DOWNSIDE LEGACY AT TWO DEGREES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
SECTION: IRS AUDITS AND TAX EXEMPT STATUS
SUBSECTION: ALL
Revised 8/20/99
IRS AUDITS
TAX EXEMPT STATUS
IRS AUDITS
Paula and Stephen Jones
Billy Dale (Travel Office)
Texe Marrs
Western Journalism Center (Joseph Farah)
Citizens for a Sound Economy
Manufacturing Policy Project (Pat Choate)
American Life League
Christian Film and Television Commission
National Rifle Association
National Review
American Spectator
National Center for Public Policy Research
American Policy Center
Heritage Foundation
American Cause (Pat Buchanan)
Citizens Against Government Waste
Citizens for Honest Government
Freedom Alliance (Oliver North)
Progress and Freedom Foundation (Newt Gingrich)
Council for National Policy
Concerned Women for America
Center for Bioethical Reform
Free Congress Foundation (warning?)
Fortress America (warning?)
Capitol Resource Institute, Sacramento, California
Center for the Study of Popular Culture (David Horowitz/head Drudge Defense Fund)
Peoples Network Inc. (Chuck Harder)
Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation (defunct, still being audited) (Newt Gingrich)
GOPAC (Newt Gingrich)
H. H. Callaway Foundation (Newt Gingrich)
Kennesaw State University, Georgia (Newt Gingrich)
Reinhardt College, Georgia (Newt Gingrich)
Bruce Bate (National Religious Broadcasters)
Margie Gray (critical e-mail)
Christopher Emery (fired usher)
Patricia and Glenn Mendoza (shouted remark/Chicago)
Kent Masterson Brown (attorney for Association of American Physicians and Surgeons)
Walter Gazecki (edited documentary "Waco, the Rules of Engagement")
Shelly Davis (whistleblower; author of "Unbridled Power")
Joseph Farah (World Net Daily)
David Horowitz, head of Drudge Defense fund
Chuck Harder (People's Network Inc.)
Chuck Lee (talk show)
David Bresnahan (talk show)
George Putnam (talk show)
Grant Gillam (internet)
Richard Mack
Landmark Legal Foundation 10/5/98 "Landmark Legal Foundation has won a significant victory in federal court in the first round of its lawsuit to uncover politically motivated audits by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Federal District Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. issued a summary judgment ruling for Landmark rejecting the IRS's attempt to force the nonprofit foundation to pay the IRS's expenses in searching for information about the IRS's tax audits of numerous conservative and libertarian organizations. "The IRS attempted to block Landmark's access to public information about the agency's audits of several conservative and libertarian public interest groups by demanding tens of thousands of dollars to search IRS files," explained Landmark President Mark R. Levin. "The purpose of this demand was to derail Landmark's nearly two-year effort to get to the bottom of the IRS's seemingly political and partisan audits." Landmark filed its FOIA lawsuit in June, 1997, after the IRS refused to respond to the Foundation's original FOIA request in January, 1997. Waivers of FOIA processing fees are normally granted by federal agencies as a matter of course to 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organizations such as Landmark. "This is an extraordinary legal victory - a rare defeat for the IRS. I'm now looking forward to the court addressing the real issues of our suit," explained Levin. "Hopefully, the court will finally order the IRS to turn over all documents showing any politically motivated requests for audits of conservative and libertarian nonprofit organizations." "
The Washington Times 10/19/98 Robert Stacy McCain ".As an example of the left's power, Mr. Horowitz said that when he was identified by the Wall Street Journal as a leader of an effort to defend Internet gossip columnist Matt Drudge against a libel suit brought by White House adviser Sidney Blumenthal, "within five days, I was notified that I was being audited by the IRS." ."
NY Post Tracy Conner ".An actress who says she had a long-ago fling with President Clinton came under IRS scrutiny just weeks after a warning that she could be audited if she didn't keep quiet, her lawyer says. Elizabeth Ward Gracen, star of the "Highlander" TV series, has been deluged with dozens of letters from the tax man - claiming she didn't file returns and threatening to seize her wages and property. Gracen, a former Miss America who says she had sex with Clinton in 1983, isn't the first woman linked to the president to interest the IRS. Paula Jones, who settled her sex-harassment lawsuit against him last year, was audited after she rejected a deal with Clinton - and the Treasury Department is investigating why the IRS got involved. Filming her TV show in Europe, Gracen refused to talk about her situation, but one of her lawyers contacted by The Post said the IRS is on her case for no good reason..The threat of an IRS probe came from the same anonymous caller who once warned Gracen she was about to get a subpoena and should get out of town, Vento said. The former beauty queen has no idea who the caller was, but her lawyer said the list of people with a motive is a short one.."
