Dick Durbin: No regrets sending IRS after conservative group

On Sunday's edition of Fox News Sunday, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., defended his decision to send the IRS after Crossroads GPS, a conservative group co-founded by Karl Rove, in 2010, The Hill reported.

Durbin told Wallace the reason he singled out Crossroads while not mentioning any liberal group is because the organization was bragging about how much money they were raising.

"Let's get back to the basics," he said. "Citizens United really unleashed hundreds if not thousands of organizations seeking tax-exempt status to play in political campaigns. The law we wrote as Congress said that they had to exclusively be engaged in social welfare and not politics and campaigning. And, so, here is the IRS trying to decide whether or not these organizations really comply with the law. Crossroads was exhibit A. They were boastful about how much money they were going to raise and beat Democrats with."

Durbin said he didn't target liberal groups because he believed that an investigation of Crossroads would serve as a warning shot to all organizations.

“There is no basis for targeting within the IRS. What we basically need to say is all groups need to have the law applied to them equally,” he said.

But a 2010 Politico report said Durbin's request "comes in the midst of a push from the White House to cast doubt on the funding sources of groups like Crossroads GPS — founded by GOP strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie — or the traditionally Republican-friendly Chamber of Commerce."

As it turns out, the IRS targeted some 500 conservative groups, and despite claims by the White House, at least two dozen conservative groups say the harassment is continuing.

“Without question, the IRS misconduct of harassing and abusing our clients was still in high gear from May 2012 through May of this year. . . . To suggest this tactic ended a year ago is not only offensive, but it is simply inaccurate as well,” said Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice.

According to a report at the National Review Online, Cleta Mitchell, the attorney representing True the Vote, has evidence that many of the “dozens, if not hundreds” of conservative groups still waiting for approval received additional reams of invasive questions in the fall of 2012 and later.

Ian Tuttle said that Sekulow Sekulow “plans to file suit in federal court in the coming weeks on behalf of more than two dozen conservative groups that claim their harassment at the hands of the nation’s tax authority continued long past the White House’s purported end date.”

Related:

•     National Review: IRS actions may have suppressed conservative vote in 2012
•     Dems twist New York Times story to smear Tea Party members as Nazis
•     Pattern of abuse? Lois Lerner's FEC grilled Oliver North about prayer
•     IRS official: 'I have not done anything wrong,' invokes Fifth Amendment
•     IRS targets Christian groups, demands content of prayers
•     Armed Homeland Security agents monitor Tea Party at IRS protests
•     Retired Army officer warns: DHS preparing for war against American citizens
•     Jay Carney to Piers Morgan: Scandals involving IRS, Benghazi, AP 'don't exist'
•     Limbaugh: Obama administration operating like 'banana republic-type government'
•     Obama Executive Order would seize US infrastructure, citizens for nat'l defense
•     Liberal Daily Kos diarist calls for 'benevolent' Obama dictatorship
•     Anonymous IRS official: 'Everything comes from the top'
•     Flashback: Chuck Schumer, Al Franken sign letter demanding IRS target Tea Party groups in 2012
•     NAACP chair: Legitimate for IRS to target 'admittedly racist' Tea Party
•     Is the ‘mainstream media’ fomenting violence against conservatives?

----------------------------------------------------------------

If you like this article, you can follow Joe on Twitter @jnewby1956, visit and like his Facebook page, or subscribe to receive email updates when a new article is published.

For hard-hitting conservative commentary, please visit Joe's blog, the Conservative Firing Line. You can also find Joe's articles at Right News Now, Liberty Unyielding and PolitiCollision.


SOURCE http://www.examiner.com/article/dick-durbin-no-regrets-sending-irs-after-conservative-group

IRS to be sued in federal court

 ACLJ charges agency's targeting of conservatives continues

The American Center for Law and Justice plans to file a lawsuit in federal court next week against the IRS on behalf of several clients, charging the IRS is continuing to target and harass conservative groups applying to create 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 tax-exempt groups, despite White House claims to the contrary.

The ACLJ represents 27 conservative organizations from 17 states that it claims the IRS targeted.

“The White House continues to pursue a narrative that doesn’t square with the facts,” Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, told WND in an email.

“The assertion that this targeted abuse ended in May 2012 is simply not the case,” he said.

Get Jerome Corsi’s scorching new exposé of the American Civil Liberties Union, “Bad Samaritans: The ACLU’s Relentless Campaign to Erase Faith From the Public Square”

Sekulow said “intrusive and unlawful questioning continued after May 2012 with 18 of our clients receiving 26 questionnaires from the IRS from May 2012 through May 2013.”

“Even more troubling is the fact that the IRS sent a letter to one of our clients dated May 6, just four days before the IRS admitted to launching this targeting scheme,” he said.

On May 20, White House press secretary Jay Carney in his daily press briefing claimed IRS targeting of conservative groups had ended in May 2012.

Two days later, Carney changed his story, adding a year to the timeline.

On May 22, Carney told the press President Obama had acted immediately after the release of the inspector general audit of the IRS, taking steps to make sure the agency practice of targeting conservative groups had come to an end:

    Let me say that, as you heard from the president immediately after the release of the independent inspector general’s audit, he is absolutely committed to finding out everything that happened here, finding out who’s responsible for the failures, holding them accountable and ensuring that the IRS take steps so that this will never happen again.

