Issa and Jordan To IRS Commissioner: Withdraw IRS Political Speech Rule

issa_jordan_ap_218 (1)

Tuesday, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan today requested that IRS Commissioner John Koskinen withdraw the controversial proposed IRS regulation that would limit political speech by nonprofit organizations. Issa argues that his Committee’s investigation into the IRS’s targeting scandal “has raised serious flaws and concerns about the process and substance of the proposed rule.”

“The proposed regulation is intended to clarify the tax-exemption determinations process and resolve problems identified in a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) audit report. It does not,” wrote Chairman Issa and Chairman Jordan. “As written, the Administration’s proposed rule will stifle the speech of social welfare organizations and will codify and systemize targeting of organizations whose views are at odds with those of the Administration.  In addition to these substantive concerns, we also have serious concerns about the process by which the Administration promulgated this rule.”

Concerns include the following, detailed in the letter:

·         The proposed rule codifies the Obama Administration’s earlier attempts to stifle political speech.

·         The proposed rule improperly applies Federal Election Commission standards to tax-exempt organizations.

·         The IRS’s efforts to develop new restrictions on political speech for non-profit groups, led by Lois Lerner and the IRS chief counsel’s office, began long before the TIGTA audit was released.

·         The proposed regulation will needlessly harm social welfare organizations.

Read today’s letter here.

Jordan Sekulow of the ACLJ appeared on the Blaze, yesterday to talk about the IRS rule change.

Meanwhile,  it is now being reported that Obama didn’t consult Justice before saying there was not a smidgen of corruption at the IRS.

President Obama didn’t check with the Justice Department before saying there was no corruption at the IRS, the department’s deputy told Congress on Tuesday, ahead of several potential showdowns on Capitol Hill this week.

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen is scheduled to appear before the tax-writing committee Wednesday, where he will likely have to defend new rules clamping down on non-profit groups. And Republicans have invited a Justice Department lawyer involved in investigating the IRS to testify Thursday — though Deputy Attorney General James Cole has said he won’t allow her to appear.


Wednesday Thursday morning’s Oversight  hearing, The IRS Targeting Investigation: What is the Administration Doing? starts at  9:30 a.m.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Video: Cruz Contrasts U.S. Foreign Policy Reality With Obama’s Utopian Fantasy

On the Senate floor, today, Sen. Ted Cruz brought up the president’s Utopian State of the Union speech to offer a contrasting account of issues impacting our nation abroad. He said that on the whole, Obama’s remarks reflected a rosy scenario that encouraged Americans not to worry to much about international challenges….

“I wish we all lived in the Utopian world President Obama painted on Tuesday, but in just one week numerous news reports suggest this world belongs more in the realm of fantasy than reality,” Sen. Cruz said. “American leadership is not defined by global opportunities to ‘do good and promote understanding,’ contrary to what President Obama claimed last week. American leadership is defined by defending and promoting the values that have made our nation great. We do this not by ignoring unpleasant realities or refusing to admit failure, but by facing our challenges and accepting responsibility for our actions, while speaking out with a clarion voice for the freedoms we enjoy, which should be the aspiration of every man and woman on the planet.”

Regarding Syria, the President claimed that Syria’s chemical weapons are being eliminated. But in reality, we have learned in recent days that the process has not proceeded as promised, with the Assyrians ignoring their deadlines and only 4 percent of stockpiles eliminated. Syria’s brutal dictator, Bashar al-Assad knows there is no threat of force to encourage him to comply. After three years of rudderless U.S. policy, more than 130,000 are dead, millions of refugees are displaced, and the oldest Christian communities on the planet are threatened with extinction.

Regarding Iran, the President claimed, “It is American diplomacy, backed by pressure, that has halted the progress of Iran’s nuclear program.” In reality, no enriched uranium has been destroyed and no centrifuges have been dismantled. In fact, the Iranians quickly refuted the President’s claim, since announcing that they have not halted their progress in the slightest. While billions of dollars now flow into Iran because of a recent and terrible deal struck to relax sanctions, there has still been no renunciation of Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism that has killed Americans in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iraq, and the mullahs have executed 40 people in the first two weeks of January alone. That should be no surprise knowing that Iranian President Hasan Rouhani has gloated, “The Geneva deal means the surrender of the big powers in front of the great nation of Iran.”