UPI 1/13/99 ".The TV actress who claims she had an affair with President Clinton in 1983 has reportedly become the subject of an Internal Revenue Service investigation just weeks after she was warned she could be audited if she didn't keep her mouth shut about her alleged dalliance with Clinton. According to the New York Post, ``Highlander'' star Elizabeth Ward Gracen has been deluged with dozens of letters from the IRS claiming she didn't file returns and threatening to seize her wages and property..The Post says she received an anonymous phone call warning her that if she didn't keep quiet about her relationship with Clinton, she would be audited by the IRS.."
1/13/99 Rush Limbaugh by Freeper Goldi-Lox ".Radio commentator Rush Limbaugh discussed today how Ms. Gracen was threatened by an anonymous phone caller to keep her mouth shut about Clinton, or expect an IRS problem. Three weeks later, the IRS letters started coming... to her mother's house...not anywhere in her IRS files.."
Drudge Report 1/31/99 ". MORRIS: When I was called by the House Judiciary Committee just last weekend to testify or to meet with them I met with 3 investigators of the committee. They asked me not to use their names and I won't but they were each 50 years of age or over, they weren't kids. They had decades of experience working for the IRS, the FBI, and all kinds of other investigative organizations; they told me that they were physically afraid of retaliation. They asked me if I would testify DRUDGE: The ones questioning you were afraid?! MORRIS: Exactly, they asked me if I would testify and I said yea. And they said aren't you afraid of retaliation? And I said what are they going to expose, my sex life? You know we have done all that. I've taken the trouble to not sin since then. And they said no, no. I mean don't you know the list of the 25 people who have died in mysterious circumstances in connection with this investigation? And I said are you guys out of your minds? And they said no, no. And one of them said I guarantee you that each of us will have an IRS audit when this is over, he said I'm saving my receipts I know that I am going to have an audit. And I said, how does that work? And he said well the head of the IRS and Hillary are very good friends. DRUDGE: Let me get this straight, those even questioning people at this point are afraid. MORRIS: Yes. And we are not talking here about some right wing nuts, or some people who are really paranoid. We are talking about guys who have spent 20 or 30 years as top level investigators for the IRS and the FBI who have retired and are now on leave and brought back by the Judiciary Committee and they specifically asked me not to mention their names on the air.."
WorldNetDaily 3/25/99 Stephan Archer "…Landmark Legal Foundation, a public-interest law firm, received 8,379 pages of documents from the Internal Revenue Service yesterday in answer to the law firm's Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the agency, but an early analysis of the documents indicates that large portions of the documents had been blacked out. "Our preliminary examination of the 8,379 pages shows us that -- as best as we can tell -- all pertinent information has been blacked out," said Mark R. Levin, Landmark's president. The "pertinent information" that Levin is referring to are the names of those individuals and groups who, during the Clinton administration, may have encouraged the IRS to audit nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations, or 501 (c) (3)s, critical of White House policies. Levin and his group are trying to determine whether the audits of these types of organizations were politically motivated…."
WorldNetDaily.Com 3/29/99 Joseph Farah Freeper E Pluribus Unum "…...there is one news organization -- and one news organization only -- that is challenging Clinton's abuses of power with regard to the pursuit and punishment of political enemies using all the many levers of government. That news organization is this one -- WorldNetDaily and its parent company, the Western Journalism Center. This morning, at 9 a.m., as part of that commitment, our attorney, Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch will argue today in federal court in Sacramento before U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell Jr. that our $10 million lawsuit against officials in the White House and Internal Revenue Service over the use of political audits should proceed. If we are successful at proving to a jury that our civil rights were violated in an attempt to suppress our investigations, it will be much more difficult for the remaining skeptics -- in the press and the public -- to ignore the Clinton administration's pattern of abuses and crimes. So, say a little prayer for us this morning…."