The Treasury Department inspector general for tax administration released its audit in early May. On May 10, Lois Lerner, then director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division, told reporters the targeting of conservative groups was “absolutely inappropriate,” suggesting the actions were undertaken by “front-line people” working in Cincinnati who singled out groups with “tea party,” “patriot” or “9/12”in their names.

In filing a federal lawsuit against the IRS, the ACLJ has concluded the White House is covering up continuing abuse, implying that Carney’s statement of President Obama’s orders to the IRS has no basis in fact.

“The intrusive and unconstitutional conduct continues – with the IRS demanding donor lists and even requesting lists of what reading materials that organizations used,” Sekulow charged.

“It’s our belief that the only way to stop this ongoing abuse is to take the federal government to court. We are planning to file a federal lawsuit next week in Washington, D.C., on behalf of numerous organizations. This abusive conduct by the IRS must be stopped.”

26 IRS letters

The ACLJ has documented that since May 2012, the date the White House initially said the targeting stopped, the ACLJ received 26 IRS questionnaires sent to 18 clients.

The 26 IRS letters posed further intrusive and intimidating questions, including demanding donor lists and requesting lists of what reading materials the organizations used, with the latest inquiry coming just days before the IRS revealed its targeting scheme.

None of the IRS questionnaires received by the ACLJ in the 26 IRS letters have been rescinded by the IRS, made inoperative or been revised since the release of the inspector general’s audit earlier this month – the second date the White House said Obama had order the abusive and possibly illegal practice to end.

The ACLJ rejects the IRS contention the abuse was limited to a few low-level employees in Cincinnati.

“While letters were sent from that office, our clients received letters sent from other IRS offices around the country – including two in California and from the main office in Washington D.C.,” he said. “There is no question that the IRS scheme emanated from beyond the IRS office in Cincinnati.”

To prove its point, the ACLJ linked to letters the IRS sent ACLJ clients from the IRS offices in Laguna Nigel, Calif.; El Monte, Calif.; Cincinnati; and Washington, D.C.

Acting IRS commissioner also lying?

Attorney Cleta Mitchell, a partner in the Washington-based law firm Foley & Lardner extends the ACLJ accusations to claim acting IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller made serious misstatements and misrepresentations in his testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee earlier May 17.

Foley & Lardner has more than 40 years of experience in law, politics and public policy, including providing legal advice to non-profit and issue organizations.

Specifically, Mitchell objected to Miller’s claim that “foolish mistakes were made by people [in the IRS] who were trying to be more efficient in their workload selection.”

In a legal memo to “Interested Parties,” dated May 20, 2013, Mitchell pointed out the inconsistency of claiming IRS employees were trying to be more efficient, when the questionnaires submitted to conservative groups were typically multi-paged “dragnet” type questions probing into every aspect of the applying organizations, including the content of prayers by leaders of the groups.

“So the decision to change a system that (prior to 2010) might ask five to six short questions specifically about an application to one that consisted of dozens of questions, necessitating volumes of materials and documents to be filed with the IRS, was done in order to ‘be more efficient’?” Mitchell asked.

Mitchell noted Miller also spoke about IRS employees “taking shortcuts.”

“This was hardly a ‘shortcut’ when it lengthened the process substantially, as documented in the Treasury Inspector General Tax Audit report,” she said.

Michell also objected to Miller’s attempt to scapegoat two “rogue” employees in the Cincinnati IRS office as being responsible for “overly aggressive” handling of tea party requests for tax-exempt status over the past two years, echoing the claim made by Lerner.

“This is completely false,” Mitchell continued.

“In 2011, at least one of the Cincinnati IRS agents assigned to handle two clients’ applications advised me that the Washington, D.C., office was actively involved in the decisions and processing of my clients’ applications for exempt status. This was memorialized in a letter to the agent, Ron Bell, on November 8, 2011. When I called him in December 2011 for an update, he advised me that the applications had been transferred to a special task force in Washington, D.C., for further review.

Mitchell said the “effort by senior IRS officials to lay this scheme at the hands of a few low level’ IRS employees is despicable and must not be tolerated.”


SOURCE http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/irs-to-be-sued-in-federal-court/

Lawyer tells Saudi airline to stop discriminating

Says flights in the United States subject to state, federal laws

A Washington attorney who previously challenged Delta Air Lines when it imposed Saudi Arabia’s Islamic rules on Americans boarding its flights in Washington and New York now has written directly to Saudi Arabian Airlines asking that the Islamic kingdom’s corporation abide by the nondiscrimination laws of the United States when its jets land here.

Jeffrey A. Lovitky earlier approached Delta because it was working under a cooperative agreement with Saudi Arabia to feature flights directly to the kingdom. But in order to do that, Delta was asking potential passengers about their religious affiliation, since Saudi Arabia does not allow Jews to enter.

Eventually, Delta agreed not to ask those questions.

But now Lovitky has dispatched a letter to Khalid A. Almolhem, director general of Saudi Arabian Airlines, in Jeddah.

“The purpose of this letter is to request that Saudi Arabian Airlines immediately discontinue its practice of refusing to sell tickets to persons of Israeli nationality,” he wrote, citing the company’s online ticketing procedures.

“The website requires the ticket purchase to identify the nationality of the passenger from a dropdown list which reflects every nationality, except for Israeli. It is impossible to purchase a ticket unless the nationality of the passenger is selected from the list on the dropdown screen. As a result, persons of Israeli nationality are precluded from purchasing a ticket through the Saudi Arabian Airlines website.”

