On the one hand there's no proof that the President had anything to do with the questions about the IRS handling of Tea Party 401(c)(4) applications. The polls show Americans don't think there is:
"Among overall Americans, 61 percent say what Obama has said about the matter is mostly or completely true, versus only 35 percent who say it’s mostly or completely false. Among Republicans, 68 percent say what Obama has claimed is false, and among conservatives, 56 percent say this. But independents believe what Obama has said is true by 58-36, and moderates believe this by 71-25."
"Among overall Americans, 61 percent say what Obama has said about the matter is mostly or completely true, versus only 35 percent who say it’s mostly or completely false. Among Republicans, 68 percent say what Obama has claimed is false, and among conservatives, 56 percent say this. But independents believe what Obama has said is true by 58-36, and moderates believe this by 71-25."
"Meanwhile, among overall Americans, 55 percent say the IRS acted on its own in targeting conservative groups, while only 37 percent say the White House ordered it. Among Republicans, 62 percent say the White House ordered it, and among conservatives, 54 percent believe this. But independents believe the IRS acted on its own by 53-36, and moderates believe this by 65-29."
Republicans for their part also admit there's no proof that the President was involved:
"On Meet the Press yesterday, Mitch McConnell and GOP Rep. Dave Camp, the leader of the House probe of the IRS story, made key concessions. Asked whether evidence existed that Obama directed the scrutiny of conservative groups, McConnell said: “I don’t think we know what the facts are.” And Camp said: “We don’t have anything to say that the president knew about this.”
Sargent does add that the investigation should go on:
"However, the investigation into the IRS story will continue, as well it should."
If it's a real investigation and not a partisan fishing expedition maybe. As Sargent also notes, the big preoccupation for the GOP going forward is going to be about 'What did the President know and when did he know it' and 'When did the White House-or any senior person in the White House-know and when did they know it?
A lot of talk about the White House's chief lawyer being made aware of this first in April. GOPers are going to make a hue and cry about what senior persons in the Administration knew of this prior to last November's election. All of this ignores that Darrell Issa was himself made aware of it prior to that.
"GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, a leader of House GOP probes, says: “Exactly who in the administration knew what about the IRS targeting is one of the key outstanding questions.” All of this will be aired out at hearings this week, and the key GOP goal is to push the targeting of conservative groups as close to Obama as possible."
"Of course, as Steve Benen notes, the Treasury Department says it sent a letter to Issa himself last year alerting him that Treasury’s inspector general was looking at the IRS charges."
This kind of breaks the whole narrative that the White House or at least the Treasury Department engaged in a conspiracy to hide information from Congress.
"Over the past few days, one of the areas of interest in the IRS controversy is which officials knew about the Inspector General's investigation and when. The idea, apparently, is to identify who was aware of the potential problems at the agency before the controversy rose to the public's attention."
"And why would that matter? In a political context, the point is to understand who, outside of the IRS, was aware of problems within the tax agency, with Obama administration critics suggesting greater awareness translates into a broader controversy."
"With that in mind, we learned Friday that some officials at the Treasury Department were aware of the Inspector General's probe last year, which proves, well, not much. Officials being made aware of an IG investigation is routine; what matters is what the IG discovers. Indeed, it's a good thing when officials higher up the food chain take a hands-off attitude -- rather than intervene during an investigation -- and wait for the findings."
"But wait, Obama's critics say, this is incomplete. What about notifying Congress? If the administration knew an IG investigation was underway, why not make lawmakers aware of this, at the time, as part of routine oversight? In this case, the administration did notify Congress last year.
The Treasury inspector general for tax administration also sent a letter to Rep. Darrell Issa in July 2012 saying it would audit the agency.
"This is not at all convenient for those eager to characterize this as a conspiracy. Last July, in the middle of the presidential election, the administration told House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) about an investigation into the IRS's potential mishandling of applications for tax-exempt status."
"And what did Issa do when he learned about this? Not a thing -- he decided to wait for the IG's report itself."
"In other words, when it comes to presenting a defense, the White House has an apparent ally in Darrell Issa, ostensibly one of the president's fiercest critics."
So there really is no issue here either. Of course this won't stop the GOP with Issa at the head flagging a dead horse-when do the facts get in the way of a good "narrative?"
What could really be less Nixonian? The complaint that the Administration wasn't involved enough-was 'just a bystander' according to Dana Milbank-misses the point. You don't want the President involved too closely with the IRS-that was the real Nixon problem. On the other hand the Treasury did make Congress aware so that talking point is also wrong.
"And when the IG report did come out last week, it too deflated conspiracy theorists' hopes -- there was no conspiracy; there was no White House pressure; there were no Nixonian tactics."
"There can be no doubt that the IRS was a clumsy, messy bureaucracy that struggled badly to deal with excessive paperwork and ambiguous tax laws, but those looking for a genuine political scandal will likely continue to be disappointed."
No comments:
Post a Comment