actions of the Obama Administration.

Either you are for this type of “government” or you are against this type of “government”.

Simple, easy ballot box issue…. for those who pay taxes.

Key West Reader on June 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM

canopfor on June 24, 2014 at 6:46 PM

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Some really weird stuff when you quote yourself 2 minutes into the future.

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 6:55 PM

UnstChem: Lol,….ya, posted on two different threads!:)

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 7:59 PM

jaxisaneurophysicist on June 25, 2014 at 6:11 PM

Go piss up a rope, you arrogant twit. Keep making excuses for Lois Lerner.

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on June 25, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Oxford Dictionary to redine “smidgeon” in 3..2…1

can_con on June 25, 2014 at 8:04 PM

jim56 on June 25, 2014 at 5:55 PM

So we’ll be seeing some examples of her going off on some Democrats soon??

Or are the Democrats not privy to the emails?? A.

Or are you full of $hit? B.

BigWyo on June 25, 2014 at 7:36 PM

answer B. But he is consistent.

arnold ziffel on June 25, 2014 at 8:16 PM

More likely, Lerner did not care what the rules are. She just wants to nail people and organizations that have different political views that she does. As a federal government political employee, that should be cause for termination promotion.

Remember who’s enforcing the rules.

J-Paul00 on June 25, 2014 at 8:21 PM

So I’m assuming this was AFTER her computer was fixed or she got a new one? What are the dates she “lost” the other emails?

UnderstandingisPower on June 25, 2014 at 8:52 PM

And memo to House investigators: This email was sent from her Blackberry, not her laptop. That means there’s another system out there that will have all those emails you’ve been wanting.

ExUrbanKevin on June 25, 2014 at 5:45 PM

I have a government issued Blackberry. My emails still go through the Exchange server. Plus, it only displays 30 days worth of emails. So, if someone was to subpoena her Blackberry, you wouldn’t find anything as she has been gone for more than 30 days. There is a chance, of course, that her Blackberry may display more than 30 days, but I doubt it. I’m on my second government Blackberry and both have had a 30 limit of displayed emails.

GAlpha10 on June 25, 2014 at 8:53 PM

Lol,….ya, posted on two different threads!:)

canopfor on June 25, 2014 at 7:59 PM

Somehow, that makes it even weirder, LOL!

UnstChem on June 25, 2014 at 9:02 PM

Evidence enough that she used her position to undermine political points of view that were different from the regime, which, Is unethical and illegal. As a healthcare professional i cannot go snooping in patients medical history without being fired. This is way beyond that. This is using your power in government to punish others without cause.

jaywemm on June 25, 2014 at 9:48 PM

How could Sen. and Mrs. Grassley act on an invitation they never received?

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2014 at 9:54 PM

How could Sen. and Mrs. Grassley act on an invitation they never received?

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2014 at 9:54 PM

WHO send her that invition ?
Do the Grassleys and Lois Lerner have the same home address ? Do they even work or live in the same building ?

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 10:01 PM

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 10:01 PM

All good questions. Do you think they were addressed to their work places? Still, if Sen. Grassley’s invitation went to Ms. Lerner, it’s seems hard to get mad at him for not going.

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2014 at 10:11 PM

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 10:01 PM

I get it now. The invitations were sent via email. I guess .gov is easy to mix up.

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2014 at 10:20 PM

Maybe the members will finally take this seriously now that one of their own was targeted instead of the stupid Tea Parties which totally deserve to be harassed.

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2014 at 10:22 PM

The senate just decided to go after the IRS.

Schadenfreude on June 25, 2014 at 10:24 PM

I got $20 American, that says an IRS employee will be the first person to utter the phrase “Yeah, So what? What the f*ck are YOU gonna do about it?” directly to Darell Issa during a hearing.

Who gives a shit? It’s apparent that no one is going to lift a finger about obama and Co. literally seizing and abusing all the power the federal government can muster.

