Lerner sought IRS audit of sitting GOP senator, emails show

Wonder who ordered her to do this? Ockham's razor.

Quote:Congressional investigators have uncovered emails showing ex-IRS official Lois Lerner targeted a sitting Republican senator for an internal audit, a discovery one GOP lawmaker called "shocking."

The emails were published late Wednesday by the House Ways and Means Committee and pertain to the woman at the heart of the scandal over IRS targeting of Tea Party groups.

The emails appear to show Lerner mistakenly received an invitation intended for Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

The event organizer apparently offered to pay for Grassley's wife to attend the event. The December 2012 emails show that in response, Lerner in turn suggested to an IRS colleague that the case be referred for an audit.

"Looked like they were inappropriately offering to pay for his wife. Perhaps we should refer to Exam?" she wrote.

You'll have to forgive me on this one.. but shouldn't Senators and Reps be subject to the same rules the average Americans are? including audits?

Yes, the timing sure sounds questionable, but in this case, I don't see a problem....

The most interesting question for me in this is exactly how Lerner "mistakenly received" an invitation intended for someone else. There are some very likely possibilities that are quite troubling to consider.

If anything improper was done, by all means audit. However, like Owl asked, how is an email to a senator mistakenly sent to an IRS official? Either the fix was in or someone passed it along to Lerner. Not buying the "mistakenly received" part at all.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

So the IRS has no problem getting OTHERS email.

well, Issa has now subpoenad all 28 years of Lerner's emails (ever since she started at the FEC)... They're gonna try to put the screws to her to speak up or go to jail.

So was the invite addressed to Lerner? How did she end up on a distribution list for Grassley unless someone added her?

If it wasn't addressed to her but ended up in her mailbox b mistake…
Isn't it illegal to open mail not addressed to you? (I always thought it was)
If it is how did Lois know what was in the envelope unless she opened it?

(06-25-2014 07:20 PM)Paul M Wrote:  So the IRS has no problem getting OTHERS email.

BAM!

(06-25-2014 05:52 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  You'll have to forgive me on this one.. but shouldn't Senators and Reps be subject to the same rules the average Americans are? including audits?

Yes, the timing sure sounds questionable, but in this case, I don't see a problem....

I see a problem. The invitation was in 2012 as was Lerner's request for an audit. Shouldn't she have waited until AFTER the senator filed his taxes for that year? And who is she to decide who gets audited? Is a wrongly addressed email to the IRS an automatic audit trigger? I thought they had formulas and strict methods on deciding who gets audited.

The email could have been forwarded.

Every IRS employee should be audited at least every two years,
but an outside IRS audit agency. Special audits should be at
the behest of the Tea Parties.

(06-25-2014 08:09 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 05:52 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  You'll have to forgive me on this one.. but shouldn't Senators and Reps be subject to the same rules the average Americans are? including audits?

Yes, the timing sure sounds questionable, but in this case, I don't see a problem....

I see a problem. The invitation was in 2012 as was Lerner's request for an audit. Shouldn't she have waited until AFTER the senator filed his taxes for that year? And who is she to decide who gets audited? Is a wrongly addressed email to the IRS an automatic audit trigger? I thought they had formulas and strict methods on deciding who gets audited.

An audit can be requested at any time, smn... to my knowledge, there's no such think as a "trigger" date.

(06-25-2014 05:52 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  You'll have to forgive me on this one.. but shouldn't Senators and Reps be subject to the same rules the average Americans are? including audits?

Yes, the timing sure sounds questionable, but in this case, I don't see a problem....

Second..

(06-25-2014 05:52 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  You'll have to forgive me on this one.. but shouldn't Senators and Reps be subject to the same rules the average Americans are? including audits?

Yes, the timing sure sounds questionable, but in this case, I don't see a problem....

he is a republican, and the current weaponized IRS has been used to attack . . . republicans. in addition, grassley has been a long time critic of the IRS, and, finally, the method and means by which a citizen is selected for an "exam" is supposed to be rigorously impartial.

it certainly isn't supposed to be based on the erroneous (?) trappings of some some overzealous IRS apparatchik's inbox.

there are some problems with it.

I guess my other question is whether anything came of it. If it led to some sort of enforcement action, then presumably it was justified. But if it didn't, then it starts to look like nothing more than harassment. Believe me, the IRS has a very good idea how much they can expect to get from any taxpayer when they choose to take a closer look. And if this didn't fit their audit profile but they went for it anyway, and particularly given the potential problems with a "mistakenly received" invitation, it starts not to pass the smell test.

(06-25-2014 09:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I guess my other question is whether anything came of it. If it led to some sort of enforcement action, then presumably it was justified. But if it didn't, then it starts to look like nothing more than harassment. Believe me, the IRS has a very good idea how much they can expect to get from any taxpayer when they choose to take a closer look. And if this didn't fit their audit profile but they went for it anyway, and particularly given the potential problems with a "mistakenly received" invitation, it starts not to pass the smell test.

provoking an enforcement action by an agency that has demonstrated political bias in it's enforcement actions doesn't "justify" a damn thing.

(06-25-2014 09:35 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 09:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I guess my other question is whether anything came of it. If it led to some sort of enforcement action, then presumably it was justified. But if it didn't, then it starts to look like nothing more than harassment. Believe me, the IRS has a very good idea how much they can expect to get from any taxpayer when they choose to take a closer look. And if this didn't fit their audit profile but they went for it anyway, and particularly given the potential problems with a "mistakenly received" invitation, it starts not to pass the smell test.

provoking an enforcement action by an agency that has demonstrated political bias in it's enforcement actions doesn't "justify" a damn thing.

Point well taken. I'm talking about a real enforcement action where he was actually doing something wrong. I've not heard of any, and I can't believe there could have been one without it being all over the news, so I assume there was none.

The fact that a political appointee was hinting at an audit of a senator of a rival party is unethical.

It wasn't inappropriate for them to pay for his wife. Wouldn't be a problem unless he didn't declare it on his next years taxes.

Let's trot out Charlie Rangel. how'd did his prosecution for not reporting income go?