Category Archives: IRS

Bill Hillary Chelsea Clinton foundation fraud, Legal definition or just dictionary, Slush fund is misleading, Example on about page regarding 2013 consolidated financial reports, 88.4 percent spent on programs???

Bill Hillary Chelsea Clinton foundation fraud, Legal definition or just dictionary, Slush fund is misleading, Example on about page regarding 2013 consolidated financial reports, 88.4 percent spent on programs???

“the Democratic Party overlooked the ethical red flags and made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil. And he delivered. With Mr. Clinton at the controls, the party won the White House twice. But in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul.”…Bob Herbert, NY Times February 26, 2001

“The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation, which reportedly expects to raise $200 million to build a library to help memorialize the ex-president’s legacy, is nothing more than a ‘slush fund,”…Dick Morris February 2001

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

Fraud.

Corporate fraud:

“Activities undertaken by an individual or company that are done in a dishonest or illegal manner, and are designed to give an advantage to the perpetrating individual or company. Corporate fraud schemes go beyond the scope of an employee’s stated position, and are marked by their complexity and economic impact on the business, other employees and outside parties.”

Dictionary:

“an act of deceiving or misrepresenting”
The about page for the Bill Hillary and Chelsea foundation shows the following at the bottom:

2013 Expenditures (Per 2013 Consolidated Financials)

88.4%
Programs
7%
Management and General
4.6%
Fundraising

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about

Gives one the impression that 88.4 percent of the expenditures went to the advertised end recipients doesn’t it?

Here are the breakdowns for the expenditures:

ClintonFoundationConsolidated2013

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/sites/default/files/clinton_foundation_report_public_11-19-14.pdf

That is a total of $ 222,396,102.

“Program services” $ 196,633,380.

Management general $ 15,633,562.

Fund raising $ 10,129,160.

The breakdown for “program services”.

Salaries and benefits……………… $ 65,775,050
Direct program expenditures……. 29,389,026
Professional and consulting………. 13,697,674
Conferences and events………………. 9,721,984
UNITAID commodities expense.. 28,647,779
Procurement and shipping…………. 1,668,867
Travel………………………………………. 16,707,454
Telecommunications…………………. 2,214,469
Meetings and trainings……………… 7,470,295
Bank and other fees…………………….. 706,900
Occupancy costs……………………….. 4,715,823
Office expenses…………………………. 4,673,655
Capital charges…………………………. 3,962,232
Depreciation…………………………….. 4,318,967
Other……………………………………….. 2,963,205

That is a lot of salaries, consulting, conferences, travel and meetings.

And those items total $ 113,372,457.

51 percent of total expenditures.

How did spending $ 113,372,457 help the advertised charity recipients.

Who benefited most?

I would like to to see the details.

From WND April 22, 2015.

“Wall Street analyst uncovers Clinton Foundation fraud”

“The Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation – already under scrutiny for foreign donations – is now being accused of fraudulent and possibly criminal mismanagement.

Over the past six weeks, Wall Street financial analyst and investor Charles Ortel has shared with WND, prior to publication, the results of his six-month, in-depth investigation into what he characterizes as an elaborate scheme devised by the Clintons to enrich themselves.

Through their foundation, Ortel contends, the Clintons have defrauded an unsuspecting international public of hundreds of millions of dollars for personal gain.

The findings come amid separate charges in Peter Schweizer’s upcoming book “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.”

In Ortel’s April 20 report, “False Philanthropy? First Interim Report Concerning The Bill Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation,” he asks: “Did management exercise vigilance to ensure that the Clinton Foundation actually carried out its original and its amended tax-exempt purposes?””

““The numbers that the Clinton Foundation supply to the global public in its legally mandated filings do not add up, are frequently incorrect and overall appear to be materially misleading,” Ortel explained.

He said that in numerous cases, the Clinton Foundation “appears to have followed inconsistent policies adding in appropriate portions of the various activities it pursued around the world to create ‘consolidated’ financial statements.”

“In some instances, portions were added only for some of the years in which the entities remained in operation, artificially enhancing purported financial results,” Ortel concluded. “In other cases, important elements of activity were improperly characterized and combined.”

Ortel asks: “Do the Clintons, and others who operate the Clinton Foundation, function as Robin Hood in reverse – do they dupe small, modest income donors to enrich themselves and cronies?””