Investors' Business Daily 4/29/99 Mark Levin "...The IRS is infamous for its efforts to root out taxpayer fraud and wrongdoing - even when, no such crimes have been committed. But don't try to uncover any sins by the IRS. It'll just stonewall and, in some cases, retaliate. The Landmark Legal Foundation is giving the IRS a dose of its own medicine. And the IRS doesn't like it. We first reported Landmark's efforts to inquire into the political actions of the IRS in May 1997. At issue: The IRS has audited some 20 right-wing groups and at least a half-dozen of Clinton's critics. Why'? And who pulled the trigger? The Landmark Legal Foundation filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the IRS to see if the agency had a political vendetta against conservative groups. Since then, the IRS has thrown up every conceivable roadblock. In fact, at nearly every turn, the IRS has broken the law, failing to provide requested material to Landmark within statutory deadlines. That is, until Landmark filed suit. The group is still locked in the legal battle. The IRS has turned over some of the documents but has so censored the material and all the relevant names, the documents are nearly useless. In addition, the agency has failed to turn over e-mail and telephone records that could show that it was doing the bidding of political hit men. In short, the agency continues to balk. Land-mark has asked the court to force the issue. ....It's critical to understand that Landmark isn't asking the IRS for private tax information. It wants public documents showing correspondence between groups or individuals seeking the audits. After all, the IRS ostensibly serves the people and should yield to public scrutiny. To be sure, most agencies try to dodge the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act. After all, no agency likes to disclose embarrassing information. But if the suspicions about these audits are true, the IRS needs to be challenged. If it has moved itself from a tax-law enforcement agency, where every citizen and group is equal under the law, into a minion of those in power. the threat to liberty is clear. Landmark's effort could be the most important lawsuit during the entire Clinton administration. We already know that other agencies, such as the Commerce and Energy Departments, have been used to facilitate fund raising for the Clinton-Gore campaign But Landmark's effort could show something far worse-- a White House that is willing to use the power of the state to crush political opponents and strangle public debate. IRS' power alone is such a sufficient threat to liberty that it's the duty and right of every citizen to monitor it. As the IRS hearings from 1997 revealed, the agency has twisted itself into an engine of great destructive power. And at least one of those IRS employees who testified about the agency's abuses is feeling the agency's wrath. Jennifer Long, a 16-year IRS employee with a record of strong performance ratings, has been targeted for firing. When news of the possible firing reached Congress, it was hastily suspended until the agency's top officials reviewed the matter. It's still under review. Punishing truth-tellers. Targeting political groups. These are not the actions of a government founded on the ideals of liberty and the rule of law...."
Associated Press David Pace 4/28/99 "... Inspectors identified 15 instances of unauthorized file snooping by Internal Revenue Service employees in the first year after Congress made such actions criminal, according to a General Accounting Office report released Wednesday. In all 15 instances, the employees involved either resigned or were fired, said the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress. One case is the subject of an prosecution under the law that makes IRS employees liable for $100,000 fines and a year in prison. Congress enacted the anti-snooping law in 1997 after the GAO reported that only 23 IRS workers had been fired in fiscal years 1994 and 1995 even though 1,515 cases of unauthorized tax file browsing had been identified...."
Investor's Business Daily 6/2/99 Editorial "...The Landmark Legal Foundation's battle to get the IRS to comply with the Freedom of Information Act has taken a new twist..... The IRS turned over more than 9,000 documents. But most of the relevant information was censored. Names and almost whole pages were blacked out. Also, the IRS didn't turn over any e-mail or telephone records - even though they were requested. Landmark has asked the IRS to explain the legal reasons for withholding information - a so-called Vaughn index. But the IRS balks at even this request....The agency maintains that there is no reason it should have to produce a Vaughn index. It says that the job is too tough and that a one-page letter attached to the documents explains everything. But there is good reason to doubt what the IRS says. For instance, it's impossible to make sense of what rules the IRS used. At times the documents show the names of lawmakers, at other times names are censored. We think there is another reason the IRS opposes the Vaughn request. Without the index it is impossible to find out if the IRS is complying with the law..... Given the poor paper record the IRS has produced, Landmark says it needs to depose Hallihan for three reasons. Hallihan is a senior IRS manager. She would know why Landmark's FOIA requests were handled with such contempt. Hallihan also knows the agency's policies on third-party contacts that urge audits or investigations. Interestingly, Landmark will only give its third reason before the judge without the IRS present. Landmark says it has asked for the special hearing to protect certain federal employees and preserve its trial strategy...."
Judicial Watch 6/15/99 Larry Klayman and Monty Warner "...."The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce," a 331-page manifesto and brainchild of Associate White House Counsel Jane Sherburne and the DNC, was circulated to select reporters in a tortured effort to describe how the "right wing" conveyed "fringe" stories into the mainstream American media. In essence, this document was an effort to "alert" friendly journalists that such a "conspiracy" was being promulgated by certain groups dissatisfied with the moral lapses of the Clinton White House. In short, it was a 1990's enemies list...... In December of 1994, Associate White House Counsel Sherburne prepared a memorandum that outlined strategies to use against individuals and organizations perceived to be adversaries of the Clinton Administration. The memo also assigned staff members to carry out these strategies - and specifically identified the Western Journalism Center for having investigated Foster's death. WJC was the only news organization targeted for action...."
Judicial Watch 6/15/99 Larry Klayman and Monty Warner "....In July 1996, after absorbing months of swirling rumors of a pending audit, Joe Farah answered a knock on his door at the Western Journalism Center. Thomas Cedarquist, an IRS official and one of the chief defendants in Judicial Watch's lawsuit on behalf of WJC, strode in and announced that, having seen the WJC's work on "60 Minutes," he had arbitrarily decided (as this Administration does) that WJC was a political and not a non- profit organization. Cedarquist then confirmed he and others in Washington were going to challenge WJC's tax-exempt status and audit their 1995 tax returns..... Regrettably, our sensibilities to this end would be quickly overwhelmed when we saw - as Joseph Farah did - that the search Cedarquist and the IRS were conducting was not for financial reasons, rather to review the content of WJC's work. Farah was asked about his affiliation with Christopher Ruddy, a thorn in the side of the Administration, and why WJC chose to work with him. Nearly every query posed to Farah was related to a story or developing story concerning the White House - an IRS search completely devoid of concern for money. Rightfully exasperated, Farah questioned the tactics of the agency and received the following rejoinder from Cedarquist: "Look, this is a political case, and the decision will be made at the national level." Taxpayers Bill of Rights? Over the course of the investigation of WJC, nearly 20 other conservative organizations - including the Heritage Foundation, NRA and Citizens Against Government Waste - felt the close, warm touch of the Clinton audit machine. Ironically, all of these groups happened to take issue with its policies and political hatchet work. Even more oddly, the media who knew of the "Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce" never saw any pattern developing that would signify an orchestrated White House effort - much less actually troubled themselves to report it. Meanwhile, the Western Journalism Center's offices were being broken into, with, mysteriously, nothing stolen. Their phone messages were apparently being monitored, and some of these developments happened to coincide with WJC breakthroughs in Clinton investigations....The scrutiny of the WJC by the IRS lasted 9 months. During this time the Center almost went bankrupt. One donor called Mr. Farah and told him that Hazel O'Leary, then the Energy Secretary, had related to him that he would lose his federal contracts if he continued to support the Western Journalism Center. WJC employees lost their jobs and livelihoods...."
Judicial Watch 6/15/99 Larry Klayman and Monty Warner "....Finally in October of 1996, Farah exposed these corrupt practices in a piece in The Wall Street Journal, and the tide began to turn. Margret Milner-Richardson, IRS Commissioner and close friend of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, abruptly resigned. The New York Post attributed her departure to political audits of conservative organizations. Some began to probe these rampant abuses, and the audit of the Western Journalism Center was "concluded" - a verdict of "no wrongdoing" rendered in May of 1997. Under the Taxpayer Bill of Rights enacted by Congress, Farah requested his case file from the IRS so he could review its contents. In keeping with the Clinton Administration standard practice, these rights were trampled on with a terse refusal to turn over the documents - the IRS frivolously citing "government privilege" as a means of keeping Mr. Farah from seeing justification for what had nearly bankrupted his organization. But Farah would not be deterred. On behalf of WJC, Judicial Watch, a public interest watchdog group, filed a $10 million lawsuit against Ms. Richardson, Mr. Cedarquist, numerous unidentified agents involved in the case and the IRS itself. We are determined to ensure that Mr. Farah sees justice in this case, and that every American is free to express his or her First Amendment-protected views without vicious, detached harassment from its own government...."
Investor's Business Daily 7/1/99 "...Just how sinister is the Internal Revenue Service? Thanks to the latest twist in the Landmark Legal Foundation's lawsuit against the agency, we have a better understanding of how bad things are there. Political corruption is just the beginning. According to a new filing, Landmark Legal Foundation has uncovered deeply troubling evidence that the IRS may have deliberately sought to cover up and destroy evidence of third-person requests to target, audit and threaten private groups and citizens -most of whom were conservative or critics of the Clinton administration...In the midst of Landmark's court battles, a ''long-term government employee'' came forward with explosive evidence from an IRS regional meeting: The IRS may be doing political dirty work for certain members of Congress and others on the left. Terry Hallihan, acting head of the nonprofit division of the IRS, speaking to the Regional Coordinated Examination Program managers' meeting on Oct. 9, 1997, made some alarming statements, say Landmark documents: First, Hallihan ''indicated that perhaps a Justice Department attorney should leave before her remarks.'' Second, she addressed ''IRS policy on 'intake notes' '' - third-person requests to audit private groups and citizens. Third, she ''noted that the IRS was trying to deal with intake notes from members of Congress and their staff members in such a way as to conceal the source of the request.'' One way to protect the IRS' friends in Congress was to ask if the tip could be blamed on a media story instead. Fourth, Hallihan said she ''was aware that intake notes relating to tips from congressmen or staffers had been or were being shredded by IRS employees.'' In other words, if it's true the IRS was destroying evidence, then it's guilty of a federal crime. This is exactly what we suspected the IRS was hiding when it began to fight tooth and nail in 1997. The IRS has an audiotape recording of Hallihan's remarks, but - no surprise - the tape hasn't found its way into the public record. Judge Henry H. Kennedy has all this information in hand. Yet he's moved at a snail's pace, despite deliberate IRS efforts to thwart the inquiry. Why? The Clinton appointee hasn't explained his actions yet...."
WorldNetDaily.com Stephan Archer "…Landmark President Mark Levin informed WorldNetDaily that his group has mounting evidence that the IRS has been obstructing information regarding the names of congressional members who are requesting audit information on tax-exempt, non-profit organizations, particularly those of a more conservative or libertarian bent. In the lawsuit itself, Landmark has been trying to obtain all pertinent information involving the names of individuals and groups who, during the Clinton administration, may have prompted the IRS to audit conservative and libertarian tax-exempt groups. Last March, Landmark Legal received 8,379 pages of documents from the IRS in response to the FOIA request, but large portions of the documents were
blacked out. ….Although Levin said there is nothing illegal about asking the IRS to audit a tax-exempt organization, deliberately obstructing public information regarding who requested the audit is a crime. "If you're destroying public documents that are the subject of litigation, that's unlawful," said Levin…."WorldNetDaily.com Stephan Archer "…Levin said he first got a hold of this information when his organization interviewed a "senior grade" government official who did not want to be identified. This "whistleblower," as Levin called the government official, was in attendance at an October 1997 IRS meeting at which Terry Hallihan, a senior manager for the tax-exempt organization division of the IRS, spoke. According to the "whistleblower," Hallihan made some interesting statements at that meeting. What was said, however, is not entirely known. However, she allegedly indicated that perhaps a Justice Department attorney in attendance leave the meeting before she spoke. No one left. According to information Levin got from his contact, Hallihan addressed IRS policies regarding certain IRS forms on which "intake notes" are kept. "Intake notes," Levin explained, are "notes taken by IRS employees in response to requests by third parties for audits of tax-exempt, non-profit groups." These "intake notes" were allegedly handled in a way that was intended to conceal the source of the audit request. "She (Hallihan) evidently said, according to the person we interviewed who was in attendance (at the meeting), that if a congressman or staffer called, the IRS was to ask the congressman or the staffer where the information came from -- like a TV or a radio report or constituents or a news article or whatever -- so that the IRS could then list as the source of the information something other than the congressman or the staffer," Levin said. Levin added he was told Hallihan was aware some of these "intake notes" had been, or were being, shredded by the IRS…."
Wall St. Journal 7/20/99 "…In its own suit seeking to depose IRS officer Terry Hallihan, Landmark Legal Foundation quotes a government official who was at an IRS meeting in San Francisco, where he alleges that Ms. Hallihan said she was aware that documents identifying the names of members of Congress and their staffers as the source of audit requests had been, or were being, shredded--and then went on to suggest ways to disguise future requests so that they did not appear to be coming from Congressmen. At the same time, a similar FOIA suit by one of the targets of these audits--Joseph Farah's Western Journalism Center--has turned up a Treasury Department report that states the audit began with a letter forwarded from the White House to the IRS. Note what we have here. To begin with, two specific accusations of political manipulation of the IRS, both with strong evidence. And in both cases an IRS fighting tooth and nail to prevent the real story, whatever it may be, from emerging. In Mr. Farah's case the Treasury Report, titled "Questionable Exempt Organization Examination Activity," came three years after he first filed suit for his IRS case file. Ditto for Landmark, which has yet to receive a direct answer to the simple question it first asked back in 1997: Who are the people who requested audits of tax-exempt organizations? We don't yet know for sure if anyone in the Clinton Administration or the IRS is targeting enemies for investigation. But we do know that many of these enemies were indeed audited…."