Read the insiders’ plans for America under Shariah, in “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” autographed, from WND’s Superstore.

Officials at the airline’s offices in Jeddah could not be reached immediately, but a screen capture of the website revealed there is no option for a person to identify themselves as Israeli.

Lovitky said while Saudi Arabia has a right to deny visas to Israeli citizens, the kingdom’s own rules do not require a visa if the passenger is traveling through Saudi Arabia en route to another location, such as someone wanting to travel from New York to Mumbai, through Jeddah.

“However, an Israeli national cannot purchase a ticket on Saudi Arabian Airlines between New York and Mumbai, even if the passport of the Israeli national contains the appropriate visa endorsements from the government of India.

See the letter.

“Simply put,” he wrote, “Saudi Arabian Airlines refuses to sell tickets to Israeli nationals, regardless of which country they are going to.”

And that, he said, violates a number of anti-discrimination requirements in the United States.

“There are numerous federal laws which prohibit discrimination on the basis of national origin. … Discrimination in air transportation on the basis of national origin, race, religion, or sex is specifically prohibited,” he wrote.

The Civil Rights Act addresses the issue, as does Title VI.

Since the airline flies to Virginia and New York, those state laws also would be applicable, he noted.

State law in Virginia “states that conduct that violates any federal statute governing discrimination on the basis of national origin shall be deemed an unlawful discriminatory practice in the State of Virginia. … The New York statute is equally explicit,” he said.

“A cause of action exists under state law, as well as federal law, against any airline which practices discrimination on the basis of national origin,” he noted. “Moreover, the operation of an airline is a commercial activity. Saudi Arabian Airlines is thus not immunized from the jurisdiction of either federal or state courts …

“I am awaiting your prompt response as to the corrective actions which will be taken,” he said.

Copies of the letter also went to the Department of State, Department of Transportation, the Saudi Arabian Embassy and others.

It was in 2011 when the earlier dispute arose. Less than two months after WND broke the story about a plan that would have Delta Air Lines impose Saudi Arabia’s Islamic rules on Americans in Washington and New York in order to fly directly to the Muslim kingdom, officials for Delta have promised not to ask anyone about their religious affiliation.

A statement from the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles reported that the airline, following a meeting with center officials, wrote in a letter to the center that, “Delta employees do not currently and will not in future, request that customers declare their religious affiliation. We would also not seek such information on behalf of any Sky Team partner or any airline.”

The letter from Andrea Fischer Newman, senior vice president of government affairs, followed a meeting between Delta officials and Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the center about the airline’s policy.

“Delta has now done the right thing, sending a signal to the Saudis that it will not cooperate with Riyadh’s policy of religious apartheid,” Cooper said. “We hope that all other U.S.-based airlines and around the world will declare and follow a similar policy.

“We also urge the Obama administration to lead the way in demanding that the Saudis drop their overt policy of religious discrimination,” Cooper said.

The airline declined to respond to a request from WND for a comment on the situation, or to explain how such a commitment might affect its contractual arrangements with Saudi Arabian Airlines for Delta to fly into the closed kingdom.

But actor and talk radio host Fred Grandy, who raised the issue before members of Congress, told WND at the time, “Delta passengers have won a significant victory over creeping Shariah. Hopefully, what the Saudis have learned from this experience is that while international corporations and government officials may look the other way at religious discrimination, American air travelers will not.”

The meeting and statements followed weeks of mounting criticism from Jews, Christians, Hindus and others who may have been targeted by Delta’s procedures.

The controversy became public after Lovitky questioned the airline about its plans to discriminate – on the U.S. soil of Washington and New York airports – against Jews and prevent them from boarding flights to Saudi Arabia – based on the religious discrimination present in that nation.

The American Center for Law and Justice called on the Federal Aviation Administration and Congress to investigate the relationship between Delta Air Lines and Saudi Arabian Airlines over the government-owned Saudi operation’s discrimination against Jews.

And ACLJ chief Jay Sekulow noted that U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., sent a letter to the FAA requesting a probe into the matter “to determine whether Delta Air Lines violated U.S. law or regulation and to ensure no U.S. citizen is denied their right to fly solely on the basis of their religion.”

Larry Klayman, the Washington attorney who founded Judicial Watch and now is of Freedom Watch USA, told WND at the time that Delta had joined Barack Obama in “kowtowing” to “nefarious Muslims.”

His reference was to the famous image of Barack Obama greeting the Saudi king with a bow.

The dispute even pulled the Saudi government into the fray.

“Rumors being circulated via the Internet regarding passenger flight restrictions on Saudi Arabian Airlines are completely false. The government of Saudi Arabia does not deny visas to U.S. citizens based on their religion,” the government said on PRNewswire.

“Liars,” said Pamela Geller on her Atlas Shrugs blog. She noted that on Delta’s own website is the statement, “The government of Saudi Arabia refuses admission and transit to nationals of Israel.”

Delta’s website also stated, “Visitors holding passports containing any Israeli visa or stamp could be refused entry.”

WND reported earlier the issue first was presented to Congress, the public and others by talk radio host and former U.S. Rep. Grandy, whose engaged in his own battle against discrimination when his former radio station demanded he tone down criticism of Islam on his program. He then left the station.