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/wall-street-analyst-uncovers-clinton-foundation-fraud/

 

IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane emails backups may exist, More computer problems with less than 20 individuals, Chairman Issa IRS attempted to keep key witness Mr. Kane away from investigators

IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane emails backups may exist, More computer problems with less than 20 individuals, Chairman Issa IRS attempted to keep key witness Mr. Kane away from investigators

“Don’t think I want to be on stage with Grassley on this issue.”…Lois Lerner email

“The IRS is clearly in full cover-up mode,” “It is well past time for the Obama administration to answer to a federal court about its cover up and destruction of records.”…Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton

 

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

From the the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform July 21, 2014.

“New Testimony: IRS May Still Have Missing Lois Lerner E-mails Backed Up”

“Official in charge of document production also raises possibility of new e-mail losses from ‘less than 20’ officials

During a transcribed interview with congressional investigators on Thursday, July 17, IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane, who supervises the IRS’s targeting scandal document production to Congress, testified that new developments now make him uncertain whether e-mail back-up tapes containing lost e-mails from key IRS targeting official Lois Lerner exist or not.  The new testimony is at odds with the June 13, 2014, memo sent to Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) by the IRS which reported that the IRS, “Confirmed that back-up tapes from 2011 no longer exist because they have been recycled.”  Kane had reviewed the June 13 memo but noted his current uncertainty with investigators.

Kane and a Committee investigator had the following exchange during Thursday’s transcribed interview:

Investigator: You stated at the time that document was produced to Congress, the document, the white paper in Exhibit 3[the June 13 memo], that it was accurate to the best of your knowledge.  Is it still accurate?

Kane: There is an issue as to whether or not there is a ‑‑ that all of the backup recovery tapes were destroyed on the 6‑month retention schedule. 

Investigator: So some of those backup tapes may still exist?

Kane: I don’t know whether they are or they aren’t, but it’s an issue that’s being looked at. 

Kane also testified that in addition to the IRS officials who had experienced hard drive crashes, as reported to the House Ways & Means Committee, a number of officials above and beyond these officials “have had computer problems over the course of the period covered by the investigations and the chairman’s subpoena” that could prevent the IRS from fully complying with the subpoenas.  Kane characterized the number of such individuals as “less than 20” and named IRS officials Andy Megosh, Kimberly Kitchens, Justin Lowe, and David Fish as members of the new group.

Justin Lowe – Technical Advisor to the Commissioner of Tax-Exempt and Government Entities, before that he was a tax-law specialist in EO (Exempt Organizations) Technical and then EO Guidance.  Advisor to Tax-Exempt and Government Entities Commissioner Joseph Grant.

David Fish – Manager of EO Guidance (which develops formal and informal guidance to the public on tax-exempt issues); Fish also served as Acting Director of Rulings and Agreements in late 2011/early 2012. Advisor to Lois Lerner.

Andy Megosh – Group manager in EO Guidance.  Megosh was cited in the Ways and Means Committee’s referral of Lerner Lerner to the Justice Department.

Kimberly Kitchens – IRS revenue agent in Cincinnati who donated to President Obama’s reelection campaign.

Chairman Issa issued the following statement on the new revelations in Kane’s testimony:

“I’m struck by the fact that the IRS attempted to keep a key witness like Mr. Kane away from investigators and only agreed to his appearance after I issued a subpoena for his testimony. Finding out that IRS Commissioner Koskinen jumped the gun in reporting to Congress that the IRS ‘confirmed’ all back-up tapes had been destroyed makes me even more suspicious of why he waited months to inform Congress about lost Lois Lerner e-mails.  Commissioner Koskinen has repeatedly blamed the reporting delay on an effort to be sure what he said was correct, we now know that wasn’t the case.”

 An expanded transcript of Mr. Thomas Kane’s exchange about the possibility that e-mail back-up tapes may still exist falls below:

Q1- And the white paper that you identified, that you called a white paper in Exhibit 3, you said that you had an opportunity to review that before it was produced.  Is that accurate?

A- Yes.

Q1- And to the best of your knowledge, was that document an accurate representation of the information within it?

A- At that time, that was certainly accurate. 

Q1- And if you had had any concerns about the accuracy of that document, would you have raised them?

A- Yes. 