“The claim that we are negotiating with Iran from a position of strength and confidence is a blinkered view of reality, because it isn’t even clear that the president is negotiating towards actual victory”, Cruz declared.. “Capitulation is not victory.”

In his only mention of Israel, the President claimed, “American diplomacy is supporting Israelis and Palestinians as they engage in difficult but necessary talks to end the conflict there” and reassured that Israel that “America will always be at their side.” In reality, reports suggest that Secretary of State John Kerry is working behind the scenes to encourage European countries to “threaten” Israel with boycotts if the Israelis don’t agree to the framework Kerry is expected to propose. Rather than threats, Israel needs to hear that the United States:

  • Values its unique status as a strong democratic ally in the Middle East,
  • Appreciates its difficult security situation with the threat of a nuclear Iran,
  • Will rigorously defend it from attacks by international institutions and attempts to undermine its economy through punitive boycotts, and
  • Is unshakably committed to preserving its security regardless of “peace process” status

Regarding Ukraine, the President claimed, “In Ukraine, we stand for the principle that all people have a right to express themselves freely and peacefully, and have a say in their country’s future.” In reality, Ukraine’s former President said last week that the country teeters on the brink of civil war; protestors have been brutally tortured and murdered; and the Ukrainian people’s constitutional rights have been trampled. This former Soviet Republic’s corrupt and autocratic leader has pulled away from a proposed trade agreement with the EU and path to NATO membership and thrust Ukraine back into Russia’s sphere of influence, depriving the United States of an important economic and security partner. The United States should look for concrete actions to demonstrate support for the opposition, starting with free-trade agreements and partnerships in the energy sector, such as releasing exports of liquid natural gas from the United States.

Other crucial international issues were simply ignored by the President.

Regarding Benghazi, the President claimed nothing. In reality, we still have no answers why four Americans were murdered in a preventable attack by al Qaida terrorists and why, more than 16 months later, no one in Washington or Libya has been held accountable. Congress, the American people and the families of the fallen deserve the answers that only a joint select committee of Congress, which Sen. Cruz has called for, can provide. Although the President was forced to address Benghazi in his interview before the Super Bowl, he refused to answer if he was informed the night of the attacks that they were the work of terrorists or why the talking points were scrubbed to eradicate any mention of terrorists.

Regarding Pastor Saeed Abedini, an innocent American citizen brutally imprisoned in Iran for peacefully practicing his Christian faith, the President claimed nothing. In reality, Abedini has been unjustly jailed for more than a year. There is no more compelling evidence that the Supreme Leader in Tehran represents the same repressive Islamist regime today that he has for years, and that his goal is not peaceful rapprochement with the West but the preservation of his own power. The President of the United States should be demanding Abedini’s release, not making his captors into diplomatic partners.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

CT Collectivist Gun Grabber Ruthlessly Exposed By Sipsey Street Irregulars

And how. If you haven’t yet read Mike Vanderboegh’s superb expose and  take-down of Michael Lawlor, Connecticut Governor Dannell Malloy’s “hatchet man” on the State’s gun control efforts, you need to stop everything and read it, right now. Take it all in and know that there are many more such men and women peppered throughout the Democrat/Media Complex – right to the highest reaches of government. And I do mean highest.

Michael Lawlor CT Office of Policy & Mgt

“You can either surrender the weapon to us, destroy the weapon, or sell it to a federal firearms licensee. After that date (January 1) that hasn’t been declared or register is banned and if you get caught, you’re going to get arrested.” — Michael Lawlor.

An Open Letter to Michael Lawlor, the CT Governor’s Hatchet Man on Firearms Confiscation. “How’s your KGB file hangin’, Mike?”

You know it is quite ironic that on the morning I sit down to write this letter we discover that Adam Lanza (whose evil deeds were the supposed excuse for your Intolerable Act) was something of a twisted fellow traveler of collectivism being an apparently homosexual, environmentalist vegan who was anti-Christian enough to forbid his mother to put up a Christmas tree. “Gee,” I thought when I read that, “This kid could have grown up to be a Connecticut Democrat politician.” That he provided the bloody excuse for tyrant wannabes such as yourself is certainly the Devil’s own joke — send a collectivist killer to enable future collectivist power. Old Scratch must be laughing his ass off.