Grandy and “Mrs. Fred,” – Catherine – were interviewed by Talk 1200 show host Jeff Katz about the controversy, which was described as “outrageous.”

Their conversation:

“Creeping Shariah? Now [it is] jetspeed Shariah. Hat’s off to Delta. It looks like Delta will be the first Shariah-compliant airline in the United States,” Catherine Grandy said.

Katz noted, “As a Jewish man, I might not be able to fly on Delta Air Lines in the future.”

Fred Grandy told Katz that he spent time in Washington briefing members of Congress and other policy makers “on this kind of threat.”

“This creeping Shariah, economic jihad, gets you everywhere you turn,” Catherine Grandy said. “This is just not right. I’m sure this will be tested.”


SOURCE http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/lawyer-tells-saudi-airline-to-stop-discriminating/

Jay Sekulow: The IRS Is Out of Control

It’s a reprehensible breach of trust. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) admits to targeting conservative groups. Unbelievable.

We represent 27 tea party groups targeted by the IRS. We got involved after the IRS launched an effort to intimidate tea party organizations by demanding information that is outside the scope of legitimate inquiry and violated the First Amendment. The IRS demanded that groups reveal the internal workings of their organizations—including the identification of members, how they are selected, with whom they associate and even what they discuss.

Early in my career I served as a trial lawyer with the Office of the Chief Counsel for the IRS. And what is absolutely clear to me is that many of the questions asked of our clients were simply inappropriate. A sampling of the problematic questions is posted here.

Of the 27 groups we represent at the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), 15 have been granted tax-exempt status by the IRS, 10 are still pending before the IRS, and two other organizations withdrew their applications due to frustration with the IRS process.

What is most troubling is the IRS assertion that this intimidation tactic originated in the Cincinnati office by a couple of rogue employees. Nonsense. That narrative doesn’t square with the facts.

The fact is that the ACLJ’s clients have received letters from Cincinnati, but also from two offices in California—El Monte and Laguna Niguel—as well as the national office in Washington, D.C. In fact, the Washington office sent a letter to one of our clients as recently as one month ago.

We now know this coordinated intimidation scheme went beyond tea party groups to include Jewish organizations and even groups that discuss the Constitution.

The targeting scheme employed by the IRS not only violates its own rules and regulations but is certain to result in a growing mistrust of the IRS by the American people.

First, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the IRS mission to operate with integrity and fairness.

Second, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the requirement to act impartially.

And third, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents engaged in dishonest, notoriously disgraceful conduct. The same can be said of IRS leaders who knew of but failed to rein in such biased, politically motivated conduct, thereby allowing the politicization of the IRS. Each such action was prejudicial to the government and impacted negatively the reputation of the IRS.

It is no wonder that, in light of the open and notorious politicization of the IRS vis-a-vis tea party and other conservative groups, many Americans view with outright alarm the called-for expansion of the IRS to implement the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Agencies like the IRS must be scrupulously apolitical to retain the confidence and trust of the American people.

With respect to its treatment of tea party and other conservative groups, the IRS failed miserably. The growing mistrust of the IRS is the inevitable (and totally understandable) result of its unwise actions.

The IRS must be held accountable for this dishonest and notoriously disgraceful conduct. The resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller does not solve any of the problems of this tainted and politically driven agency.

The American people and our clients deserve much more.

There are many questions that President Obama has failed to address, including why his attorney general is heading up this investigation. The fact is that an independent counsel needs to be appointed—with no ties or allegiance to this president.

The IRS scheme to target conservative groups because of their thoughts and ideological positions is both unconscionable and intolerable. It is also actionable.

We continue to move forward in preparing a federal lawsuit on behalf of our clients—a complaint that could be filed as early as next week.

Jay Sekulow is chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice.


SOURCE http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/39515-jay-sekulow-the-irs-is-out-of-control

Tea party tax returns show activism on a budget

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dozens of tea party groups and other conservative organizations of the kind subjected to improper scrutiny by the Internal Revenue Service operated with small budgets and rarely displayed overt partisan activities, according to an Associated Press review of public tax filings by 93 such activist groups. A few groups built million-dollar operations and political ties that could have been legitimate grounds for IRS investigation, tax law experts said.

The AP reviewed 990 tax returns for nonprofit groups that were made publicly available and posted on both the Guidestar and the Foundation Center websites, searching between 2009 and 2011 under the terms "tea party," ''patriot" and other terms frequently used by tea party groups. Several tea party groups also made their tax returns available to the AP. The returns detailed revenues and expenses for the groups, as well as other details. Donors' identifies, however, are shielded from disclosure under federal tax code provisions.

Only 21 of the 93 groups reported annual gross receipts higher than $25,000 between 2009 and 2011, according to the AP review. The $25,000 figure is a threshold for the IRS because an organization's financial strength and revenue sources are important factors in determining its tax-exempt status. Nonprofit groups reporting less than $25,000 a year are allowed to file a short-form, postcard tax return instead of a detailed filing — one indication of a low-budget operation.

The median income for all the groups was just $16,700 a year. That figure includes several tea party organizations that boasted million-dollar budgets and a cluster of others with more than $100,000 in annual revenues. The well-funded activist groups were led by the Georgia-based Tea Party Patriots Inc., the nation's biggest tea party group, which started out with more than $700,000 in annual revenues in 2009 and grew to $20.2 million annually in 2012.