Q1- And did you raise any concerns about the accuracy of that document?

A- As I indicated earlier, I had some issues that are suggested edits that I thought needed to be made, and there was a discussion about those, and there were some changes made.  They weren’t major, but, you know, I was accommodated. 

Q1- So the end product was accurate?

A- That was the state of knowledge and facts as we knew it when the document was set up.

Q1- Thank you very much.  I really appreciate the many hours you’ve spent with us. 

Q2- Sir, if I could just ask you one clarifying question based on your answers to those questions.  You stated at the time that document was produced to Congress, the document, the white paper in Exhibit 3, that it was accurate to the best of your knowledge.  Is it still accurate? 

A- There is an issue as to whether or not there is a ‑‑ that all of the backup recovery tapes were destroyed on the 6‑month retention schedule. 

Q2- So some of those backup tapes may still exist?

A- I don’t know whether they are or they aren’t, but it’s an issue that’s being looked at. 

Q2- By who?

A- It’s part of the TIGTA investigation.

Q2- So no one in the IRS, to your knowledge, outside of TIGTA, is looking at that issue?

A- The IRS is not looking at anything being investigated by TIGTA. 

Q2- And when was that issue identified?

A- Sometime after the white paper was sent up. 

Q2- And has there been any discussion about disclosing that issue to Congress, to the best of your knowledge?

A- I don’t know whether it has or it hasn’t been.  I thought Chairman Issa asked a question about it at the last hearing, but I could be wrong about that. 

Q2- The hearing with Commissioner Koskinen?

A- Yes.

Q2- And did the Commissioner give an accurate response to that question?

A- I forget how the question was framed, but I thought I had a recollection that Chairman Issa had asked the Commissioner about a backup tape issue looking ‑‑ being looked at by TIGTA.  That’s the context of my recollection. 

Q2- Anything else that you’re aware of that you can tell us about about the issue of the potential availability of a backup tape? 

Kane’s Counsel – Objection to form.

A- Again, it’s all under investigation by TIGTA at this point in time.  And I don’t know if there is a backup tape with information on it or there isn’t.  I know that there’s an issue out there about it. 

Q2- Okay.  Thank you, sir. 

(Q1= Committee investigator #1; Q2= Committee investigator #2; A= Kane)”

http://oversight.house.gov/release/new-testimony-irs-may-still-missing-lois-lerner-e-mails-backed/

Judicial Watch US District Court Hearing July 10, 2014 Lois Lerner IRS emails, IRS failed to notify of lost emails, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, District of Columbia, Special prosecutor to be appointed

Judicial Watch US District Court Hearing July 10, 2014 Lois Lerner IRS emails, IRS failed to notify of lost emails, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, District of Columbia, Special prosecutor to be appointed

“Don’t think I want to be on stage with Grassley on this issue.”…Lois Lerner email

“The IRS is clearly in full cover-up mode,” “It is well past time for the Obama administration to answer to a federal court about its cover up and destruction of records.”…Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

 
From the New York Observer June 27, 2014.

“BREAKING: Meet Emmet Sullivan, IRS Judge Who Once Sicced a Special Prosecutor on DOJ”

“Earlier today, attorneys for Judicial Watch sought a courtroom status conference “as soon as possible to discuss the IRS’s failure to fulfill its duties to this court under the law, as well as other ramifications of this lawsuit.” It took Judge Sullivan just a few hours to grant the hearing.

Now the IRS will have to talk to Judge Sullivan about all this—and he has the power to do something about it.

Judge Sullivan is the judge who held federal prosecutors in contempt, dismissed an unjust indictment against a United States Senator, and publicly excoriated the Department of Justice. He also had the moral conviction, courage and gumption to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department and the individual prosecutors.

The IRS, the White House, and the DOJ have a lot of explaining to do (and some emails to locate). The Washington Examiner reports that “No mention was made in that production of the lost Lerner emails, even though the original Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit filed in May 2013 specifically sought them. Judicial Watch further noted that ‘although IRS had knowledge of the missing Lois Lerner emails and of the other IRS officials, it materially omitted any mention of the missing records’ in an April 30 status update on its document production.”

Emmet G. Sullivan, a graduate of Howard University and Howard Law who was appointed by President Clinton, is one of the heroes of my new book, Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. Judge Sullivan ordered an independent investigation of the Department of Justice, which revealed its corrupted prosecution of United States Senator Ted Stevens.”