Boehner is going to sue? really? what’s THAT gonna take? Eight years? I’m sure Killary will be firmly ensconced as “Party Chariman” of the People’s Democratic Republic of America by then.

Welcome to the beginning of The Fourth Reich.

a5minmajor on June 25, 2014 at 10:53 PM

In other words, both Grassley and Lerner were invited to the same tax event, but somehow Grassley’s invite ended up in Lerner’s envelope. That’s how she knew he’d been invited. And because Grassley’s wife was included on the invite, Lerner jumped to the conclusion that the event organizers were offering to “inappropriately” pay for his wife.

She “jumped to the conclusion” because the invite said they were paying the wife’s way. She then questioned if this wasn’t inappropriate…

What’s wrong with her raising the alarm about that? Well, (a) there was no reason yet to think Grassley had accepted the invitation. She wanted to “examine” the guy on the mere possibility that he would. And (b) per her e-mail exchange with her deputy on this, she seems … not to understand the law at all. It falls to the deputy to explain to her that it’s not illegal for event organizers to pay for his wife so long as he reports the income on his 1040.

…at which point her employee pointed out nothing inappropriate had happened yet and the matter was dropped.

So let’s get this straight:
1) a federal official with oversite responsibility noticed something that seemed wrong to them
2) they raised the issue asking whether this needed to be addressed
3) the department determined that there was no cause for an investigation at the time.

This is a scandal?

Really?

Tlaloc on June 25, 2014 at 10:56 PM

WHO send her that invition ?
Do the Grassleys and Lois Lerner have the same home address ? Do they even work or live in the same building ?

burrata on June 25, 2014 at 10:01 PM

They don’t have to have the same address. Haven’t you ever mixed up cards or letters putting one for X in the envelope for Y and vice versa?

Tlaloc on June 25, 2014 at 10:57 PM

I got $20 American, that says an IRS employee will be the first person to utter the phrase “Yeah, So what? What the f*ck are YOU gonna do about it?” directly to Darell Issa during a hearing.

God, I wish…

Tlaloc on June 25, 2014 at 10:58 PM

Federal court orders US to pay $50,000 to conservative group after tax return information reportedly leaked

IRS charged with taxpayer abuse. Must pay fine with taxpayer money.
Yay. The system is working.

Fark me.

Closet Optimist on June 26, 2014 at 1:24 AM

This email was sent on her Blackberry. Can we subpoena that? I’m sure that contains a lot of information that was kept outside the government computers.

djaymick on June 26, 2014 at 7:34 AM

And another troll goes to bat for the IRS.

CurtZHP on June 26, 2014 at 7:50 AM

Tlaloc on June 25, 2014 at 10:56 PM

Yeah, it was nothing personal, especially the part about not wanting to be seen on the same stage as Sen. Grassley.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 9:11 AM

I have two questions on this:

1) Did Lerner commit a crime when she opened mail addressed to someone else?
2) How did a letter addressed to a US Senator not get checked by Homeland Security? All congressional mail is supposed to be checked at a special facility.

barnone on June 26, 2014 at 9:11 AM

djaymick on June 26, 2014 at 7:34 AM

I thought it was already in the mix.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 9:11 AM

barnone on June 26, 2014 at 9:11 AM

My guess is that the invitation inside the envelope was addressed to Sen. Grassley, not the outside envelope. And if he got her’s it probably was checked. Although at this point it wouldn’t surprise me that they don’t check Republican member’s mail in the hopes that someone will bump them off.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 9:13 AM

This woman has the face of the Greek mythological creature “Medusa.”

I am sure if I saw her in person she would have the same effect on me that the Greek Medusa did, I would be turned to stone forever.

Nat George on June 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM

LoL is married to a tax attorney and so all this cutsie ‘oh.I get it how we have to wait to see what Grassley does on his income tax return before the irs can act” is just bs. Just like that ‘oh, I really don’t know too much about IT and computers, teeheee, but it looks like my hard drive is broken (as she puts the hammer back in her purse)…can you please help me fix it cause I just can’t go on without it’

sickening

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 10:35 AM

My guess is

No need to guess Cindy. Her intent was clear. Was she getting a bounty for every conservative she nabbed one way or another?