Judicial Watch 7/20/99 "…Just released IRS documents show that an audit of the Western Journalism Center, a non-profit, "originated" with a complaint forwarded to the IRS by the Clinton White House. The forwarded complaint had been faxed by a California resident directly to Bill Clinton. The smoking gun IRS/Department of Treasury documents were released to the Western Journalism Center last week, as a result of lawsuits brought by Judicial Watch on behalf of Western Journalism Center. Judicial Watch represents the Western Journalism Center in its cases concerning the politicized audit, which caused the Center great harm and continuing damage…. The documents note how a "Special Inquiry" by the Department of Treasury found that "the audit originated from a taxpayer who faxed a letter to the White House expressing his concern over a one-page advertisement paid for by WCJ (Western Center for Journalism) that asked for contributions to investigate (White House deputy counsel Vincent) Foster's death. The fax was forwarded to the EO (Exempt Organizations) National Office and then to the respective Key District Office for appropriate actions." Once the audit began, an IRS agent told representatives of the Western Journalism Center that the audit was "political" and that decisions on the audit were being made out of the "national office." Indeed the newly-released IRS documents show that the IRS’s national office did take an interest in the Western Journalism Center audit. The documents also call into question the sworn affidavits of IRS officials submitted in federal court recently in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit on behalf of the Western Journalism Center. "The IRS and the Clinton Justice Department told us they had turned over the entire case file on the Western Journalism Center. This was not true, as many smoking-gun documents were suppressed…."
1999 WorldNetDaily.com 7/20/99 "…A 1996 Internal Revenue Service audit of WorldNetDaily.com's non-profit parent company began with an accusatory letter forwarded to the agency from the Clinton White House, show Treasury Department documents obtained by the Internet newspaper through the Freedom of Information Act. ….. The revelations were followed quickly by the resignation of IRS Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson, a close personal friend and political confidante of Bill and Hillary Clinton, and the launching of a congressional probe by Rep. Bill Archer, R-Texas, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation.
WorldNet Daily 7/22/99 "...The Internal Revenue Service and the Justice Department are withholding evidence crucial to a $10 million civil suit alleging the tax agency audited the Western Journalism Center at the behest of the White House in 1996, says Judicial Watch chairman Larry Klayman..... a Treasury Department report obtained by the center through a separate FOIA request shows investigators found documents in the case file not yet produced by the IRS or Justice Department. Among those documents is a letter sent from the White House to IRS officials suggesting an audit of the center was in order.... "This new evidence, clearly suppressed by the administration until after a favorable ruling by a Superior Court judge, provides the smoking gun we were hoping to find in the discovery process," said Klayman. "I am confident this new revelation demonstrating the government systematically concealed the truth will persuade the courts to permit this case to proceed to trial and give us the opportunity to expose and punish these abuses of power." ..."
WorldNet Daily 7/26/99 Joseph Farah "…An official Treasury Department report, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act after three years of such filings by the Western Journalism Center, parent company of WorldNetDaily.com, states unequivocally that the audit of the center in 1996 began with a letter forwarded to the Internal Revenue Service from the White House. This is known as the smoking gun that proves the Clinton administration was actively using the IRS as its own private political attack dog. This is the stuff of police states. This is worse than anything the Nixon administration did. This is raw-boned abuse of power…. WorldNetDaily has been hammering on this story for five consecutive business days. Only two other print sources have touched it -- the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times. Neither treated it as the serious, headline-making front-page news it is….Not only does the Treasury Department report make clear the audit initiated as a result of the letter from the White House, there has been a systematic cover-up of this fact for three years and it continues at the White House and IRS even today. Hello? Is anyone home out there? Do we now tacitly accept such authoritarian practices at the highest levels of government? Is this a case of once impeached, you're home free on any future charges? Or has the public and press become so overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of Clinton administration corruption that proof of crime no longer even matters? …"