Read more:

http://observer.com/2014/06/breaking-meet-emmet-sullivan-irs-judge-who-once-sicced-a-special-prosecutor-on-doj/#ixzz35u2gbOmu

From Judicial Watch June 27, 2014.
“Federal Court Grants Hearing on IRS Email Destruction to Judicial Watch”

“Judicial Watch today filed a Motion for Status Conference, and within hours was granted a hearing in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to confer about the emails of Lois Lerner and other IRS officials, which were the subject of longstanding Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and a lawsuit, and which the IRS now claims to have “lost” (Judicial Watch v. IRS(No. 1:13-cv–1559)). The hearing is scheduled for July 10.

The emails Judicial Watch has sought since May 2013 cover portions of the same period for which the IRS on June 13, 2014, notified the House Committee on Ways and Means were lost or destroyed. Yet, according to the Motion for Status Conference, the IRS failed to notify either Judicial Watch or the court concerning the “lost” emails:

Plaintiff’s FOIA requests and the Committee’s request indisputably seek the same emails of Lois Lerner and the other IRS officials, including Nikole Flax, from January 1, 2010 to the present. Despite the obvious relevance, IRS has still not notified the Court or Plaintiff of the destruction of emails and whether the same issues relating to production of emails of Lois Lerner or the other six IRS officials exist in this lawsuit. Plaintiff only learned of the destroyed records on June 13, 2014, when the news media reported on the existence of IRS’s letter to Congress about the status of the emails.

In May 2013, Judicial Watch submitted four separate FOIA requests for IRS communications concerning the review process for organizations seeking tax exempt status. One of the FOIA requests specifically sought Lerner’s communications with other IRS employees and with any government or private entity outside the IRS regarding the review and approval process for 501(c)(4) applicants from January 1, 2010, to the present. A second request sought communications for the same time frame between the IRS and members of Congress and other government agencies, as well as any office of the Executive Branch. After the IRS failed to provide the information, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit on October 9, 2013.

The Judicial Watch Motion for Status Conference contends that its FOIA lawsuit led to the discovery of the “lost” emails:”

 

Read more:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/federal-court-grants-hearing-irs-email-destruction-judicial-watch/

Motion:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/motion-status-conference/

 

 

Thanks to commenter cabbyaz.

House Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, March 11, 2014, Lois Lerner Involvement IRS targeting of tax exempt organizations, Lerner lied, Planned October retirement

House Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, March 11, 2014, Lois Lerner Involvement IRS targeting of tax exempt organizations, Lerner lied, Planned October retirement

“Winston kept his back turned to the telescreen. It was safer, though, as he well knew, even a back can be revealing. A kilometre away the Ministry of Truth, his place of work, towered vast and white above the grimy landscape.”…George Orwell “1984″

 
“His earlier thought returned to him: probably she was not actually a member of the Thought Police, but then it was precisely the amateur spy who was the greatest danger of all. He did not know how long she had been looking at him, but perhaps for as much as five minutes, and it was possible that his features had not been perfectly under control. It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself — anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offence. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.”…George Orwell “1984″

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From the House Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, March 11, 2014.

“Key Document Based Highlights (documents and testimony in appendix):