You know after just a cursory reading of your biography here and here, I realized that I owed you an apology. Previously I had described you as Malloy’s “Eichmann.” But Eichmann was a rather colorless bureaucrat, defining as Hannah Arendt spelled out, “the banality of evil.” But you, sir, are no bureaucratic handmaiden of evil. No, to call you an Eichmann would require an apology to both you and Eichmann. You, sir, are a true believer — more of a Heydrich than an Eichmann. Or, if you raise a Godwin’s objection, shall we say a Felix Dzerzhinsky? Yes. Dzerzhinsky is certainly more fitting.

I note that while you were at UConn in 1977 you “participated in language studies in Russia in 1977” at Moscow and Leningrad. You then earned a Master’s Degree in Soviet Area Studies from the University of London in 1981. You were, what, 20 when you first experienced the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War? It must have fascinated you early on in life. Yet after you got your Masters in Soviet Area Studies from the University of London at a time when that and other British universities were prime recruiting grounds for KGB “political warfare” assets, and you subsequently “received a Fulbright-Hays Scholarship to study economic reform in Hungary in 1982,” you decided to change course and become, in quick succession, a lawyer, a prosecutor and then a Democrat Party politician.

Why the change, Mike?

Your KGB file might provide some clues along those lines, of course. I had a long chat with a former CIA Cold Warrior who is intimately familiar with the KGB infiltration and subversion tactics of the time of your stay in the Soviet Union. He says that you certainly have a KGB file and had a KGB officer assigned to your case with the object of making an asset of you. No one from the United States got into the Soviet Union back then without the close inspection of the KGB. NO ONE.

And what would the KGB be looking for, I asked? “A lot of dewy-eyed kids were going to the Soviet Union back then with this fascination for the other side. They thought the Vietnam War proved the evil nature of American society and they wanted to see what the other side was like. So they (the KGB) would look for someone with those misconceptions and then look for other vulnerabilities. And their recruitment operations were vast. VAST.” What other vulnerabilities? I asked.

“For one, homosexuality or other sexual deviance,” he answered. He drew my attention to these passages regarding the Prime case from The New KGB: Engine of Soviet Power by William Corson and Robert Crowley:

Prime exhibited most of the disabilities on the KGB check list and more than qualified as a target for recruitment. A loner, a young man with sexual problems and someone who, by his own admission, believed that the downtrodden of the world would fare better under communism. Such symptoms and attitudes assured that, at an appropriate moment, he would fall into the Soviet bag. The case is not a tribute to the Soviets’ prescience but another instance of their readiness for an event such as Prime’s self-selection, their single-minded patience, clerical effort, and corps of competent case officers who were trained and fully aware of what their jobs entailed.

In Berlin the Soviet support nets are massive. In addition to surveillance, drivers, couriers, police, and postal employees, they include “swallows” who specialize in foreigners who enjoy mild or other forms of perversion. . . The KGB’s ‘girls’ . . . provide the organs with volumes of information about their clients. . . The girls are also alerted to spot the six “d’s” — discontent, disaffection, depression, drunkenness, desperation, and sexual dysfunction — nany one of which might provide a future lever. — pp. 390-361.

It is a matter of record that after being long in the closet, you “came out” only in 2006.

Of course Prime was not a homosexual but the KGB did not lack for male “swallows” if their target had those appetites.

Read the whole thing, here.


And now there’s…

My Second Open Letter to Mike Lawlor — On “Nightcrawlers” and Treason Played for Laughs. We’ve already established that you are willing to sell out your country. Now we’re just haggling about the price.

 MBV Note to Readers: In my first letter to Connecticut’s own Felix Dzerzhinsky,Mike Lawlor, we explored the subject of that tyrannical collectivist’s KGB file. The response to that missive was very gratifying, as well as rewarding in terms of further clues and offers of assistance. I hope you like this letter as much as you liked the first.

You know, it’s the arrogance about you collectivist pricks that always strikes me as ironically misplaced. You’re always the smartest guy in the room, dispensing orders from on high as if to the purple born, yet when it comes to the important things you really aren’t all that bright.