Facing IRS delays in tax-exempt status since late 2010, the Tea Party Patriots also set up a separate "super" political action committee last January, a sign of the group's growing campaign involvement. Overt political ties and activity are red flags for IRS scrutiny, tax law experts said, and returns from several groups hint in that direction, including voter turnout efforts and rallies. But while the tax returns of many of the groups reflected interests in fiscal responsibility and other pet conservative issues, there was little clear evidence of direct campaign ties.

Some tax law experts said that if IRS officials had considered finances and political involvement in their oversight of the wave of applications by tea party groups in recent years, the agency could have quickly determined whether low-budget groups qualified for tax-exempt status. The agency's blunder, said former top IRS official Marcus S. Owens, was seizing on every activist group that appeared to have a tea party or "patriot" background.

"The big boys who suddenly look like they won the lottery are the ones who should expect a knock on the door," said Owens, who headed the IRS' oversight of tax exempt groups in the 1990s. He added: "The agency should have applied better filters than looking for every tea party group under the rug."

The tea party tax filings showed that many of the groups reported low expenses. The median yearly expense for the 93 groups was $12,770. That figure also included high-spending groups like the Tea Party Patriots, which showed $17.6 million in expenses in 2011.

The contrast between many of the low-budget tea party groups and the few with big bank accounts was most striking in their spending.

Many tea party groups showed minor payments for basic operations — travel costs, office supplies, insurance, meals and items for rallies.

The Faulkner County Tea Party of Conway, Ark., which earned $7,847 in 2010, listed $570 for senior citizen transportation and $873 for a website and communications. The First Coast Tea Party Inc. of Jacksonville, Fla., noted $14 for cookbook expenses and $101 for Christmas ornaments. The Laurens County Tea Party of Laurens, S.C., which took in $2,400 in income in 2010 and is seeking tax-exempt status, listed $204 for buying T-shirts for members.

Those low-budget expenses also rarely showed evidence of direct political activity. The Faulkner County Tea Party described itself as "nonpartisan," promoting "fiscal responsibility, conservative principles and values in government, at all levels." The group paid $912 for a "meeting facility expense" and $180 in advertising in 2012. Even during the 2010 campaign, the group spent just $162 on a voter guide, On the high end, Tea Party Patriots lavished $5.7 million in payments to three direct mail contractors and $1.8 million on fundraising and nearly $1.4 million on telemarketing in 2012. The group paid nearly $700,000 to Campaign Headquarters, an Iowa operation that advertises its voter contact phone and GOTV operations. In January, the activist group set up the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund super PAC, promising to seek unlimited contributions.

Unlike nonprofits regulated by the IRS, super PACs are monitored by the Federal Election Commission. Following the lead of multimillion-dollar campaign operations like GOP strategist Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and the Democratic-leaning Priorities USA, large and small tea party groups have pressed for tax-exempt status over the last four years.

Some tea party groups have applied as educational groups under the 501(c)(3) tax code, while many others have sought 501(c)(4) status as social welfare groups. Under IRS rules, (c)(4) groups can be involved in politics if it is not their primary purpose, but (c)(3) groups are banned from most direct political involvement. Under federal law, both tax-exempt nonprofits can seek unlimited donations and do not have to disclose the identities of their donors.

An inspector general's report on the IRS' handling of tea party groups noted that auditors were poorly trained in distinguishing between the nonprofit classifications. "It led to inappropriate enforcement of the tax laws," said Jay Sekulow, a lawyer representing nearly two dozen tea party groups with the IRS.

The Houston-based King Street Patriots organization has been waiting since July 2010 for a decision on its tax-exempt status for itself and an allied group, True the Vote, a leading national conservative group aimed at confronting vote fraud. Catherine Engelbrecht of Richmond, Texas, an official of both groups, complained that she and her husband are not only wrangling with the IRS but have fielded inquiries from other federal agencies.

Engelbrecht said the couple has been contacted in recent months by the FBI's domestic terrorism unit, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Her patriots group is well-financed, listing $140,000 in revenue and $130,000 in expenses in its 2010 tax filings. True the Vote listed $64,000 in income and $38,000 in expenses the same year. The 2010 filings were the only recent returns that are publicly available.

The group was at the forefront of conservative efforts to target vote fraud in the 2012 election and said it trained as many as 1 million election monitors. Engelbrecht said her group was nonpartisan, but top Democratic Party election lawyers and activists closely monitored the group's Election Day activities and accused it of close ties with Republican Party vote-suppression efforts.

Engelbrecht said she worries that tea party groups were being targeted by the government.

"I'm very concerned," she said, about a "coordinated effort by the federal government to single out private citizens."


SOURCE http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2013-05-17/tea-party-tax-returns-show-activism-on-a-budget

Jay Sekulow: The IRS Is Out of Control

It’s a reprehensible breach of trust. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) admits to targeting conservative groups. Unbelievable.

We represent 27 tea party groups targeted by the IRS. We got involved after the IRS launched an effort to intimidate tea party organizations by demanding information that is outside the scope of legitimate inquiry and violated the First Amendment. The IRS demanded that groups reveal the internal workings of their organizations—including the identification of members, how they are selected, with whom they associate and even what they discuss.

Early in my career I served as a trial lawyer with the Office of the Chief Counsel for the IRS. And what is absolutely clear to me is that many of the questions asked of our clients were simply inappropriate. A sampling of the problematic questions is posted here.