  • Tea Party “itching for a Constitutional challenge:” Lerner and her colleagues, after being under public pressure from President Obama and other Democrats, engaged in an e-mail exchange about how they could showcase their scrutiny of a Tea Party applicant for public disclosure, despite rules protecting the secrecy of unapproved applications.  The conversation turned to the possibility of a court case – if a Tea Party applicant would challenge the IRS ruling.  On this, Ms. Lerner opined, Tea Party groups would litigate because they are “itching for a Constitutional challenge.” – p. 41
  • Lerner discusses political scrutiny that isn’t “per se political:” In one e-mail exchange that began with a discussion of an article noting, “organizations woven by the fabulously rich and hugely influential Koch brothers,” Lerner told colleagues, “we do need a c4 project next year.”  While she initially says, “my object is not to look for political activity,” later in the exchange she acknowledges that it will examine political activity. “We need to be cautious so it isn’t a per se political project.  More a c4 project that will look at levels of lobbying and pol. Activity along with exempt activity.” – p. 17
  • Lerner broke IRS rules by mishandling taxpayer information:  While Lerner told Congress under oath, “I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations,” e-mails show Lerner handled protected 6103 taxpayer information in her nonofficial e-mail account. In a November 2013 letter from Daniel Werfel, Werfel notes, “We do not permit IRS officials to send taxpayer information to their personal email addresses. An IRS employee should not send taxpayer information to his or her personal email address in any form, including redacted.” – p. 33
  • Lerner planned to retire in October all along: While House Democrats have pushed that Lerner was forced out by the IRS as a result of the TIGTA report; new e-mails indicate that Lerner had planned an October retirement long before TIGTA released its report.  Her paid leave amounted to a paid vacation preceding her retirement – it does not appear that the IRS penalized her in any way for her conduct. – p.  40-41
  • Despite knowing about improper scrutiny, Lerner had IRS blame victims: An IRS document bearing Lerner’s signature shows that in March 2012, despite knowing about improper scrutiny at that time, Lerner reviewed and signed off on a response to Congress that blamed applicants for heightened scrutiny.  “[T]he IRS contacts the organization and solicits additional information when the organization does not provide sufficient information in response to the questions on the Form 1024 or if issues are raised by the application …. The revenue agent uses sound reasoning based on tax law training and his or her experience to review the application and identify the additional information needed to make a proper determination of the organization’s exempt status.” – p. 36
  • Concern Citizens United hurting Democrats:  Lerner believed the Executive Branch needed to take steps to undermine the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.  A senior advisor to Lerner e-mailed her an article about allegations that unknown conservative donors were influencing U.S. Senate races.  The article explained how outside money was making it increasingly difficult for Democrats to remain in the majority in the Senate.  Lerner replied:  “Perhaps the FEC will save the day.” – p. 21
  • Citizens United created pressure for IRS to “fix the problem”:  According to Lerner: “The Supreme Court dealt a huge blow, overturning a 100-year old precedent that basically corporations couldn’t give directly to political campaigns.  And everyone is up in arms because they don’t like it.  The Federal Election Commission can’t do anything about it. They want the IRS to fix the problem.” – p. 20
  • “Multi-Tier Review”:  Lerner personally directed that Tea Party cases go through a “multi-tier review.” An IRS employee testified that Lerner “sent [him an] e-mail saying that when these cases need to go through multi-tier review and they will eventually have to go to [Judy Kindell, Lerner’s senior technical advisor] and the Chief Counsel’s office.”  A D.C. IRS employee said this level of scrutiny had no precedent. – p. 24-25
  • Head of the IRS Cincinnati office’s testimony refutes Lois Lerner and President Obama’s O’Reilly interview assertion that this was all about a “local office”: “[Y]es, there were mistakes made by folks in Cincinnati as well [as] D.C. but the D.C. office is the one who delayed the processing of the cases.” – p. 44″

http://oversight.house.gov/report/staff-report-lois-lerners-involvement-irs-targeting-tax-exempt-organizations/

From the report.

“Through e-mails, documents, and the testimony of other IRS officials, the Committee has learned a great deal about Lois Lerner’s role in the IRS targeting scandal since the Committee first issued a subpoena for her testimony. She was keenly aware of acute political pressure to crack down on conservative-leaning organizations. Not only did she seek to convey her agreement with this sentiment publicly, she went so far as to engage in a wholly inappropriate
effort to circumvent federal prohibitions in order to publicize her efforts to crack down on a particular Tea Party applicant. She created unprecedented roadblocks for Tea Party organizations, worked surreptitiously to advance new Obama Administration regulations that curtail the activities of existing 501(c)(4) organizations – all the while attempting to maintain an appearance that her efforts did not appear, in her own words, “per se political.””

“During the February 24, 2012, briefing, Committee staff asked Lerner whether the criteria for evaluating tax-exempt applications had changed at any point. Lerner responded that the criteria had not changed. In fact, they had. According to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), in late June 2011, Lerner directed that the criteria used to identify applications be changed.23 This was the first time Lerner made a false or misleading
statement during the Committee’s investigation.”