Take that slip you made in the interview when you played the subject of treason for laughs. Of course you have long thought yourself safe from scrutiny of any questions about what you were up to back in the 70s and early 80s. But mentioning that a. you had tried to get a job with the CIA right out of law school and b. that they had turned you down, well, even to a guy like me who’s nothing particularly special other than an amateur student of history, why, that’s just plain stupid.

It raises so many questions and reinforces the ones I’ve already asked. Why would the CIA, at the height of the Cold War when it needed every trustworthy Russian speaker and analyst, turn you down? I guess the key word there is “trustworthy.” The CIA, and not because of the bad joke, must have found compelling reasons to find you untrustworthy. That must have stung, huh? Not that you weren’t accepted — you would play that for laughs, for you are the smartest guy in the room and that just proves their stupidity, right? As a homosexual you already were struggling with issues of identity, loyalty, societal trust, etc. And again, homosexuality is not the issue. It is not now, nor was it then, grounds (by itself) for exclusion from employment by the CIA. According to my sources, the Agency knowingly hired many homosexuals from its inception onward as long as it was convinced of their loyalty, their trustworthiness. And, my sources say, as long as that was understood up front there was no blackmail risk and the Agency only very rarely was proved wrong about their pick.

So why did they turn you down, Mike? What was it that they spotted about you? I am told by sources who were once in a position to know that you have not only a KGB file and a CIA file, but an FBI file as well. We’ll never get anything out of the CIA, but I wonder what a FOIA of the FBI might turn up? Have you got the juice to work your will upon the Fibbies as well?

And again, why apply to the CIA at all? Why did you change your career from Soviet Studies academic to zealous public prosecutor seeking the brass ring of political power? You are a public official. These are legitimate questions. Not that I expect an answer from you, at least not a written one.

Hat tip: Larwyn’s Links.

Linked by Maggie’s Farm, thanks!

Fox News: Fmr CIA Director Morell Altered Benghazi Talking Points To Help Obama Politically (Video)

Fox News reported today that former CIA Director Mike Morell may have altered the Benghazi talking points to help the Obama administration politically during the 2012 election.

Via WFB:

On September 15 one day before Susan Rice made her infamous appearances on various Sunday shows, according to the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report Morell received an email from the CIA station chief in Libya indicating the Benghazi attacks were “not/not an escalation of protests.” The report does not indicate when Morell read the email, but that same day Morell cut the word “Islamic” from the talking points and left the word “demonstration.”

On September 16, Morell emailed embassy staff in Tripoli asking for more information. The FBI and CIA reviewed the closed circuit footage on September 18 showing there were no protests. Yet, President Obama still employed the “demonstration” verbiage just days later.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said Morell accompanied Susan Rice in a closed November meeting to discuss the attack. According to Graham, Morell defended Rice and tried to emphasize there was confusion about what happened in Benghazi. Moreover, Graham alleged Morell did not accept responsibility for altering the talking points, instead blaming the FBI. ”I called the FBI. They went ballistic. Within 24 hours, his statement was changed where he admitted the CIA had done it,” Graham said.

Charles Krauthammer responded to the report and Obama’s pre-Super Bowl interview.

“When Obama talks about this as if he didn’t know, I think he’s simply continuing a successful stonewall,” Krauthammer explained, pointing to multiple diplomatic and security officials providing contemporaneous accounts differing from the administration’s initial characterization of the events. “He talks around it — he talks in a way that is not answering the question.”

Additionally, due to the story’s complicated nature and “huge cast of characters,” the media has also stayed away from investigating the story, which the president is well aware of. “He knew, he pretends he doesn’t, and he has succeeded in not getting the program he should have as a result of that.”

Catherine Herridge reported on the Morell story on The Kelly File where she made the point that people “are speculating that Morell may have higher political ambitions considering his employment at Beacon Global Strategies, a government relations firm founded by close Hillary Clinton confidante Philippe I. Reines.”

Megyn Kelly also had on SC Congressman Trey Gowdy to discuss Obama’s statements on Benghazi and the IRS scandals.

Editor’s note: the  headline was altered since originally posting to reflect that Morell is the former CIA Director not the current one.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!