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 10:36 AM

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 10:35 AM

She would look stunning in an orange jumpsuit.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 10:42 AM

Everyone is glossing over the most important question here: How is it that Lois Lerner “accidentally” acquired an invitation intended for Sen. Charles Grassley? While we were sleeping, the federal government has been completely overtaken by liberal partisan hacks that cannot be disciplined, fired, or prosecuted. That’s how.

supersport667 on June 26, 2014 at 11:13 AM

And they are thumbing their noses at us!!!

supersport667 on June 26, 2014 at 11:14 AM

She would look stunning in an orange jumpsuit.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 10:42 AM

to match her stunning fluorescent orange lipstick and nails, no doubt. It’s time for an artist’s rendition.

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 11:25 AM

Yeah, it was nothing personal, especially the part about not wanting to be seen on the same stage as Sen. Grassley.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2014 at 9:11 AM

That Lerner doesn’t like Grassley still doesn’t make a scandal. Or are you saying a government employee who sees something hinkey has to ignore it if it happens to be done by someone they don’t like.

Again, much like the IRS bureaucrat’s response to Lerner- there’s no harm done here.

Tlaloc on June 26, 2014 at 5:02 PM

This woman has the face of the Greek mythological creature “Medusa.”

I am sure if I saw her in person she would have the same effect on me that the Greek Medusa did, I would be turned to stone forever.

Nat George on June 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM

Can’t imagine why the GOP has trouble attracting female voters.

Tlaloc on June 26, 2014 at 5:04 PM

Tlaloc

your gal’s really a foxy lady…the kind that leaks stuff to the LGBT’s so’s they can out conservatives who support not for profit organizations promoting traditional marriage…wow…what a fine woman she is…and oh so smart, probably just like you.

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 5:40 PM

your gal’s really a foxy lady…the kind that leaks stuff to the LGBT’s so’s they can out conservatives who support not for profit organizations promoting traditional marriage…wow…what a fine woman she is…and oh so smart, probably just like you.

gracie on June 26, 2014 at 5:40 PM

So you’re okay with hating on gays you just don’t have the courage to do so openly. Gotcha.

And you think this demonstration of bigoted cowardice was going to generate sympathy for you?

That part I really don’t get.

Tlaloc on June 26, 2014 at 7:35 PM

The word everyone is looking for here is: Inquisition.

The Tea Party and Grassley are heretics, and Obama called for an Inquisition.

The Democrat Inquisition of anyone who is heretic of their beliefs.

petunia on June 26, 2014 at 7:59 PM

She “jumped to the conclusion” because the invite said they were paying the wife’s way. She then questioned if this wasn’t inappropriate…

So your defense is that she’s a moron. Thus justifying faith in government to Do Big Things ™.

This is a scandal?

Really?

Tlaloc on June 25, 2014 at 10:56 PM

It’s evidence that she will use any excuse to go after people who have done nothing wrong, who happen to be on the other side of the aisle from her politically.

Notably, you did not quote the part where AP said anything about a scandal. Probably because… he didn’t. He DID qualify the circumstances surrounding the issue (it was only two entire paragraphs at the end of the article), but you conveniently left that part out in order to make him look unreasonable and unwilling to give benefit of the doubt.

The Schaef on June 27, 2014 at 5:03 PM

So you’re okay with hating on gays you just don’t have the courage to do so openly. Gotcha.

Tlaloc on June 26, 2014 at 7:35 PM

And apparently you’re okay with privacy laws only applying to people with whom you disagree politically.

I guess that’s not surprising considering you’re attacking their character by making the issue about something other than what it is (“hating” gays by opposing expansion of state-conferred marriage benefits).

The Schaef on June 27, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Comment pages: 1 2