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ 7/26/99 Stephan Archer Sarah Foster "…The Internal Revenue Service and the White House have formally declined to comment on a tax audit of Western Journalism Center, WorldNetDaily.com's non-profit parent company, after Treasury Department documents, obtained by the Internet newspaper through the Freedom of Information Act, revealed that an accusatory letter faxed to the IRS from the White House initiated the audit….. One IRS spokesman did comment briefly on the case to a staff writer for the Washington Times. "We do get comment from the public and sometimes the comments we get from public sources are an issue in deciding whether to commence an audit of an exempt organization," said Steve Pyrek. In response, Larry Klayman, whose Judicial Watch has filed two lawsuits on behalf of Western Journalism Center's case against the IRS and White House, said the practice, whether routine or not, should be stopped. "You have tremendous power when you get something from the White House and a bureaucrat has to act on it," said Klayman. "The White House has no business forwarding it. It has a conflict of interest and would inflict undue influence on the IRS. It's like an official stamp to start an audit." …"
World Net Daily 8/4/99 Stephan Archer "...Although it could very well be the most flagrant abuse of power the nation has seen since Nixon, Congress has remained silent. The abuse of power being referred to is the Internal Revenue Service's 1996 audit of the Western Journalism Center, parent company of WorldNetDaily. Political motivations behind the audit were alleged by the center's founder, Joseph Farah, when the IRS agent in charge of the audit, Thomas Cederquist, said the case was a "political case" and "the decisions were being made at the national level.".... WorldNetDaily, in attempting to get a reaction from Congress, has made repeated calls to numerous members of Congress but has had little success in getting even the smallest comment from any of them. Most of the congressmen didn't even know Western Journalism Center had been the target of a politically motivated audit. Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., explained to WorldNetDaily a possible reason for Congress' lack of response on the issue may have had to do with the fact that on July 20, the very day both WorldNetDaily and the Wall Street Journal broke the story, Congress was "riveted on passing a tax bill." "I think that drowned out everything else," Doolittle said. "I really think that's the lion's share of the explanation as to why I suspect most people weren't even aware of it." ...."
TAX EXEMPT STATUS
Chicago Sun-Times 12/11/98 Lynn Sweet Ernest Tucker ".A Wheaton congregation is among a group of eight churches nationwide whose tax-exempt status is being challenged by a group that claims they broke election laws. Americans United for the Separation of Church and State filed formal complaints Thursday with the Internal Revenue Service, seeking to strip the exemptions because they say the churches distributed Christian Coalition material two days before last November's election. ``These houses of worship are breaking federal tax law and penalties must be imposed,'' said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the Americans United group. A spokesman for the Wheaton Evangelical Free Church, 520 Roosevelt Rd., called the charges ``baseless.'' William Miller, a former associate pastor of the church and spokesman, said, ``we are familiar with the IRS regulations and we have abided by those.'' Miller said he had been unaware of the group's charges. Joseph Conn said his group filed the complaints because the material from the Christian Coalition ``was clearly to endorse Republican candidates.'' He said his group had done an extensive education campaign for churches before the Nov. 3 election to ``educate'' clergy on the boundaries for participating.``We chose eight that we knew of, but obviously there were more,'' he said. ``We just didn't have information on all.''."
Washington Times 2/5/99 Greg Pierce ".Now that the Internal Revenue Service has ruled that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's college course was just that -- a college course -- all those Democrats who claimed it was an illegal political scheme owe the man an apology, says Republican Chairman Jim Nicholson. After all, the House forced Mr. Gingrich to pay a $300,000 fine over the issue. And Mr. Nicholson has a question: What took the IRS so long? "The Clinton administration Internal Revenue Service owes an explanation why it took 3- and- a-half years to determine that Newt Gingrich's college course wasn't political, something they should have known after watching 20 hours of tapes," Mr. Nicholson said.."The trumped-up charges by congressional Democrats, led by David Bonior, were politically motivated attacks from the outset," he said. "Bonior and the Democrats owe Newt Gingrich an apology, and all Americans should demand an explanation of why the Internal Revenue Service became a weapon for 41 months of political water torture against the most prominent opponent of the Clinton-Gore Democrat agenda." ."
