The IRS scandal: FBI games
Doing the bidding of the “politics above all” Obama administration, the FBI has been stonewalling — for six months — a congressional probe of the special scrutiny to which the IRS subjected conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.
Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have set a Dec. 16 deadline for the FBI to produce documents related to the FBI's own investigation of the IRS. If the FBI doesn't comply, Mr. Issa will subpoena its new director, James B. Comey Jr., reports The Washington Times.
Among targets of that special IRS scrutiny were Catherine Engelbrecht, an officer of conservative groups King Street Patriots and True the Vote, her husband and their company. They were hit with an IRS audit, repeated IRS and FBI questions about both groups' activities and a federal occupational safety investigation.
The FBI maintains it can't release the requested documents because its investigation of the IRS is ongoing. But the FBI tipped its politically motivated hand when, after consulting with the Justice Department, it rescinded an offer to have its assistant director in charge of that probe brief Mr. Jordan in person.
Mr. Comey's brief record as FBI director thus suffers a black mark. And Congress should continue to doggedly pursue and expose the full truth about — and those responsible for — abuse of IRS power aimed at this administration's political opponents.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Economics ignorance: We must do better
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- Cyber insecurity: The feds fail to protect the public’s data
- U.N. Watch: Iranian showdown
- Charter school pablum: Hillary Clinton misleads on education
- Sunday pops
- Amnesty’s end run: What rule of law?
- The Gerard Mangis sentence: A criminal, coddled
- ‘Vetting’ refugees: A dubious U.N. link