Of the 27 groups we represent at the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), 15 have been granted tax-exempt status by the IRS, 10 are still pending before the IRS, and two other organizations withdrew their applications due to frustration with the IRS process.

What is most troubling is the IRS assertion that this intimidation tactic originated in the Cincinnati office by a couple of rogue employees. Nonsense. That narrative doesn’t square with the facts.

The fact is that the ACLJ’s clients have received letters from Cincinnati, but also from two offices in California—El Monte and Laguna Niguel—as well as the national office in Washington, D.C. In fact, the Washington office sent a letter to one of our clients as recently as one month ago.

We now know this coordinated intimidation scheme went beyond tea party groups to include Jewish organizations and even groups that discuss the Constitution.

The targeting scheme employed by the IRS not only violates its own rules and regulations but is certain to result in a growing mistrust of the IRS by the American people.

First, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the IRS mission to operate with integrity and fairness.

Second, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the requirement to act impartially.

And third, by singling out tea party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents engaged in dishonest, notoriously disgraceful conduct. The same can be said of IRS leaders who knew of but failed to rein in such biased, politically motivated conduct, thereby allowing the politicization of the IRS. Each such action was prejudicial to the government and impacted negatively the reputation of the IRS.

It is no wonder that, in light of the open and notorious politicization of the IRS vis-a-vis tea party and other conservative groups, many Americans view with outright alarm the called-for expansion of the IRS to implement the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Agencies like the IRS must be scrupulously apolitical to retain the confidence and trust of the American people.

With respect to its treatment of tea party and other conservative groups, the IRS failed miserably. The growing mistrust of the IRS is the inevitable (and totally understandable) result of its unwise actions.

The IRS must be held accountable for this dishonest and notoriously disgraceful conduct. The resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller does not solve any of the problems of this tainted and politically driven agency.

The American people and our clients deserve much more.

There are many questions that President Obama has failed to address, including why his attorney general is heading up this investigation. The fact is that an independent counsel needs to be appointed—with no ties or allegiance to this president.

The IRS scheme to target conservative groups because of their thoughts and ideological positions is both unconscionable and intolerable. It is also actionable.

We continue to move forward in preparing a federal lawsuit on behalf of our clients—a complaint that could be filed as early as next week.

Jay Sekulow is chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice.


SOURCE http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/39515-jay-sekulow-the-irs-is-out-of-control

Group to file suit in federal court over IRS targeting

The American Center for Law and Justice expects to file suit in federal court over the targeting of fourteen of its clients by the IRS soon.

Jay Sekulow, ACLJ chief counsel, told The Daily Caller Wednesday he expects to file suit next week and has a team of lawyers working on the issue.

ACLJ has not decided whether it will file one class action suit on behalf their aggrieved clients or separate suits.

“We are looking at the issue of whether it could be certified as a class or whether we would have to bring each claim as an individual claim,” he explained. “Which would mean we would be filing some in Cincinnati or the District Courts in Ohio, some in the district courts in California, some in the District of Columbia. We are looking at all that.”

According to Sekulow, it is too early in their review process to know whether the conservative groups that the IRS targeted for enhanced scrutiny would qualify as “a class certifiable action.”

“You have a number of aggrieved parties coming out of the same targeting, so we are looking at [a class action suit],” he explained. “The difference in our case is — this is the technical side — some have been granted status and they still may be filing suit because of the fact that they were targeted.”

Of the 27 Tea Party groups  ACLJ represents, 10 are still awaiting responses on their tax exempt status and this week received another letter of inquiry about one of their clients from the IRS. Currently ACLJ has 14 plaintiffs.

“It would be much more judicially economical for the courts and for everybody, to have it in one court, but we don’t have the answer to that yet,” he added, noting that especially after the release of the inspector general report Tuesday he cannot imagine anything that would sway ACLJ against litigation.

The main focus for ACLJ at this point is filing suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“The claims will involve obviously First Amendment issues, both speech, association, probably press as well,” he said adding it might also include federal interference with business claims.

ACLJ has yet to determine all the defendants. The suit will likely include the Treasury Department and the IRS.

Monday ACLJ sent a letter demanding that the IRS get a response by Friday to 10 tea party groups who have not received tax exemptions or face possible legal action. ACLJ has not received any responses to its letter.

Dan Backer, an attorney with DB Capitol Strategies PLLC who represents tea party groups targeted by the IRS, including TheTeaParty.net, has also threatened litigation but has not decided whether to act yet.

Backer told TheDC that he expects lawsuits to arise from the targeting, whether from his groups or others.

“As every law school professor has said, I can sue you for breathing. But, is it worth it?  [W]e’re trying to figure that out and it’s a complex issue,” he wrote TheDC in an email Wednesday.


SOURCE http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/15/group-to-file-suit-in-federal-court-over-irs-targeting/

The puzzling, intrusive questions the IRS asked conservative groups we represent

Lois Lerner is the director of the exempt organizations division at the IRS. Friday, she dropped a bombshell when she told reporters, that “absolutely inappropriate” actions were undertaken by “front-line people” located in Cincinnati who went rogue and searched out groups with “Tea Party” and “Patriot” in their tax exemption applications and then put those groups through a special, intrusive process.

Now we have learned that Lerner knew about the targeting as early as 2011.

But Congress and the America public didn’t know until just before the weekend.

We also learned more from a draft of the Inspector General’s report that was released in the media over the weekend. The draft provides a comprehensive timeline for the IRS scandal.

The targeting actually began before the 2010 mid-term elections and appears far more widespread than the IRS first reported. It turns out that it’s not just Tea Party groups, but Jewish organizations and even some groups that study and discuss the U.S. Constitution were targeted.

But there’s more, much more, to this scandal than detailed in the IG report.  At the American Center for Law and Justice, we’ve represented 27 conservative organizations, from 18 states.  Here’s what we’ve learned:

First, the scandal was hardly localized with rogue agents in Cincinnati.  At the ACLJ alone, we’ve also dealt with offices in Washington, D.C., Laguna Niguel, California, and El Monte, California.

Second – and here’s what the mainstream media is missing – the questions asked the conservative groups were unconstitutionally intrusive.  Here’s one example:

Do you directly or indirectly communicate with members of legislative bodies?  If so, provide copies of the written communications and contents of other forms of communications.

What is an “indirect” communication?  A newspaper article that a legislator might read?  A speech a legislator’s spouse might attend?  The question is impossibly broad and vague.

Here’s another example:

List each past or present board member, officer, key employee and members of their families who:

a) Has served on the board of another organization.

b) Was, is or plans to be a candidate for public office.  Indicate the nature of each candidacy.

c) Has previously conducted similar activities for another entity.

d) Has previously submitted an application for tax exempt status.

So now the spouses, parents, and children of conservative leaders are under scrutiny?

Or, how about this:

Do you have a close relationship with any candidate for public office or political party?  If so describe fully the nature of that relationship.

These questions read like a wish list for far-left activists trying to examine every aspect of the conservative grassroots movement and chill or intimidate activists into silence.  Imagine if the IRS had similarly targeted the Occupy Wally Street movement or labor unions or environmentalist groups, the outcry -- from the beginning -- would have been overwhelming.

Third, the IRS abuse is ongoing.  Even though the IRS admitted wrongdoing, even though the Inspector General’s report indicates that wrongdoing was widespread, the IRS still hasn’t withdrawn its overbroad and unconstitutional questions, and it still hasn’t granted the exemptions it should grant, despite the fact that some applications have been pending for more than two years.

At the ACLJ we sent the IRS a letter demanding that it grant tax exemptions for all pending applications for our clients, and we also demanded that the IRS hold accountable all those responsible for its unconstitutional policy and actions.

I started my career as a trial tax attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service, and it is impossible for me to believe that this misconduct to be localized and undertaken by “low-level” employees.

In fact, those who work in this area are highly trained, tax-exempt specialists who don’t pursue reviews without approval. Indeed, the Inspector General’s report is unlikely to be truly comprehensive. That’s why a thorough congressional investigation is absolutely mandatory.

We need more than an investigation; we need accountability.  At the ACLJ we’re exploring all legal options on behalf of our clients.  But accountability need not wait on litigation.  Americans won’t regain confidence in the IRS – perhaps the federal government’s most intrusive and omnipresent agency – unless those responsible are punished.

So far the Obama administration has a terrible track record of holding officials responsible for misconduct.

No one has truly been held accountable even for the Benghazi debacle, where 4 brave Americans lost their lives.  Yes, President Obama has expressed outrage at the IRS scandal, but actions speak louder than words.

Mr. President, the ball’s in your court.  Will you act?
Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Follow him on Twitter@JaySekulow.


SOURCE http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/05/14/puzzling-intrusive-questions-irs-asked-conservative-groups-represent

ACLJ Demands IRS Approve Tax-Exempt Status for 10 Tea Party Groups Calling IRS Targeting Scheme "Dishonest" and "Notoriously Disgraceful"

(Washington, DC) - The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which represents nearly 30 Tea Party organizations nationwide, today sent the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) a letter demanding that it grant tax-exempt status immediately to 10 Tea Party groups which have been targeted for additional review. Of the 27 Tea Party groups represented by the ACLJ, 15 have been granted tax-exempt status and today’s demand letter addresses the status of the 10 organizations that are pending. The ACLJ demands that the IRS respond by Friday, May 17th or face possible legal action.

“This is one of the most abhorrent breaches of trust imaginable,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “We now know this coordinated intimidation scheme went beyond Tea Party groups to include Jewish organizations and even groups that discussed the Constitution. The IRS must be held accountable for this dishonest and notoriously disgraceful conduct. We are demanding that the IRS grant our remaining clients tax-exempt status immediately. If that does not occur by Friday, we will advise our clients of their right to sue the IRS for the redress of their grievances. The targeting scheme employed by the IRS not only violates their own rules and regulations, but is certain to result in a growing mistrust of the IRS by the American people.”

In its letter to the IRS Acting Commissioner, the ACLJ demands that the IRS take the following action:

(1) That the IRS approve immediately, and without further delay, the pending requests for either 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) tax exempt status of the following organizations: Albuquerque Tea Party, Allen Area Patriots, Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots, Greenwich Tea Party Patriots, Laurens County Tea Party, Linchpins of Liberty, Myrtle Beach Tea Party, North East Tarrant Tea Party, Patriots Educating Concerned Americans Now (PECAN), and Unite in Action.

(2) That the IRS identify and appropriately discipline all IRS employees who either concocted, knowingly carried out, knowingly failed to stop, or knowingly misinformed Congress or the public about, the scheme to target Tea Party and similar groups in violation of IRS rules and regulations, thereby unlawfully politicizing the IRS and its approval process.

Further, the letter, which is posted here, notes that the IRS conduct violates its own rules and regulations.

"First, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the IRS mission to operate with integrity and fairness. Second, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents violated the requirement to act impartially. And third, by singling out Tea Party and related groups for special scrutiny based on their political views, IRS agents engaged in dishonest, notoriously disgraceful conduct. The same can be said of IRS leaders who knew of, but failed to rein in, such biased, politically-motivated conduct, thereby allowing the politicization of the IRS. Each such action was prejudicial to the Government and impacted negatively on the reputation of the IRS. It is no wonder that, in light of the open and notorious politicization of the IRS vis-a-vis Tea Party and other conservative groups, many Americans view with outright alarm the called-for expansion of the IRS to implement the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"). Agencies like the IRS must be scrupulously apolitical to retain the confidence and trust or the American people. With respect to its treatment of Tea Party and other conservative groups, the IRS failed miserably. The growing mistrust of the IRS is the inevitable (and totally understandable) result of its unwise actions."

The ACLJ began representing Tea Party groups after the IRS launched an effort to intimidate Tea Party organizations by demanding information that is outside the scope of legitimate inquiry and violated the First Amendment. The IRS demanded that groups reveal the internal workings of their organizations - including the identification of members, how they are selected, who they associate with, and even what they discuss.

Sekulow, who served as a trial lawyer with the Office of the Chief Counsel for the IRS earlier in his career, said many of the questions were simply inappropriate and fall well outside the scope of legitimate IRS inquiry. A sampling of the problematic questions is posted here.

The ACLJ is launching a national petition calling on President Obama and members of Congress to hold those responsible for this conduct accountable. The Petition to End IRS Abuse states: “The Internal Revenue Service cannot be used as a weapon against political enemies. There must be a thorough investigation of IRS abuse, and those responsible must be punished. There is no for excuse turning the full power of the IRS on American citizens.”

The ACLJ represents 27 Tea Party organizations. Fifteen have been granted tax-exempt status. Ten groups are pending and two organizations asked that their applications be withdrawn because of frustration with the IRS inquiry.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), focusing on constitutional law, is based in Washington, D.C.


SOURCE http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/aclj-demands-irs-approve-tax-exempt-status-for-10-tea-party-groups-calling-irs-targeting-scheme-dishonest-and-notoriously-disgraceful

ACLJ Calls On Defense Secretary To Cut Ties With Anti-Christian Extremist Used By Pentagon As Advisor On Religious Tolerance

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which defends religious freedom and the constitution, urged the Secretary of Defense today to cut ties with an anti-Christian extremist whom the Pentagon is using to provide advice on crafting policies on religious tolerance for the armed forces. In a letter to Secretary Chuck Hagel, the ACLJ argues that the views of Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) "do not comport with Supreme Court opinions on permissibly religious expression" and urges Secretary Hagel to discontinue using him as a consultant on religious tolerance.

"Mikey Weinstein's beliefs and statements are not only offensive, but clearly represent the vehement intolerance that our military should reject," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "To use him as an advisor in crafting policy for religious tolerance is absurd. Without question, he's among the world's worst candidates to advise Pentagon officials on religious matters. This extremist has no business advising the Pentagon on any matters – much less the critically important need to protect the religious freedom of our men and women serving in the military."

Weinstein has a long track record of using pejorative language to describe Christians – including words and phrases like "monsters," "pitiable unconstitutional carpetbaggers," "bigots," "stuck pigs," "evil," "hate groups," and "die-hard enemies of the Constitution."
Weinstein says that Christians exercising their faith in the military "is a national security threat. What is happening … is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished."

He also says, "We are fighting the Christian version of the Taliban."  "We're fighting Al Qaeda. We're fighting the Taliban, and we're turning our own military into that exact same thing."

In the letter, which is posted here, the ACLJ argues:

"While he claims to be in pursuit of religious tolerance, he readily defames those who disagree with him and accuses them of all manner of evil activities. In truth, Mr. Weinstein's disagreement is with the beliefs held by those he targets, beliefs that he frequently misunderstands and misstates and beliefs he periodically mocks."

By providing consultative services to the Pentagon, the ACLJ notes that: "In effect, Mr. Weinstein is demanding that the Pentagon adopt his position on what theological beliefs, expression, and conduct are acceptable."

The ACLJ specifically calls on Secretary Hagel to cut ties with Weinstein immediately:

"In light of the facts and law presented above, it is clear that Mr. Weinstein and the MRFF do not represent views or pursue policies that enhance religious tolerance. Mr. Weinstein advocates extreme positions which he defends with intemperate and ill-considered arguments. He is an extremist who sees constitutional violations where none exist. He is the last person who should be consulted in developing a balanced policy on religious expression in the armed forces of the United States."

In addition to the letter, the ACLJ has heard from more than 65,000 Americans who are calling on the Obama Administration to end its relationship with Weinstein.

Led by ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and is online at aclj.org.

MEDIA  CONTACTS:
For Print: Gene Kapp  (757) 575-9520
For Broadcast:  Alison Geist or Chandler Epp (770) 813-0000
SOURCE American Center for Law and Justice