[...]
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.
However,
almost 500 other groups with “Patriot” or “Tea Party” in their name
were not so fortunate. (For the record, this is not the first time that
Obama sycophants in a powerful government agency have targeted Patriot
and Tea Party groups. Read “Army Preps for Tea Party ‘Terrorists’,” a
Patriot Post exclusive from the same time period the IRS began its
targeting operations.)
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.
[...]
A legal and tax advisor to The Patriot Post informed us that the Post
and Patriot Foundation Trust, our education fund advocating Liberty and
constitutional integrity, clearly “met the criterion for the corrupt
IRS inquisition,” but for a couple of reasons (which we can’t disclose
publicly) we were passed over for review. She asked, “What’s it like
being on Obama’s "enemies list.” I responded, “It’s like receiving a
gold star on a badge of honor!”
For
the record, the IRS harassment of conservative groups was not limited
to a few “low-level employees” in Cincinnati. The current complaint
count involves Obama’s union thugs in at least three IRS regional
offices who have targeted more than 500 conservative groups.
However, almost 500 other groups with “Patriot” or “Tea Party” in their
name were not so fortunate. (For the record, this is not the first time
that Obama sycophants in a powerful government agency have targeted
Patriot and Tea Party groups. Read “Army Preps for Tea Party
‘Terrorists’,” a Patriot Post exclusive from the same time period the
IRS began its targeting operations.)
Obama’s political and legal team certainly recalls 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.”
[...]
1. For 18-months, all tax exempt applicants with the words “Patriot” or
“Tea Party” in their names were selected for review, however, the IG
report said it was unclear who had ordered the IRS to target Patriot
and Tea Party groups. Later that order was 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. Notably, while the IRS Cincinnati office was stalling
conservative group applications for tax exempt status, it awarded the
Barack Hussein Obama Foundation its status in just 34 days. (So, the
Obama administration rejects terrorist profiling, but supports Patriot
profiling…)
2. IRS section chief Lois Lerner knew about the profiling in June 2011,
but in March 2012, the former head of the IRS, Douglas Shulman,
testified before Congress “that the agency was not targeting
conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status as ‘social
welfare’ groups.” Shulman’s denial undoubtedly provides Obama political
cover, even though he logged into the White House 157 times since 2009
– more often than any Cabinet member. Even Obama’s close friend, AG
Eric Holder, only logged in 62 times. Shulman’s chief of staff,
Jonathan M. Davis, met with Obama staff at the White House and adjacent
Eisenhower office building more than 300 times between 2009 and 2012.
Shulman’s predecessor, Mark Everson, visited the White House only once
in his four years as IRS head under President George W. Bush, and said
he might as well have been in “Siberia.”
[
This
report is quite lengthy. Needless to say, anyone with a brain
must ask "How is it that Obama has not been impeached?"
Obama
and his appointed cronies have good reason to worry that a Trump DOJ
will look into myriad felony acts committed over the last 8 years.
Shock
Troops? Here's his "Shock Troops"
They've been lying low, but Obama's past use of SEIU thugs to
crack
down on his opponents is the very model of Hitler's Brown Shirts.
, an
agency that has unbridled powers of search and seizure. The
agency have added 16,500 new agents to 
Severe warning: this article contains extremely
graphic and disturbing images. They tell the story, but they are not
for children or those who are upset easily by violence.
A
list of members of the United Nations' Human Rights Council shows the
dangers of the Obama Administration's internationalist approach.
Among
the Council's current members is Venezuela — currently engaging in a
violent campaign of repression under President Nicolas Maduro. In
response to negative media coverage of the unrest, government forces
attacked CNN cameras, and ordered Internet service providers to "block
websites with content contrary to the interests of the
Government." If
these thuggish actions qualify Venezuela for membership in the UN Human
Rights Council, what role will Maduro's government get to play in
governing — and censoring—the Internet?
Then
there's the case of Russia, also elected to the UN Human Rights Council
last fall. Russia's invasion of the Crimea — aided by immediate
censorship of pro-Ukrainian websites by Russian authorities — leaves
little doubt of that country's cavalier disregard for the freedom of
other nations, and its own people. Yet even as his half-hearted
actions failed to preserve Ukraine's territorial sovereignty, President
Obama seems perfectly willing to surrender America's sovereignty over
the Internet, giving autocrats like Vladimir Putin a greater say in how
the Internet does — or, as online censorship increases, does not —
operate.