Washington Post 3/31/99 Peter Slevin "…The Internal Revenue Service properly stripped tax breaks from a New York church that opposed candidate Bill Clinton in full-page newspaper advertisements during the 1992 campaign, a federal judge here ruled yesterday. U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman decided that the IRS acted lawfully when it took away tax-exempt status from The Church at Pierce Creek in Vestal, N.Y. He dismissed the church's claims that the IRS violated religious freedoms and engaged in selective prosecution. Churches that claim exemption from taxation cannot take sides in an election campaign, the federal tax code states. The IRS concluded after a two-year investigation that the nondenominational Christian church had done just that and no longer was entitled to the exemption. The case centered on a full-page advertisement that appeared in USA Today and the Washington Times four days before the 1992 general election. The advertisement said, "Bill Clinton is promoting policies that are in rebellion to God's laws."…"
Oklahoman Online 6/10/1999 Mary Jacoby Freeper eleven "...After a 10-year review, the Internal Revenue Service has denied the Christian Coalition's application for federal tax- exempt status. The confidential IRS ruling, delivered to the coalition this spring, essentially settles a long- standing controversy about the nature of an organization that has been a powerful force within the Republican Party. The question before the IRS was: Is the coalition, as it maintains, a nonpartisan group dedicated to educating voters on issues of importance to religious conservatives? Or is its real purpose, as critics have argued, to influence the outcome of elections in favor of the GOP? The IRS ruling points to the latter, said University of Miami law professor Frances Hill, an expert on tax-exempt organizations. "It is suggesting that the real activities were in substantial part to influence the outcome of elections."..."
The Wall Street Journal 6/22/1999 Leslie Lenkowsky "...Groups favoring abortion rights have petitioned the IRS to withdraw the Catholic Church's tax exemption because of its endorsement of antiabortion candidates. Black churches have reportedly been warned that opening their pulpits to candidates might jeopardize their exemptions. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has also been the object of complaints, including a lawsuit brought by former U.S. government officials, that it devoted more of its resources to backing candidates than the IRS allowed. Environmental groups have been particularly active campaigners. The League of Conservation Voters widely advertises its "dirty dozen" list of congressmen whose voting records it deemed unacceptable. The league keeps a "scorecard" indicating which of them are defeated. Because the IRS's decisions are confidential, we don't know what led it to rule against the Christian Coalition. It's possible but unlikely that politics played a role. (The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation is completing a report on allegations of political bias in the IRS's auditing of conservative political groups, which should indicate whether there is a problem in the agency.) ...."
Augusta Chronicle 7/25/99 "…As a rule Democrats line up behind watchdog groups that push separation of church and state policies. But Americans United for Separation of Church and State may have gone over the edge this time. Shortly before a July 4 voter registration drive organized by the Christian Coalition, AUSCS warned churches nationwide that they could forfeit their tax-exempt status by working too closely with partisan political groups. That was hardly news to churches, but why would the point be made just before a Christian Coalition registration drive -- unless it was designed to scare off, not only new voters, but volunteer organizers as well? Maybe this is a coincidence, but six GOP senators, including Georgia's Paul Coverdell and South Carolina's Strom Thurmond, are asking the Justice Department investigate. Indeed, there's nothing wrong for church groups to encourage citizens to register and vote. Black churches have engaged in such activities for decades and usually register mostly Democrats….."
WorldNetDaily 8/19/99 Stephan Archer "…When House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer, R-Texas, announced Aug. 2 that the Joint Committee on Taxation was still conducting an investigation of politically motivated Internal Revenue Service audits after two-and-a-half years, he evidently forgot to let his staffers know this. In response to allegations that the 1996 audit of WorldNetDaily's parent company, Western Journalism Center, was politically motivated, the Internet newspaper's readers flooded Archer's office as well as the offices of their local representatives, with e-mail and letters. One concerned reader, Bill Vendramin, wrote his congressman, Rep. Peter J. Visclosky, D-Indiana, asking him to help Archer in the continuing investigation of IRS procedures. However, the congressman wrote back saying Archer was not aware of any investigation. "I have contacted Chairman Archer regarding this investigation, and have been informed that he is neither conducting one, nor is he aware of, an ongoing investigation into these allegations," Visclosky wrote in a letter dated Aug. 5 to Vendramin. However, as was
reported earlier by WorldNetDaily, Archer had stated in an Aug. 2 press release from the House Ways and Means Committee he would continue to "monitor the progress of the JCT's (Joint Committee on Taxation's) investigation." The subject of this investigation was explained by Archer earlier in the press statement: "On March 24, 1997, in coordination with the Senate Finance Committee, I requested the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) investigate allegations the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had targeted certain tax-exempt organizations with audits for political reasons." "Unfortunately, due to the investigation's complexity, scope, and because it involved privileged information about individual tax returns, the committee's final report has been delayed considerably beyond our original hopes," continued Archer. "This investigation has become far more voluminous than was originally anticipated." Archer went on to explain he takes allegations of IRS harassment of political enemies "very seriously" and will "follow the JCT's investigation with interest." …"