Obama's 'enemies list' -- Tyranny in action
By Mark Alexander
If you asked me whether I thought card-carrying members of the Socialist Democratic Party would, by way of their bureaucratic surrogates, use the IRS and other government agencies to target groups with the name "Patriot," I would have said, "Of course." If you asked me whether I thought they would get caught at it, I would have said "No," because they're smart enough to use "cutouts" between their office and the bureaucrats committing the offense.
Cutouts are bureaucratic managers who act as surrogates to do the political bidding of elected officials. They are blamed and sacrificed for the "good of the cause," in order to protect (read: "provide plausible deniability for") elected officials who feign outrage and indignation at the violation of law in support of their political agenda. When the president of the United States is the elected official behind a culture of corruption and abuse of power, the layers of cutouts make it nearly impossible to find impeachable evidence of executive collusion.
Needless to say, Barack Obama and his black-bag dirty tricks team learned well from their Democrat predecessors, FDR, JFK and Clinton, how to use the Internal Revenue Service to harass their opponents. But they also learned a few things from Richard Nixon about the importance of using cutouts. Nixon resigned to avoid impeachment after being caught on tape discussing the Watergate burglary with key staffers, where today those staffers would never directly discuss such abuse of power with a sitting president.
When I was young, a legislative aid to our senator took my father and me to hear the testimony of one of those staffers, H.R. Haldeman, former chief of staff to Nixon. I was too young to fully grasp Watergate, but I sensed that this hearing had significant implications for the president.
I'm older and a little wiser now, and I assume that, unlike Nixon, Obama is probably clever enough to ensure his fingerprints are not on anything directly related to the most significant scandal of his administration -- the politically-motivated adulteration of the Benghazi talking points ahead of his 2012 re-election campaign.
Likewise, don't expect Obama to be convicted for "guilt by association" with those in his administration who have apparently been using the IRS to target his political opponents since at least 2010. As his former chief dirty trickster, David Axelrod, said this week, "Part of being president is there's so much beneath you that you can't know because the government's so vast." Yes, many, many layers.
Indeed, it was been confirmed last week that senior IRS administrators in Washington did have knowledge that the agency targeted conservative groups for harassment. A legal and tax advisor to The Patriot Post informed us that the Post and Patriot Foundation Trust, our education fund advocating constitutional integrity, clearly "met the corrupt criterion for the IRS inquisition," but for a couple of reasons (which we can't disclose publicly) we were passed over for review.
However, almost 500 other groups with "Patriot" or "Tea Party" in their name were not so fortunate.
Obama's political handlers certainly recall Article II, Section 1 of the 1974 House impeachment against Nixon, which could be a template for a case against Obama today if not for all the cutouts: "He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to ... cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner."
Undoubtedly, the current regime's dirty tricksters have learned their history and covered all the bases to protect their radical socialist leader.
As for his knowledge of the IRS case, Obama claims, "I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward." Apparently he's invoking the administration's now-familiar Sergeant Schultz defense: "I know nothing, I see nothing, I was not here, I did not even get up this morning."
However, it's difficult to reconcile Obama's claim with the 54-page report issued by the Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury regarding the targeting of his political opponents.
That report concludes:
(1.) For 18-months, all tax exempt applicants with the words "Patriot" or "Tea Party" in their names were selected for review, and later that order expanded to include "groups focused on government spending, government debt, taxes, and education on ways to 'make America a better place to live'." Then came groups with educational missions focused on the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
(2.) IRS section chief Lois Lerner knew about the targeting in June 2011, but in March 2012, IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman testified before Congress "that the agency was not targeting conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status as 'social welfare' groups." (By the way, not in the IG's report is the fact that Lerner was given $42,531 in bonuses during the time period when she was overseeing the IRS agents who were targeting conservative groups.)
Yes, Obama fired acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller Wednesday, though Miller was already scheduled to resign next month. Miller's firing is nothing more than a diversionary tactic.
Obama feigned outrage: "Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I'm angry about it. The good news is we can fix this." I presume that means making sure the abuse is better concealed in the future...
And then there's the question of how Obama's 2012 campaign co-chair, Joe Solmonese, far above most cutouts in the IRS case, acquired the confidential donor tax records of the National Organization for Marriage and assailed Mitt Romney for his donation of $10,000 to NOM in support of traditional marriage. Solmonese protested that Romney's "funding of a hate-filled campaign designed to drive a wedge between Americans is beyond despicable. Not only has Romney signed NOM's radical marriage pledge, now we know he's one of the donors that NOM has been so desperate to keep secret all these years."
At the time, Solmonese was still president of the so-called Human Rights Campaign, a major homosexual advocacy organization. A day after posting that criticism of Romney in the liberal Huffington Post, he resigned his position with HRC and became Obama's co-chair.
It's no small irony that before the IRS scandal broke last week, Obama delivered a commencement address at Ohio State University, where he counseled graduates, "Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn ... that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices."
Using the strong arm of government to suppress political opponents exercising our constitutional prerogative to "petition the government for a redress of grievances" is the very definition of tyranny.
To that end, I recall language from another historic impeachment, which most assuredly applies to Obama: "He has refused his Assent to Laws... He has obstructed the Administration of Justice... He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people... He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation ... all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States."
That indictment is, of course, from our Declaration of Independence.
I am also reminded of another commencement speech Obama delivered in 2009 at Arizona State University, after university officials declined to give Obama an honorary doctorate. Obama "joked" that "[university president Michael] Crowe and the Board of Regents will soon learn all about being audited by the IRS." Maybe not so much of a joke after all...
As you recall, Obama proclaimed in 2010, when the IRS began its work on his enemies list, "We have put in place the toughest ethics laws and toughest transparency rules of any administration in history." That was just another fine example of rhetorical horse pucky from the master prevaricator.
Last month, Obama asserted, "I am elected by you. I am constrained ... by a system that our Founders put in place. It's a government of and by and for the people."
He may have uttered the words of a solemn presidential oath to abide by the constraints of the "system our Founders put in place," but there is no evidence he has, does or ever will abide by that oath.
Obama's spin machine is running full throttle.
After Lois Lerner publicly acknowledged, "We made some mistakes; some people didn't use good judgment. We're apologetic [for] absolutely inappropriate" actions against conservative groups, Jay Carney, proxy spokesman for the president of the United States, rebutted, "You know, one person's view of what actions were taken happened is not enough for us to say concretely what happened was inappropriate."
Carney's non-committal confutation followed Obama's qualification of his "outrage" about the IRS accusations: "If, in fact, IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that had been reported on..."
And David Plouffe, manager of Obama's 2008 campaign and a senior advisor until January of this year, responded via Twitter, "[Important] to note GOP groups flourished [the] last 2 elections, overwhelming Ds. And they will use this to raise more $."
Oh. So the IRS actions were justified on the grounds of "leveling the playing field"?
The House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight is demanding that the Internal Revenue Service turn over every communication in its records that includes the words "tea party," "patriot" or "conservative."
Stay tuned folks.
Mark Alexander is the executive editor of the Patriot Post.