“During another briefing on April 4, 2012, Lerner told Committee staff that the
information the IRS was requesting in follow-up letters to conservative-leaning groups—which, in some cases, included a complete list of donors and their respective contributions—was not out of the ordinary. Moreover, on April 26, 2012, in Lerner’s first written response to the Committee’s request for information, Lerner wrote that the follow-up letters to conservative
applicants were “in the ordinary course of the application process to obtain the information as the IRS deems it necessary to make a determination whether the organization meets the legal requirements for tax-exempt status.”24

In fact, the scope of the information that EO requested from conservative groups was extraordinary. At a briefing on May 13, 2013, IRS officials, including Nikole Flax, the IRS Commissioner’s Chief of Staff, could not identify any other instance in the agency’s history in which the IRS asked groups for a complete list of donors with corresponding amounts. These marked the second and third times Lerner made a false or misleading statement during the Committee’s investigation.”

Read more:

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Lerner-Report1.pdf

Lois Lerner Malik Obama Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) approval letter signed on Sunday June 26, 2011, Walid Shoebat, Dr. Sadek Raouf Ebeid fax to Committee Chairman Darrell Issa Trey Gowdy Jim Jordan

Lois Lerner Malik Obama Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) approval letter signed on Sunday June 26, 2011, Walid Shoebat, Dr. Sadek Raouf Ebeid fax to Committee Chairman Darrell Issa Trey Gowdy Jim Jordan

“Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Orlando Jones?
Who benefited most from the murder of Donald Young?
Who benefited most from the murder of Lt. Quarles Harris Jr.?
Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Christopher Kelly?
Who benefited most from the murder of Bill Gwatney?
Who benefited most from the death/murder of Andrew Breitbart?
Who benefited most from the death of Loretta Fuddy?”…Citizen Wells

“Who has threatened Lois Lerner’s life?”…Citizen Wells

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

From Walid Shoebat March 4, 2014.
“New Inconsistencies with Malik Obama’s IRS Paperwork Revealed on Eve of Hearing”

“Barack H. Obama Foundation’s tax exempt status approved on a Sunday
**SHOEBAT EXCLUSIVE**

As the scheduled March 5th House Oversight Committee Hearing draws closer, the man who filed complaint No. 1761/2013 against Malik Obama – Dr. Sadek Raouf Ebeid – is sending a fax to Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, along with members Trey Gowdy and Jim Jordan, notifying them of even more disturbing inconsistencies. Many of these inconsistencies involve former IRS Director of Exempt Organizations, Lois Lerner, who is scheduled to appear before the committee.”

“For starters, the date stamped at the top of the Barack H. Obama Foundation’s 501(c)(3) approval letter which bears Lerner’s signature, is dated June 26, 2011. That day was on a Sunday. This new revelation comes after it’s been known that Malik Obama’s Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) received expeditious and potentially illegal tax exempt status from Lerner when the approval was backdated by 38 months. That this approval was granted on a Sunday raises more questions.

This is where Ebeid comes in. Within a few short hours of this posting, Ebeid will be faxing the following letter to Issa, Gowdy, and Jordan. Each one of their offices will receive this information approximately 24 hours before the hearing is convened (click on image to view letter):”

Read more:

http://shoebat.com/2014/03/04/new-inconsistencies-malik-obamas-irs-paperwork-revealed-eve-hearing/

Lois Lerner fears for her life, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Wednesday March 5, 2014, Attorney Bill Taylor Lerner pleads Fifth Amendment rights, Rep. Darrell Issa

Lois Lerner fears for her life, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Wednesday March 5, 2014, Attorney Bill Taylor Lerner pleads Fifth Amendment rights, Rep. Darrell Issa

“Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Orlando Jones?
Who benefited most from the murder of Donald Young?
Who benefited most from the murder of Lt. Quarles Harris Jr.?
Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Christopher Kelly?
Who benefited most from the murder of Bill Gwatney?
Who benefited most from the death/murder of Andrew Breitbart?
Who benefited most from the death of Loretta Fuddy?”…Citizen Wells

“Who has threatened Lois Lerner’s life?”…Citizen Wells

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From the Daily Caller March 4, 2014.

“Lois Lerner fears for her life if she testifies at Wednesday’s oversight hearing”

“Lois Lerner fears for her life if she testifies openly before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Wednesday, according to her attorney.

House oversight committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa announced Sunday that Lerner will testify at Wednesday’s hearing, but Lerner’s attorney Bill Taylor said that Lerner will seek to continue invoking her Fifth Amendment rights and will also seek a one-week delay of her testimony.

Oversight members are reportedly open to granting Lerner a one-week delay if she petitions for one in person at Wednesday’s hearing. The delay would allow Lerner’s lawyers to continue negotiating for immunity, which they have been doing since at least September.

“I advised the staff that calling Ms. Lerner knowing that she will assert her rights was not only improper but dangerous. Ms. Lerner has been the subject of numerous threats on her life and safety, and on the life and safety of her family. I left with the staff recent evidence of those threats,” said Taylor in a letter to Issa.”

Read more:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/04/lois-lerner-fears-for-her-life-if-she-testifies-at-wednesdays-oversight-hearing/#ixzz2v22r7Fq5

 

Thanks to commenter observer.

IRS National Treasury Employees Union opposes Obamacare, HR 1780, Members encouraged to write congressmen, Congressman Dave Camp legislation, Insurance exchanges to replace Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

IRS National Treasury Employees Union opposes Obamacare, HR 1780, Members encouraged to write congressmen, Congressman Dave Camp legislation, Insurance exchanges to replace Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”…Barack Obama

“Obamacare requires all insurance companies to report to the IRS the name, address, identification number, and type of policy purchased by every customer, along with a determination whether the insurance was “government-approved” for purposes of complying with Obamacare’s individual mandate.[12] Likewise, individuals will have to file similar forms demonstrating they held “government-approved insurance” with their tax returns.”…Heritage Foundation

“A Party member lives from birth to death under the eye of the Thought Police. Even when he is alone he can never be sure that he is alone. Wherever he may be, asleep or awake, working or resting, in his bath or in bed, he can be inspected without warning and without knowing that he is being inspected.”…George Orwell, 1984

 

 

The IRS is supposed to enforce Obamacare.

They don’t want it either.

From Illinois review July 25, 2013.

“IRS WORKERS WANT AN EXEMPTION FROM OBAMACARE”

“Another union has lost its enthusiasm for ObamaCare – or at least for one major feature of the federalized health insurance scheme.

The National Treasury Employees Union, or NTEU, is encouraging its members to write their congressmen in opposition to HR 1780, a bill that would have federal government workers use health insurance exchanges to buy health insurance. (Their sample letter is below.) The exchanges would take the place of the Federal Employee Health Benefits program that currently provides insurance to Treasury Department employees.

The creation of health insurance exchanges was one of the key features of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare. The exchanges were supposed to provide a means for workers who did not have employer-provided insurance to purchase affordable insurance on their own. Under ObamaCare, members of Congress and their staffs are required to buy health insurance through the exchanges. HR 1780 would extend this to all federal government workers.

The exchanges, which were originally to be managed by state governments, have proved difficult to set up. Twenty-seven states have passed on creating their own exchanges, and another seven states (Illinois included) have opted for a partnership arrangement where the federal government will still take the lead in setting up an exchange – rather than take on the task on themselves. The creation of the exchanges is behind schedule, and many health care providers doubt that they will be functional in timeto prevent disruptions in health care.”

Read more:

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2013/07/irs-workers-want-an-exemption-from-obamacare.html#more

From the National Treasury Employees Union site:

“Ask your members of Congress to oppose HR 1780.”

http://capwiz.com/nteu/home/

Sample letter:

“I am a federal employee and one of your constituents. I am very concerned about legislation that has been introduced by Congressman Dave Camp to push federal employees out of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and into the insurance exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

H.R. 1780 would put federal employees in a special class where they would be prohibited from receiving health insurance through their employer. It would treat federal employees differently from state and local government employees and most employees of large private sector companies who receive health insurance benefits through their employer. The primary purpose of the Affordable Care Act was to provide a marketplace for the sale and purchase of health insurance for those who do not have such coverage – not to take coverage away from employees who already receive it through their employers.

I work hard and am proud of the services that I provide to your constituents every day. One of the main benefits I receive as a federal employee is the ability to purchase health insurance coverage through the FEHBP with an employer contribution towards those benefits. Please let me know your views on this legislation. I look forward to hearing back from you.”

http://capwiz.com/nteu/issues/alert/?alertid=62634726&type=CO

HR 1780.

“113th CONGRESS 

1st Session 

H. R. 1780To provide that the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to the President, Vice President, Members of Congress, and Federal employees are those created under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or offered through a health insurance exchange.”

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:H.R.1780.IH: